The next paradigm to look at this event in is the liberal. Although similar to realism in that it developed over many centuries of philosophy, liberalism has an innately good view of human nature. Quebec’s choice to hold a referendum would have been welcomed in liberal viewpoint for change is not looked down on. Since Quebec felt that they had been held down and discriminated against that it was ok for them to call for independence from the union. Canada would have been looked down on in a liberal model if they had take any other type of action than what they did in the Quebec referendum. In this case if the referendum had passed by a slim margin Canada should have recognized Quebec’s freedom and tried to cooperate as much as it would with other sovereign states.

Not many American understand what is taking place in Quebec, but it is truly an amazing test for western democracy. We read about violent ethnic conflict and countries partitioning in the news more and more each day, yet there is a sense of disconnection because they are “far way”. Now we have ethnic conflict in our neighbor’s back yard. This gives us a unique view of these types of conflict, one that we have not had before. I hope that Canada does not harm there democratic principles in trying to keep Quebec a part of it’s union if it so chooses to strike out on it’s own. It is a testament to western democracy that Quebec can challenge Canada for its sovereignty without the treat of violent revolt.

The question of Quebec’s quest for sovereignty is an interesting one in that is test the democratic process to limits. Canada is an established western democracy yet it if Quebec votes democratically to separate from the union, what can Canada do? In my opinion not much. Prime Minister Jean Chre’tien set a possibly dangerous scenario up when he stated that Quebec would need to vote a clear majority to separate and even then the Canadian government was threatening retaliation (Prairie p.2). By stating that Chre’tien dismissed the democratic process as invalid which undermines all democracy. I believe that in the case of Quebec they have a ligament claim to being a sovereign state. Quebec’s society and cultural aspects of life are very different from that of English Canada. Quebec can also make the argument from passed abuses by English Canada that it should have it’s own state. It has only come recently that Canada reformed to a bi-lingual country, yet ethnic divides still re!

To understand the dramatic differences in culture between Quebec and the rest of English Canada a look at the country’s past is necessary. English explorer John Cabot stumbled onto Canada in 1497 while searching for a Northwest Passage to Asia (Hiebert p1). Shortly after that in 1539 to keep pace with the English, King Francis I of France commissioned Jacques Cartier to also seek a Northwest Passage to Asia (Hiebert p1). English and French rivalry is a common theme in early Canadian history during the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries. In 1600 New France was established by the fur trade industry which encomp

Some topics in this essay:
Parti Quebecois, English Canada, Minister Chre’tien, Canada Quebec, Jean Chre’tien, Liberal Marxist, Canada” Annis, Americans Canada, French English, Quebec Quebecois, parti quebecois, english canada, prime minister, ethnic conflict, quebec referendum, international politics, western democracy, minister chre’tien, prime minister chre’tien, “yes” vote, quebec’s quest sovereignty, democratic process, prime minister jean, western democracy quebec, referendum parti quebecois,