The dinkelberry gang want to run posters off

[giblets]

So let's see...
Separatists lose: they have to suck it up and accept it because the provincial authorities make them accept it.
Separatists win: the non-separatists get to throw a hissy fit and secede from Quebec, and the provincial authorities can't do anything about it.
Wow, that's a massive double standard. If the non-separatists really want to live in Canada they could, you know, move to another province if Quebec secedes.

[KrazyHorse]

Wow, that's a massive double standard.

Not really. The whole question of what a uniform standard would look like for this is idiotic. Why should provinces have the right to secede from an unified Canada, but not municipalities from an independent QC? Why should municipalities have the right to secede from an independent QC, but not a unified Canada?

On a realpolitik level, the thought that Canada would let a bare majority of QC force out a massively federalist Montreal is pretty ridiculous.

[giblets]

Well, it does look as if Ben claimed some sort of double standard existed:

Quebec has no more right to force people who want to remain in Canada to leave, than Canada has any right to force those who wish to leave to stay.

On a realpolitik level, the US should force Canada to pay tribute

[KrazyHorse]

The amount of tribute extracted would be minimal compared to the cost of extracting it and the loss in prestige the US would take elsewhere.

[DaShi]

Prestige?

[KrazyHorse]

You don't think that the US would suffer in its interests elsewhere due to the spectacle of it blatantly engaging in bullying-for-profit?

Governments in other countries have to react to the views of their citizens...

[giblets]

The amount of tribute extracted would be minimal compared to the cost of extracting it and the loss in prestige the US would take elsewhere.

It would cost very little to extract if Canada decided that paying tribute is better than getting invaded. I'm not sure why the US would care about prestige if it embraced realpolitik.

[KrazyHorse]

Both of those claims are idiotic.

[giblets]

So, Canada will not do the realpolitik thing and will try to fight a war with the US to avoid having tribute extracted from it?

[KrazyHorse]

No ****.

[giblets]

Interesting, I didn't know Canadians cared about realpolitik when dealing with Quebec but not when dealing with the US.

[Ben Kenobi]

Separatists lose: they have to suck it up and accept it because the provincial authorities make them accept it.
Separatists win: the non-separatists get to throw a hissy fit and secede from Quebec, and the provincial authorities can't do anything about it.

The vote is to dissolve their provincial authority. Their provincial authority cannot be dissolved until they pass a vote to do so. Once their provincial authority is dissolved, then things have to be resolved.

If the non-separatists really want to live in Canada they could, you know, move to another province if Quebec secedes.

Quebec, as an entity no longer exists anymore. It may be replaced by the country Quebec, but that has to be decided by the Federal government. The Federal government has stated that if Quebec were to separate, anyone who resides inside Quebec would still have full Canadian citizenship, and the government has the responsibility to protect Canadians.

So this is why, after the vote on dissolution, that those who do not wish to remain in an independent Quebec, have to negotiate with the Federal government to decide what and how Quebec will be partitioned to form an indepedent state of Quebec.

Canada could simple say, "No", and restore the province of Quebec. Then the separatists have to decide if they wish to escalate the issue. It depends on how badly to Harper that the ROC wants Quebec to stay.

Personally, I doubt that Harper would escalate the issue, but he would insist on partitioning Quebec, and in such a way to preserve the territorial integrity of Canada. International law would back him up, they've done plebescites for many years to settle border issues.

[giblets]

No, the vote is to make Quebec sovereign. Neither of the referendums made any mention of "dissolving their provincial authority".

[Ben Kenobi]

No, the vote is to make Quebec sovereign.

Their authority as the 'province of Quebec' is derived from the federal government. A successful vote to separate means that the entity of the Province of Quebec no longer exists.

To create the sovereign nation of Quebec is something else altogether, and requires mutual accord with the Canadian government in order to be accomplished peacefully.

Neither of the referendums made any mention of "dissolving their provincial authority".

When the United States joined together, it meant the end of their legal existance as colonies of Britain. They successfully defended themselves and were able to declare themselves as both the federal United States of America, and each of them as their individual states.

This did not give them the right to the territory until after the peace accords with Great Britain. Same thing for Quebec. If Quebec leaves peacefully, this would have to be agreed upon by Canada. What they take with them would also have to be negotiated.

If the two sides cannot come to agreement, it would mean war to settle the issue.

[giblets]

If the two sides cannot come to agreement, it would mean war to settle the issue.

Yep, you sound like a pacifist.

Well, I'm glad to know you wouldn't defend the CSA. I mean, they never negotiated their way out of the US.