![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Although nationalism remains a significant motif of Quebec politics, it no longer has the same texture, the same purpose, or the same spirit it once had. What accounts for this change? And what should we make of it? This article proposes a critical reflection to gauge whether the nationalism/democracy nexus at the heart of much of the literature on nationalism still defines and characterizes contemporary Quebec nationalism. The article examines the reasons why today’s mainstream Quebec nationalism sets itself apart from the motivations that informed its earlier expressions and unequivocal stance against the Canadian state, assesses current Quebec nationalism in light of the democratizing impetus that nationalism is usually said to embody and nurture, and offers some critical thoughts on the analytical limits of the nationalism/democracy nexus for our understanding of the historicity of Quebec nationalism.
Acknowledgments
The initial version of this article was presented in the context of a lecture series on “The Future of Nations: Continuity and Rupture” organized by Alain-G. Gagnon and Alain Dieckhoff at the Centre de recherches internationales (CERI), Sciences Po Paris in the winter and spring of 2017. I thank them both for offering me the opportunity to structure my thoughts about contemporary Quebec nationalism. The final iteration of this article has benefitted from the probing questions of my students and from the insightful comments of ARCS’s anonymous reviewers. I am especially grateful for Andrew Holman’s support and editorial acumen.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. The public health crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic has encouraged the Legault government to seek more discretionary powers and avoid having to submit to regular mechanisms of accountability. In spring 2020, it introduced a legislative proposal, Bill 61, which, on account of the emergency situation created by the pandemic and the need to strengthen the economy, was to give the Premier the possibility to govern by decree, obviate the obligation to call for tenders in public infrastructure projects, and shield cabinet members from legal liability and from being sued. The bill was vehemently contested by opposition parties and civil society organizations who were particularly concerned with the erosion of democratic accountability that the bill represented. The government introduced an amended version of it in fall 2020 (Bill 66), which, though stripped of the sections that were deemed problematic in Bill 61, nevertheless raised concerns among environmentalists and Indigenous peoples who fear the government still has too much discretion with respect to the implementation of infrastructure projects affecting the environment. Although the Legault government remains popular within the electorate, many commentators have noted its authoritarian and paternalistic inclination (Collectif Citation2020).
2. A recent example of this is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s reaction to the apparent inability of provincial governments to control the tragically high levels of COVID-19 casualties among the elderly and his ensuing commitment to a national long-term care program, which is a primarily provincial policy field and jurisdiction. The Legault government was quick to dismiss it as a federal infringement.
3. Led by the Environics Institute for Survey Research, in collaboration with the Canada West Foundation, the Centre d'analyse politique—Constitution et fédéralisme, the Institute for Research on Public Policy, and the Brian Mulroney Institute of Government.
4. They are found mostly within the ranks of the progressive (but electorally marginal) Québec solidaire party, the social-democratic wing of the Parti Québécois, as well as in some labor unions, community groups, and academia.
5. Essayist Mathieu Bock-Côté is perhaps the most prominent among these intellectuals. A prolific blog writer for Quebecor, Quebec’s leading mainstream francophone media concern, a regular public affairs analyst on electronic media in both Quebec and France, he burst onto Quebec’s political and intellectual scenes a dozen years ago with hard-hitting, polemical essays and public interventions whose sectarian spirit and staunch, French-Canadian ethnic nationalism resonate with growing segments of Quebec society. His work laments the emasculation of the sovereigntist project by previous nationalist leaders and intellectuals (Bock-Côté Citation2007), deplores what he sees as the divisive and deleterious consequences of multiculturalism (Bock-Côté Citation2016) and blames current social anxieties on the politics of difference and recognition (Bock-Côté Citation2012). Others, like sociologist Jacques Beauchemin and historians Éric Bédard and Frédéric Bastien (who ran unsuccessfully for the leadership of the Parti Québécois in 2020), have also received significant, positive exposure among nationalists and the general public, advocating views that are close to Bock-Côté’s and that situate them within the same ideological orbit. For detailed and critical analyses of this school of thought, see Belkhodja (Citation2008), Belkhodja and Traisnel (Citation2012), Dupuis-Déri and Ethier (Citation2016), Fortier (Citation2019), and Piotte and Couture (Citation2012).
6. Premier François Legault is on record as endorsing Mathieu Bock-Côté (Citation2019) book L’empire du politiquement correct (the empire of political correctness), which excoriates what he sees as the left’s militant and intransigent defense of minority claims, difference, and diversity. See Montpetit (Citation2019).
7. The Marois government (2012–2014) recruited Université du Québec à Montréal sociologist Jacques Beauchemin as a key advisor to assist in the formulation of the bill. Beauchemin was Mathieu Bock-Côté’s doctoral thesis supervisor and mentor. He is the author of several books, which clearly stand in defense of an ethnicist (French-Canadian) view of Quebec nationalism.
8. The quoted material in this paragraph is from the explanatory notes introducing the full official text of Bill 60. See Charter (Citation2013).
9. Daniel Turp, Université de Montréal law professor and former Bloc Québécois MP and Parti Québécois MNA, has been spearheading the movement in favor of the formal recognition of Québec citizenship. See Turp (nd).
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Daniel Salée
Daniel Salée is professor of Canadian politics and public policy in the School of Community and Public Affairs and in the Department of Political Science at Concordia University in Montreal, Quebec. He has written in both English and French on a wide range of issues including Quebec nationalism, constitutional politics, ethnocultural diversity, and Aboriginal policy. In recent years, his research interests have focused more specifically on the politics of Indigenous peoples/state relations in Quebec and Canada, and on the politics of contact zones involving hegemonic majorities and ethnocultural and racialized minority groups in liberal democracies. He co-edited Peuples et autochtones et politique au Québec et au Canada. Identités, citoyennetés et autodétermination which was published in 2020 by Presses de l’Université du Québec.