Ricky Blue

His LCC columns are archived here

RICKY BLUE

We who are not them

Some commentators claim that the referendum was the defining issue of the past Quebec election, and the defeat of this option indicates that separatism is in decline.

Unfortunately, this is wishful thinking.

The reality is that Quebec elections are always about identity.

And if some think the separation issue will now disappear, they are dreaming in colour.

Yes, André Boisclair of the PQ actively promoted a third referendum, and that was part of the reason why his party came in third.

But a bigger problem for Boisclair was that Quebecers simply did not identify with him.

He is a gay man who went to Harvard and lives in Montreal, so how could he really understand the day-to-day concerns of the average Jean and Ginette raising three kids in Shawinigan?

And the fact that he obeyed the hardliners in his party by trying to persuade the electorate of the wisdom of having an endless series of referendums simply proved how little he understood Quebecers' current priorities.

Identity worked against Jean Charest as well.

Many Québécois still see him as Ottawa's man, and he is far too comfortable speaking English.

Some pejoratively call him "John" Charest.

On top of that, he made a rather ill-advised decision to run on his record.

But Mario Dumont played the identity card and won big time.

Because he is one of: (to borrow a phrase coined by Jacques Parizeau on referendum night in 1995) "we who are us."

I love that phrase. It says so much, so succinctly. (Let's give the jolly old separatist fart his due!)

Identity is the key. In Quebec, it's all about, "we who are us."

Not that this is so unique - or so wrong.

An electorate naturally seeks out someone to represent them who they are comfortable with, someone who will represent them authentically because they have the same values and beliefs.

Quebecers see Mario as a good son-in-law, someone they could hand their loved one over to and know that they would be cared for.

So that was, metaphorically, what so many of them did in the election.

And what many pundits are predicting will inevitably happen in a bigger way in the next one.

But where does that leave those of us who are not "we who are us"?

Those of us who are in fact "we who are not them."

When Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper declared not long ago that the Québécois were "a nation" we wondered what that meant.

The government of Quebec quickly claimed that it included everyone who lives in Quebec.

But the Canadian prime minister cowardly refused to clarify.

"We who are not them" know that although we live within the territory of the Province of Quebec, and deal with all the joys and frustrations that entails, we are not part of any Québécois nation; just as surely as the Mohawks who live across the St. Lawrence River know that they are not part of a Québécois nation.

If the government of Canada can recognize a Québécois nation existing within its borders, will the government of Quebec ever recognize a Canadian nation within its borders?

I doubt it.

But they should because that is the reality of it; and that is our identity, "we who are not them".

There might be an existential angst involved when a Québécois tries to wear the Anglo Canadian identity, as amusingly portrayed by separatist ideologue Pierre Falardeau in his film Elvis Gratton.

But we Canadians living in Quebec feel the same way, we cannot simply pretend we are Québécois.

We are not that good at acting (with the possible exception of our own real life Elvis Gratton, Robin Philpot).

And that was probably why, after the election, our Island of Montreal remained a bright Liberal red.