Oh, he's spouting off stupidness about how Canada is letting Quebec dictate all our foreign policy and that that's why Canada's international reputation is failing. Because, of course, it's only Quebec that didn't want to take part in the war in Iraq, and we absolutely have to cater to the whims of the US in order to maintain our international standing.
It's on the front page of the National Post, surprise surprise.
And it's the National Post, really. What do you expect? Kowtowing to Americans and promoting tunnel-visioned conservativism is what they do best.
Pretty much.
I had to suffer through Granatstein in university ("Who Killed Canadian History?"), and while some of his stuff obviously has merit, a lot of the rest is just bile and vitriol. He has a serious axe to grind about military history, and he never misses an opportunity to let the sparks fly.
I just wish someone would muzzle him already.
"No, Jack. You can't belong to this university if you're going to make stupid-ass comments to the press..." :P
Pretty much what I thought. However, according to him, Quebec's principles are not Canada's principles, which is a load of horse-hooey. Granted, there are supporters of the war in Iraq in Canada; they're just not the majority, thankyouverymuch.
Yeah. The mention of the 40% difference in opinion between Alberta and Quebec was a very nice way of skewing the statistics to make it look like Quebec is off on its own. Even if the statistics are accurate (and that's a WHOLE other ballgame) you can't hold the province that supported the war most up as an example of what Canadians Really Think. I'd say most are somewhere in the middle -- and probably closer to the Quebec opinion than the Alberta one.
Quebec and Alberta are traditionally at odds over everything. Alberta is also the most rabidly pro-American province in Canada, mostly due to their oil production.
So to say that his use of the statistics is skewed is putting it mildly. :P
As I recall, there was a majority of people in Canada who didn't support the war.
Also, I'd like to point out that Quebec is in fact part of Canada, and comprises 1/6 of the country's population. Why the hell should our opinion suddenly be ignored just because some jackass anglo historian thinks only the ROC should have a say in foreign policy? When you ask for a Quebecker's opinion, by definition you're also getting the opinion of a Canadian. Last time I checked, we hadn't separated yet.
*grr*
Sorry, this topic is making me grouchy. Stupid Granatstein.
Sorry. Poor wording on my part. I didn't mean to sound as if I thought Quebeckers are not Canadians. Quebec is, however, known for being one of the more liberal-minded provinces. So while a Quebecker's opinion is still Canadian, if you did a survey of Canadians, all of whom lived in Quebec, it likely wouldn't be representative of the entire country's opinion. Nor would it be representative if the survey were done only in Alberta, or Nova Scotia, or Ontario, or British Columbia, or any one area.
(Of course, depending on how the question is phrased, your survey it might not even accurately reflect the opinion of the people you surveyed.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 02:53 pm (UTC)It's on the front page of the National Post, surprise surprise.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 03:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 03:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 03:31 pm (UTC)...because there are ONLY French Canadians in Quebec...
...among many other logical flaws I could name...
And it's the National Post, really. What do you expect? Kowtowing to Americans and promoting tunnel-visioned conservativism is what they do best.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-01 03:42 pm (UTC)Pretty much.
I had to suffer through Granatstein in university ("Who Killed Canadian History?"), and while some of his stuff obviously has merit, a lot of the rest is just bile and vitriol. He has a serious axe to grind about military history, and he never misses an opportunity to let the sparks fly.
I just wish someone would muzzle him already.
"No, Jack. You can't belong to this university if you're going to make stupid-ass comments to the press..." :P
What a wanker...
Date: 2005-11-01 04:48 pm (UTC)Re: What a wanker...
Date: 2005-11-01 05:03 pm (UTC)Re: What a wanker...
Date: 2005-11-01 05:30 pm (UTC)Re: What a wanker...
Date: 2005-11-01 05:42 pm (UTC)So to say that his use of the statistics is skewed is putting it mildly. :P
As I recall, there was a majority of people in Canada who didn't support the war.
Also, I'd like to point out that Quebec is in fact part of Canada, and comprises 1/6 of the country's population. Why the hell should our opinion suddenly be ignored just because some jackass anglo historian thinks only the ROC should have a say in foreign policy? When you ask for a Quebecker's opinion, by definition you're also getting the opinion of a Canadian. Last time I checked, we hadn't separated yet.
*grr*
Sorry, this topic is making me grouchy. Stupid Granatstein.
Re: What a wanker...
Date: 2005-11-01 05:59 pm (UTC)(Of course, depending on how the question is phrased, your survey it might not even accurately reflect the opinion of the people you surveyed.)
Re: What a wanker...
Date: 2005-11-01 07:22 pm (UTC):)
Re: What a wanker...
Date: 2005-11-01 09:42 pm (UTC)