October Crisis

In further analysis, angry people are more likely to listen to militants and commit violent acts, building a tense environment for Quebec citizens to live in. According to CBC Digital Archives, in response to the FLQ and other revolutionary groups forming, “when innocent people became injured from terrorist attacks, the cry for police involvement became shrill.” (FLQ Backgrounder Web) It is evident in this statement that many separatists who resorted to acts of terrorism consequently stimulated anger and fear in Quebec. If the Quiet Revolution had not occurred and the feelings of separatism and rise of terrorist groups did not follow, fewer people would have been hurt by the violence, both directly and indirectly. All things considered, the encouragement of separatism also weakened English-French relations as Quebec left 30 large shared programs, though the other provinces did not have the right to do so. All things considered, “from the Quebec Act of 1774 to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canada has protected the place of its French minority. If Quebec were to separate, that protection would be gone and the Francophone society would be assimilated by the wider world within a generation or two.” (Kheiriddin) In relation to this comment, many English Canadians viewed Quebec’s special status during the revolution as

Due to the bitter rivalries of their mother countries, the two sides also had a strong feels of animosity against one another. This animosity was furthered when the French surrendered New France. This cession of French territory to the British occurred after the French and Indian Wars of the mid 18th century; specifically after the treaty of Paris in February 20th of 1763. The essential annexation brought about much anger within the French. This was illustrated during the highlights of the Patriote movement (the rebellions of 1837 and 1838) and the secession of New France to become British. These events, along with prior rivalry with Britain and its colonies brought forth a substantial amount of Francophone nationalism. Though the rebellion was also caused by famine and poverty on some level, it was the strong French nationalism was the spark that brought about Canada’s first “civil war.”

Firstly, the Conscription Crisis of 1942 provoked conflict between the French and English Canadians, but also changed Canadian identity positively during the 1940s. Ever since World War ll began and Canada joined the war the French Canadians highly opposed to the idea of conscription; “[...]English-Canadians, who were mostly in favour of conscription, and French-Canadians, who were strongly opposed.” To begin with, the prime minister of Canada at the time, Mackenzie King had acknowledged the great disagreement the French Canadians had against conscription and made a promise to the nation: “King’s government [...] had promised the nation, and particularly Quebec, that it would not send any conscripts to serve overseas.” The last thing that King wanted to do was to impose conscription especially when Quebec strongly believed in anti-conscription: “The Quebec ministers kept a strong vigil over King's anti-conscription predisposition, reminding him of the terrible divisiveness of the World War 1

The Quebec City mayor sent reinforcements from Ottawa to help control the rioting, which had been going on for two days. On the Easter Monday the crowds organized against the military presence in the city. Armed rioters started to fire at the troops and vise versa. There was an estimated four men killed by the fire and dozens injured. These riots represent one of the most violent disturbances in Canadian history. These riots erupted over conscription, which grew from how things were before in French Canadian nationalism. The military crackdown that lasted in Quebec until the end of the war resulted in an increase in state power in the growing of French Canadian nationalism. These riots over the conscription and the French Canadians sticking to their ways lead to a many difficult and unpleasant times in Quebec.

Not only did they have trouble fighting on enemy lines, but there were also political battles to be addressed within the country itself. Despite the enthusiasm with which most Canadians approached the war effort, there was, from the start some quiet voices of dissent. Those voices that would grow in volume as the slaughter in France became more apparent and dragged on from year to year. The dispute that took place from the beginning and all the way through the war was mainly divided into two groups: the English- Canadians and the French-Canadians. The English-Canadians felt that it was their duty to aid Britain in the war and their dedication never faltered during those long years. However, the French-Canadians were simply upset that so much Canadian effort was being put into a fight that was not really their own. Henri Bourassa, a French-Canadian politician and nationalist, spoke publicly against the war in I916. His parliamentary followers backed his opposition; this united front, however, was built more on circumstances than it was on deeper political principles. Most Canadians agreed that the German’s idea of expansionary war was unnecessary, destructive, and evil. They agreed that “The Great War” needed to be ended before too much damage was made. However, they could not come to an consensus about how that was to be accomplished. The French-Canadians did not believe

Though the beginning of the separatist movement was marred by fighting and violence, the vast majority of the conflict has been a political one. The reason for the revolution in Quebec stems from the restrictions placed upon the populace by the English. These restrictions were on both the language and culture of the Quebecois, and caused them to feel trapped in under the English rule, for lack of a better term. This revolution is on a much less certain foot than the others however, with many of the younger citizens not remember the restrictions of days

For some time, many Quebecois had faith in the FLQ, believing the group would speed the process of separation from Canada; however the FLQ’s loyalty to these beliefs is questionable. Ultimately, it was perceived that the FLQ’s only goal was to give Quebec its justice; they wanted to see them united in a free society. On the other hand, during the October Crisis, they had not been able to prove that. When the FLQ kidnapped British diplomat James Cross, it publicized 7 demands, of which only one concerned French-Canadians, pertaining to fairer working conditions which was later dropped (Tetley, 2007). The rest concerned the FLQ themselves: publication of the Manifesto (a public declaration of policy and aims), the name of an informer, $500,000 in gold, the release of 23 jailed terrorists, and to transport them to either Algeria or Cuba (Knowlton, 1990). A goal of Quebec’s at the time, the protection of the French language, was a cause that preoccupied much of the nation, but was not a particular concern for the FLQ. In fact, the 1970 Manifesto was written in and proclaimed in informal French and “Fringlish” (Knowlton, 1990). The FLQ’s dedication to their cause is doubtful. FLQ believed that they weren’t going to get caught, hence their slogan “Independence or death” (Brown, 2011). However, when justice prevailed, the members chose exile rather than martyrdom. This made it clear that the FLQ’s dedication

Soon after the outbreak of World War II, Trudeau began to study law at the Université de Montréal. Pierre was strongly against signing up to fight. Like most French Canadians at that time, he didn`t believe that it was just a war. Rumours about the Holocaust swirled around campus. Nothing could distract Pierre from his studies. A few months later, he heard a speech by Ernest Lapointe, who was Prime Minister Mackenzie King`s right-hand man and Quebec lieutenant. He promised the crowd that there would be no absolutely no conscription, or so Pierre thought.

Nationalism is an important aspect of national pride and identity for countries around the world. For example, Canada takes pride in its cultural identity, one that is claimed to be different from other ‘Western’ more ‘industrialized’ nations, such as countries in Europe, and the United States. Even though Canada currently has a national identity that differs greatly from that of other more established countries, history has dictated the way in which a particular national identity exists today. In Canada, Samuel De Champlain and the French established colonies that created a cultural clash between the French Europeans, and First-Nations Canadians within the country. However, this notion of French Canadian Nationalism isn’t necessarily embraced by all of the Canadian Population. This paper seeks to analyze important pieces of Canadian History that have contributed to a broken concept of what constitutes Canadian nationalism, with an emphasis on how historic events prevent and affect coherent Canadian Nationalism in modern society. Through the analysis of the notions and histories associated with ‘First-Nations Nationalism’, ‘Quebecois Nationalism’, and a broader ‘Anti-American’ identity embraced by many Canadians, this paper seeks to locate common ground within the culturally diverse Canadian population in order to progress toward a singular coherent

In October 1970, Canada faced a pressing terrorist attack in Montreal, Quebec by a group known as the Front de Liberation du Quebec, or the FLQ for short. The group committed multiple attacks starting in 1963 that slowly escalated until the October Crisis, where they kidnapped two government officials and proceeded to murder one of them. The Canadian government responded harshly and rapidly. The prime minister of Canada, Pierre Trudeau, issued the War Measures Act which along with various things allowed the police and military full reign to arrest people and hold them with no explanation. The Canadian population was highly supportive of the government’s action believing that this extreme state repression would bring a finish to the October

The act of applying conscription during the First and Second World Wars have nearly torn Canada apart. The conscription crisis of 1917 was a treacherous event that occurred during the First World War. During this time the relations between Quebec and the rest of Canada were in an all time low in our Canadian history. The Québécois thought conscription was merely unnecessary no matter what circumstance; while all other Canadians did essentially want conscription occur. The contrast was inevitably high on the issue of conscription between the Québécois and the rest of Canada thus creating a solution when conscription was indeed needed was impossible. However while William Lyon Mackenzie King was the Prime Minister during the Second World

“French Canada: the rise and decline of a ‘church-nation’” by Sylvie Lacombe covers the influence the Canadian Catholic Church had on French-Canadians from the early nineteenth century until the mid-twentieth century. It explores how the failed Upper Canada rebellions led to British parliamentary control over the French via the Act of Union in 1840.  This enabled the Catholic Church to take over several provincial social institutions which came to influence nationalistic ideas and values.  Thus, many French-Canadians believed themselves to be part of a “church-state”. However, Irish Catholic immigration, new Anglo-Saxon imperialistic ideologies and the loss of French-speaking schools in the

In the midst of the October Crisis Pierre Trudeau handled the time of terrorism well. In this essay one will see how Trudeau handled the crisis excellently by examining the first domestic use of the War Measures Act which led to improvements on the Act, ensuring that Quebec did not become its own independent country, and how Canada stood behind and supported Quebec and Pierre Trudeau through the acts of violence led by the FLQ.

Finally in 1867, the United Canadas joined two other British Colonies, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to form the Dominion of Canada (McRoberts 1991, 413). French-Canadians continued to fight against assimilation and received autonomous privileges with exclusive jurisdiction over matters regarding its cultural distinctiveness***. Thus, the Francophone language and culture has always been at the forefront of Quebec priorities. Since Confederation, Quebec nationalist have felt that the Francophone language and culture has been at risk of assimilation by the rest of Canada. As a result, Quebec nationalism is fundamentally rooted in the preservation of the Francophone language and culture (Guiberneau 2006, 52). Political leaders in Quebec continuously urge for the recognition that Canada is composed of two nations or cultures (McRoberts 1991, 413). Prior to confederation Quebec enjoyed numerous autonomous privileges. Unfortunately, post-confederation Quebec did not enjoy as many autonomous privileges because Canada was created as a relatively centralized federation (Beland and Lecours 2007, 406). A centralized federation not only took several of these autonomous powers away from Quebec, but it also threatened the Francophone language and culture (Beland and Lecours 2007, 406). With this said, Quebec nationalism has placed a great deal of pressure on the federal government to decentralize, giving more powers to provincial governments.

As the 20th century comes to an end, Canada is a transcontinental nation whose interests and representatives span the face of the globe and extend into every sphere of human behaviour. However this was not always the case. When the four colonies of British North America united to create Canada on July 1, 1867, the new country's future was by no means secure. Canada was a small country, with unsettled borders, vast empty spaces, and a large powerful neighbour, the United States. Confronting these challenges was difficult for the young country. Though Canada was independent in domestic matters, Britain retained control over its foreign policy. Over the next fifty or so years, Canada's leaders and its