It's worth remembering two or three primary things about what we'll call the next Yes Camp.
First: It will be a rally for the independence of Quebec. There we will find a confluence of political and social forces who want to make Quebec a country. There you will find entrepreneurs and union workers. There you will find environmentalists and people who find that environmentalists have a disgusting authoritarian streak. There will be conservative and progressive. There you will find people on the left and people on the right. you get the idea.
In other words, we'll find people there who have very little in common except that they are Quebecers and they want the people of Quebec to govern themselves without coming under the watchful eye of Canada. We will find people out there who believe that it is better for people to own their home outright than to have someone else own barely one-fifth of it. They will also have in common, we can be fairly assured, the desire to live in a fully French-speaking society, which no longer sees its identity diminished at home.
But for the rest, not so many points will be the same. But these few similar points are absolutely essential.
I come to the next point.
I have always been suspicious of those who practice conditional sovereignty. He was traditionally leftist: he said he wanted sovereignty, provided it was accompanied by a social project. A progressive, ecological, feminist, anti-globalization or socialist social project. Without it, he said, sovereignty would have no interest, or a limited interest.
they were wrong. And they also acknowledged the authoritarian temptation when they said they wanted to constitutionalize this social project in the constitution of a sovereign Quebec, just as they wanted to seize the new country. Elections will be held in sovereign Quebec. If the Left wants to implement its program, let it win without trying to manipulate the game. I would add that he would not be in a position to impose it in the dynamics of new state formation.
But these days, the “Quebec” right, with its liberal tendencies, appears to be adopting the logic of the left. She says: Sovereignty, perhaps, but on the condition that the QS is not in the alliance. Sovereignty, perhaps, but without leftism. And now it is that he reminds us that a pluralistic society includes left and right, and that we cannot have a free country on the symbolic or political exclusion of the entire stream that, no matter how critical, is constitutional. Of western society. This would also be undemocratic.
In 1995, in the Sovereignist Alliance, we got Jean Garron and Louis Harrel, François David and Eric Duhaime. In 2027, or 2028, we will find Paul Saint-Pierre Plamondon, Yves-François Blanchet, Bernard Drainville, Simon Jolin-Barret, Ruba Ghazal, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois and many others in the sovereigntist coalition. I would add that Joseph Fackal, Richard Martino, Sophie Durocher and yours truly will be there as well. We can clearly see that different streams will cross paths there.
In other words, Ruba Ghazal has found its place in my sovereigntist coalition. I would be curious to know whether this is true in his mind.