Search results

Demonstrates that nationalist discourse in Quebec has been ambiguous, offering evidence for different perspectives on sovereignty ranging from ethnonationalist to civic arguments. This case also reveals how nationalist discourse can shift along this axis during various stages of the secession debate. Further, there is some indication that Quebecois arguments for sovereignty have been made in terms of just cause & self-determination, with the definition of sovereignty used in various ways. Attention is given to the scholarship generated from this rich case, highlighting the work of Allen Buchanan, Michael Ignatieff, Kai Nielson, & David Miller that supported a dichotomous view. This Manichean approach has been challenged by Anthony D. Smith, Rogers Brubaker, Margaret Moore, & Michael Keating. In closing, other ambiguities that exist at the core of Quebec's sovereignist movement are touched on. J. Zendejas