|
Reprinted below is an exchange between Marc D., a supporter of the International Bolshevik Tendency, and Raymond Debord
(alias Damien Elliott), at that time the leading figure in the JCR-Gauche Révolutionnaire, the
French affiliate of the Committee
for a Workers’ International. The first two items were originally published in French in the March 1994 issue of l’Égalité (No. 28).
Mail: l’Égalité in favor of Quebec
nationalism?
‘‘ (...) I noted the article on the Canadian elections
and the photo of the
indépendantiste demonstration in the last issue (No. 26----Editor’s note) of l’Égalité. Does this signify support for Quebec nationalism? (...) The weight of nationalist sentiment in the workers’ movement represents a burden, and not a catalyst or an ‘objective dynamic’ in the
development of revolutionary class
consciousness.’’----M.D.
For an
Independent and Socialist Quebec!
by Damien Elliott
The article to which our reader refers gave some news on the breakthrough of Bloc Québécois nationalists
in recent Canadian elections. To
illustrate this, we chose----on purely
‘‘journalistic’’ grounds----a photo of an
‘‘in-dépendantiste’’ demonstration. The JCR-Gauche Révolutionnaire has not yet had the opportunity to address this question and to formulate its point of view. Nor has this debate been carried out with the editors of Militant Labour, a new Canadian newspaper, which we welcome in passing, sharing the views of this editorial board. Militant Labour, addressed to an anglophone public, has declared itself in support of ‘‘Quebec’s right to
self-determination.’’ In the folledingue article, Damien Elliott expresses his personal viewpoint, seeking to open a discussion indispensable for all who wish to build a revolutionary workers’ party in Quebec.
* * *
Having a correct position on the national question is indispensable for whomever claims to defend workers’ interests. This is evidently the only means of winning a hearing in countries where national conflicts exist. This has nothing to do with support to
‘‘nationalism’’ in general for there are two nationalisms: that of the oppressors (reactionary) and that of the oppressed (progressive). The demand for national independence by proletarian revolutionaries doesn’t imply support to bourgeois nationalist leaderships. On the contrary, raising the demand above all is intended to fight them by removing the major obstacle to rallying workers to the program of socialism and internationalism. If the unity of nations is desirable, it cannot be achieved otherwise than in terms of strict equality. In the case of an oppressed nation, separation with the oppressor nation is often the first necessary step toward future unification. But let us start by stating clearly that Quebec is an op- pressed nation within the Canadian State.
An Oppressed Nation
A publication of the LSO/LSA1, a revolutionary organization no longer in existence, gave this subject some valuable guidelines: ‘‘The
Québécois constitute a nation sharing a common national language, French; a culture and a history which date from the former North American colony of France; and a common territory more or less delimited by the present borders of the province of Quebec....The background of the oppression of the Quebec nation goes back to the British conquest of the French colony in 1760 and the defeat of the revolutionary national uprising of 1837, which was an attempt at bourgeois democratic revolution, similar to that launched by the American colonistsmore than 60
years earlier....The Quebec nation is deprived of its democratic right to political self-determination. The Canadian constitution nowhere recognizes the right of the Québécois or of any other nationality
to décide their own fate, extending to
and including the right to separate and to form their
own State if they so desire.... Francophones----who
constitute more than 80% of the population
of Quebec (Editor’s note)----are subject to linguistic discrimination, which renders them second class citizens. English, the language of the oppressor nation, holds a privileged position. Francophone workers, among whom one notes a much higher rate of unemployment than among anglophones, are a source of cheap labour for the capitalists. The Quebec economy is dominated by large Anglo-Canadian and American corporations. The main instrument of domination is the impérialiste Canadian State.’’2
Nationalism, Burden or Catalyst?
As long as the nationalist and
‘‘indépendantiste’’ movement obtains minority support among the members of an oppressed nation, defenders of workers’ interests have to denounce this oppression and to recognize the right of the nation in question to self-determination. Such is the correct position with respect to Corsica or to the French Pays Basque. Things change the moment when the
‘‘indépendantiste’’ demand assists the development of the class struggle or if it shows signs of winning the support of the majority of the oppressed nation. In Quebec’s case, support for the national movement has been on the rise since the early 1960’s. One of its by-products has been the rise of
the PQ (Parti
Qué-bécois) a bourgeois formation strongly rooted in all sectors of the population, including the industriel proletariat. But the national bourgeoisie, represented today by the Bloc Québécois, has shown itself to be
incapable of consistently defending
(Quebec’s) national interests. The
satisfaction of this demand however has an exceptionnel progressive character as it directly challenges the central State, the heart of Canadian capitalism. As the LSO/LSA notes:
‘‘Quebec
nationalism is currently a major challenge to the governments of Ottawa and Washington, to Bay Street and to the rue Saint Jacques.’’
The national movement has allowed the Québécois to obtain a number of rights but the central state refuses to delegate further government prerogatives and to admit the idea of ‘‘asymmetric federalism,’’ which
would give more powers to Quebec than to the
other nine provinces, because
of its national
distinctiveness. With the deepening of the economic
crisis, nationalist sentiment continues to grow and, given the serious threats of the federation’s
explosion, the national struggle is one
of the most likely channels for the
working class to take power. If a workers’ government seized power in Quebec, an event this important would immediately have gigantic repercussions and would shake not only the rest of Canada but all of North America from top to bottom.
An Objective Dynamic?
The struggle for Quebec’s national liberation, like all similar processes, contains a certain dynamic which pushes toward its transformation into socialist revolution. On the other hand, it is obvious that this cannot be produced spontaneously, without the national movement passing at one moment or another under the leadership of a class party having a clear consciousness of its goals. This is even truer today, after the disappearance of the USSR and the
‘‘Soviet bloc.’’ It is
thus hardly a question of extending the least confidence in the Bloc Québécois, a priori hardly
susceptible of winning Quebec’s
independence and certainly incapable of
guaranteeing a real independence, that is to say a break with the Anglo-American trusts, NATO and international financial institutions. In Canada, the principal workers’ party is the NDP, a Social Democratic organization which never succeeded in winning support in Quebec because of its refusal to support even self-determination. But a Canadian workers’ organization which seriously wants to take power to introduce socialism will never achieve this by turning its back on the national aspirations of Quebec’s working population. In this field, it would become the champion of national independence and would try to lead the national movement by placing it under the flag of socialism. In English Canada, it would work to counter the chauvinist prejudices of anglophone workers, explaining to them that their own emancipation depends in large measure on their capacity to support Quebec’s right to
self-determination.
* * *
Notes
1. Ligue Socialiste Ouvrière/League for Socialist Action,
Canadian section of the IVth
International (‘‘United Secretariat’’)
2. La question nationale au Québec, in Pour un
Québec indépendant et
socialiste (éditions d’Avant-Garde. Montréal. 1977)
to read the long comment of the IBT
http://www.bolshevik.org/1917abcd.html
Canada : marxism vs nationalism
