Podcast By Chiara Lea and Francesca Hotson
Chiara: Hello, and welcome to this episode of the Identity Hunters podcast. I’m Chiara.
Fran: Hello, My name is Fran. It’s lovely to be here.
Chiara: All right, well, we’re going to be focusing on Quebec nationalism. Fran, do you want to get us started off with that?
Fran: Let’s begin with just a tiny bit of historical background. So, as we know, the French began to colonize what is now Canada at almost exactly the same time as the English began to colonize what is now the United States. And by the mid 18th century they had staked a claim to an immense region connecting the Saint Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes down the Mississippi to New Orleans.
Fran: The province of Quebec is that last remnant of this vast sphere of French influence, which goes back over 400 years or so. So it is hardly surprising that the national identity of Francophone Canadians
has often clashed with the wider Canadian definition of a nation. And these deep French roots made it impossible to build a sense of Canadian National identity around a single ethnic group, language or set of traditions and supposedly shared collective history and memory.
Fran: The result is a paradox and a bold experiment, a Canadian National identity founded on the very idea of multiculturalism itself. And what is even more paradoxical is to find one of the roots of this identity in an extremist manifestation of Quebec nationalism. And that is why we move into a brief summary of the history of the Front de Liberation du Quebec, or FLQ.
Fran: How was my pronunciation?
Chiara: [Laughs] Yeah, no, don’t worry about it. You’re doing great. The FLQ was a Marxist terrorist group. They started in about 1963 and continued until about the 70s. They were responsible for 200 bombings and robberies that resulted in up to six deaths. Their most
impactful event, the October Crisis, provided the immediate background to the publication of the FLQ Manifesto. We often see Canada as this perfect, peaceful country. I mean, I definitely do, but half a century ago there was a violent suppression movement which led to aggressive action as the first chain of political events, known as the October Crisis.
Chiara: It started around October 5th, 1970. A branch of the FLQ kidnapped a British Trade Commissioner named James Cross and then released their manifesto. Worse still, this was followed by the kidnapping and subsequent murder of the Minister of Immigration and Minister of Labor, Pierre LaPorte on November 6th. In response, the Canadian federal government, led by Pierre Trudeau, implemented the War Measures Act for the first time in Canadian peacetime history.
Fran: So Chiara, you seem to know a lot about Quebec nationalism. But like, I think in contrast to something I think I’m more familiar with, the Troubles in Northern Ireland. There are kind of a lot of
similarities but between both separatist movements, which were both fuelled by the use of violence as a means to achieve their ends, and were reinforced by powerful nationalist historical events in defining the conceptual boundaries of the nation, reinforcing a sense of pride in the nation’s achievements, and evoking feelings of pity and ignition at the losses suffered by the nation.
Fran: And they both talk about their national traumas as well. For Quebec, it was their conquest by the English, and for Northern Ireland it was the famine and the nationalist claims to independence and recognition both significantly gained rapid momentum simultaneously in the 20th century. Which was where this rebirth of nations took place? The most notable historical event, I think, for Island were the Easter uprisings in 1916.
Fran: But for Quebec, it was the Quiet Revolution, which, just to clarify, was a period in Quebec’s history during the 1960s in which a revitalization to Quebec’s economy occurred, along with new Liberal reforms, and eventually this led to the October Crisis and allowed the nationalist desires of reinforcements, commiseration and inspiration to take root.
Chiara: So what gave rise to this violence and bloodshed so uncharacteristic of what we associate with Canada? The best way to answer these questions is to dive into the FLQ manifesto itself and unpack it bit by bit to understand its version of Quebec nationalism.
Chiara: We’re going to go through excerpts of this manifesto and tell you a bit about where this nationalism comes from and our thoughts on it.
Chiara: Yeah, so let’s start with the opening line, “The Front de Liberation du Quebec is neither the Messiah nor modern day Robin Hood. It is a group of Quebec workers who are determined to use every means possible to ensure that the people of Quebec take control of their own destiny”. (1)
Fran: Now, what a nice little set of implicit contradictions. They explicitly disclaim any messianic intentions in the same sentence as they talk about destiny, and the reference to workers is the first hint of underlying Marxism. And although they will claim to be nonviolent later in the manifesto, their determination to use every means possible, especially in this Marxist context, carries a clear implicit threat of violence, which is in fact made explicit by the kidnapping.
Chiara: Another contradiction is contained in this closing reference to ‘destiny’ sounds like religious language, but it’s very important to understand the religious situation in Quebec at the time. From the 60s
to the 80s, the Catholic Church felt a loss of influence due to the state taking up much of its previous duties with education and health. Quebec was determined to shape itself as a state that was “the
embodiment of French nationalism in Canada”.
Chiara: Yet, alongside French language, Quebec was distinguished from the rest of Canada by its French Catholic religion, which had become a very powerful force in shaping French Canadian identity and
politics, especially pre 1980s. But Marxism is materialistic, anti clerical atheist changing with these times. The FLQ represents a Marxist split in Quebec nationalism.
Fran: Yeah, in fact the FLQ manifesto has a consistent anti Catholic bias, claiming for instance that “we are terrorized by the Catholic Church”. Moreover, it aligns the struggle for Quebec rights with broader movements of anti colonial rebellion as cited in the manifesto. So essentially, the FLQ definitively sought not to promote Quebec nationalism as a form of Catholic political culture, and so instead the subject is placed on the Quebec worker.
Chiara: So what is this destiny that the FLQ seeks? The first hint is contained in the next passage from the manifesto. “The front de liberation du Quebec wants total independence for Quebecers, united in a free society and purged for the good of the clique of voracious sharks, the patronizing big bosses and their Henchmen who have made Quebec their private hunting ground for cheap labor and unscrupulous exploitation”.
Chiara: What’s interesting to note about this is that the FLQ doesn’t demand a free Quebec. They demand a total independence of Quebecers from exploitation. So almost coming back to the idea that it’s not about the land, it’s about the body. It’s about this obsession that nationalists have with the physical body of a certain ethnic group. Independence for the FLQ is about freedom of the body rather than just freedom of the land.
Fran: In that last sentence, the appeal to the exploited working class sounds like Marxism to me. The Anglo capitalists from Ontario have made Quebec their happy hunting ground for cheap labor and
unscrupulous exploitation. For many, the land itself meant little, but the people and the culture were the force that needed independence. This is unlike other nationalist movements in Palestine or Catalonia, for example, Quebec is already a province and it wants more autonomy. But ultimately, Quebec nationalism is about our blood, our kind and our race.
Chiara: I definitely think that’s true. Yeah.
Fran: There is another thing that I’d like to mention in the last part of the quote. We know that the choice of the phrase big bosses refers to the dominant role of Anglophones in Quebec’s economy. Although the
French speakers outnumbered the English speakers in this province, the Anglophone population had better economic opportunities and held higher positions in the labour force. What’s important here is that the original manifesto was broadcast in French, but the phrase big bosses was specifically written in the original as English. And there are other points where they choose to use English words. But here they’re
saying not only are you big bosses, you are English big bosses.
Fran: But this is overall about the erasure of francophone culture by the Anglophones.
Fran: OK, so now we’re moving on to another excerpt from the manifesto, which is “the FLQ is not an aggressive movement, but rather a response to the regression perpetuated by high finance through the puppet governments in Ottawa and Quebec”. Chiara, can you elaborate on that?
Chiara: Yeah, of course. So I’m actually going to work backwards with this quote. The puppet government aspect that the FLQ is talking about, they’re suggesting that the government is a sham, this political process is a sham, and Canada is actually being ruled by bankers. Now this is central to the FLQ manifesto.
Chiara: It’s how they justify their more violent actions against the state. They claim that the FLQ is able to finance itself through voluntary taxes levied on the establishments that exploit workers. There’s no is crucial here because to the FLQ, these voluntary taxes are essentially robberies put against the banks often. But they’re not only addressing their upset with Ottawa, but also they’re addressing their upset with the people who disagree with them within Quebec as well. I think that’s a really interesting dichotomy because they’re saying that the federal government is responsible, but also the Quebec government is responsible.
Fran: And then they talk about how they’re not an aggressive movement, but they are a response to aggression. I think that’s really key here.
Chiara: Yeah, no, I agree. It’s fascinating to me because the FLQ, as previously mentioned, was responsible for over 200 bombings with six people dead.
Chiara: Fran, to me that sounds like violence. It sounds like aggression.
Fran: It sure does. They say that this is not an aggressive movement, but when they act to be loyal to the province, it is not aggressive. It is to defend themselves against the oppressors.
Chiara: Yeah, they’re trying to say, look, we’re not the violent people. It’s the government that is oppressive towards us. And I’ll be honest, they got a really good reaction because at the end of the day, what did the government do in response to their kidnapping? They issued the War Measures Act. They released the military in the streets. They had curfews. They had all these policies, which to a lot of people seemed like a form of violence from the state.
Fran: Those are the famous Pierre Trudeau interviews where they’re asking him just how far will you go in regards to the War Measures Acts. And he says just watch me.
Chiara: I mean, what’s even more fascinating is the things that they quote as violence. Now I think this is where you get a really interesting look into the psyche of the FLQ and how they think. So they named Bill 63, which in simplest terms is a bill that says French needs to be in the curriculum of schools. But what the FLQ is saying is no, this is violence because you’re not mandating the importance of French, because actually what it’s doing is allowing people to put their kids into English schools where French is not the majority language they use in the classroom. But this is violence against our culture, against our people. They’ve tied their blood to their language.
Chiara: I guess that shows to you that the FLQ violence is not just the army in the streets, the, you know, legal detentions of people that they were having during this time. It’s about the actual erasure of their
culture, their identity through these pieces of paper.
Fran: Right, that actually leads me to the next quote. “Montreal policemen, those strong arms of the system, should understand these reasons. They should have been able to see that we live in a terrorized
society because without their force, without their violence, everything fell apart on October 7th”.
Chiara: This is an appeal to the policemen who are, in other words, working class people who are imposing the will of the big bosses.What they’re actually referring to is a period in Canadian history where
there was a strike by the Montreal police officers and firefighters. And through that there were several hours of violence. The Quebec government brought in the military. And the FLQ is saying that the
policemen should now be able to sympathize with the workers and support their demands rather than acting on the orders of the bosses and suppressing the revolt.
Fran: Exactly because they are tools of the state who use violence on a regular basis. And what the FLQ is trying to say here is that not even you are safe. The violence that you use against others, that same
violence can be used against you.
Chiara: I think what they’re trying to point out here is that at the end of the day, the policemen are just another victim of the system, as shown by what occurred on October 7th, with the military getting involved and stripping away the privileges that they thought they had. This is talking about how they should be able to now see that we live in a terrorized society at the moment, because when they lost all their privileges, they saw what it was really like in the society for the rest of us. No longer can you hide behind this idea of your own privilege, because you’ve seen what happens when we break through that.
Fran: It’s almost a very logical kind of ploy to say we understand you are indoctrinating, you are indoctrinated in this system, but you got a chance to see what it was like not to be part of that system. Now is, let’s say now is your moment, because I see so many nationalists who say anyone who sides with the other or the enemy is our enemy and the FLQ is doing something different.
Fran: They’re actually saying, no, we get it. We understand why you thought this way. We understand that
they gave you privilege. We get it. But you’ve been taken out of that now.
Fran: OK, so the next quote that we would like to shine some light upon goes as follows. “We have had our fill as have more and more Quebecas of a pathetic government that performs 1001 acrobatics to
charm American millionaires”.
Chiara: So I think this is a really interesting thing because here, directly they’re naming another. They are exploiting the Canadian fear of America, which I’m going to be honest, has not faded with time. The FLQ is playing on a much deeper and more pervasive Canadian fear of being assimilated or made subject to the United States, which goes back at least until the War of 1812.
Chiara: A timely example of this would be the Canadian fears post the election of Donald Trump. American culture, opinions, values and capital constantly mixes with Canadian industry, which led to the
fear that American politics would come to Trump, no pun intended, Canadian beliefs. With one of the largest borders in the world between the two nations, America has often felt like the leader of North American politics. Despite Canada’s cultural and political differences. When it comes to population, GDP or global influence, the United States dwarfs Canada, which leads to nationalistic fears. Due to the connection between Anglophone Canada and America through, for one thing, language, the two become synonymous with each other in the eyes of the FLQ.
Fran: The real fear for Canadians is not military occupation and annexation so much as being reduced to an American colony economically.
Chiara: Fear of American influence is woven into the Canadian identity itself, and this trepidation has been made abundantly clear in the FLQS position. They’ve created another enemy outside their borders and one inside. Another example that comes to mind is the American interference in Latin America, and for Canada in particular. The idea of America involving itself in Canadian affairs, particularly as this was taking place during the Cold War, did not appear to have a favorable outcome.
Chiara: So one of the final quotes we’re going to be getting into, I’m going to focus on the second-half of it, which states, “to keep the poor natives of Quebec in fear of the misery and unemployment in which
they are accustomed to living”. So, Fran, what do you think about the choice of word natives in this quote?
Fran: Yeah, so by calling themselves natives, they are linking themselves to the First Nation communities who are at the time fighting for similar liberation against the oppressors. But you know, these people in Quebec, they are not natives. They’re not native to the land. They are the French that first colonized the land. But they legitimize their claim because they arrived before the British did.
Fran: This is just another classic example of a nationalist strategy. They are looking to historicize themselves. The risk of that is that it creates A normative right, a normative ethnic right almost, because claiming to be natives implies that there’s an ethnic element as well. This is very important because they have created their own separate identity that is now ethnic.
Chiara: So finally getting into our last quote, let’s talk about the end of the FLQ manifesto, where they say, “our struggle can only be victorious and awakening. People cannot be kept in misery and contempt for long, Long live free Quebec, Long live our imprisoned political comrades, Long live the Quebec Revolution”.
Fran: We have some more messianic language here. I think it’s interesting that they say awakened because it’s bringing back to these tones from the beginning of manifest destiny, of this undertone of
religious ideology, even though they pushed back against her.
Chiara: It’s making loyalty imminent to the patriot. And it’s really interesting in the case of Quebec because by making loyalty imminent, it justifies violence.It is truly nationalist because it assumes happiness through the concept of political loyalty through identity. Again, we’re talking about the FLQS contradiction on this front.
Fran: The perspectives of the workers of Quebec is also repeated over and over again throughout the manifesto. The FLQ refers to the working men as “slaves, servants and bootlickers to the fortresses of
high finance”. What’s at stake here is intentionality. It’s been placed there to prove that there is an actual threat and they need to take action. This struggle for survival is easy to believe. It is an ethnic war. It re-politicizes violence on the basis of radical normativity.
Chiara: Yeah. I think to conclude some of the main points of this manifesto, the FOQ wants free Quebecers with a secular state and then they go about trying to awaken people to this Quebec by appealing to the working class. They are mimicking the oppression of an ethnic group, the First Nations, to make themselves an ethnic group, and enforcing colonial rhetoric against the federal Canadian
government and bankers.
Fran: Quebec and the First Nations compelled Canada to commit to the multicultural experiment, which is the cornerstone of its liberal identity. And the FLQ has demonstrated a unique formation of nationalism through the struggle for survival as French Canadians, a failed ethnic war of linguistics.
Chiara: So why did the nationalist movement fail? From the contradictions within the FLQ’s own thoughts, it’s clear that their aggressive actions and confusing messianic rhetoric fail to inspire loyalty by, quote, every means possible after the October Crisis.
Chiara: Well, thank you so much for joining us.
Fran: Thank you for listening.
Bibliography
(1) All further quotes are sourced from the FLQ Manifesto as cited in the bibliography
Beaudry, Lucille “Francophone Nationalism in Québec,” 2015. Canadian Encyclopedia https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/nationalisme-francophone-au-quebec.
Bélanger, Damien-Claude and Front de Libération Du Qubec , ”FLQ Manifesto” 2007. http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/quebechistory/docs/october/documents/FLQManifesto.pdf.
Bilodeau A, Turgeon L. Boundaries of the nation(s) in a multinational state: Comparing Quebecers and other Canadians’ perspectives on national identity. Nations and Nationalism. 2021; 27: 530–547. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12641
CBC News. “House Passes Motion Recognizing Quebecois as Nation,” November 28, 2006. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/house-passes-motion-recognizing-quebecois-as-nation-1.574 359
CBC Radio. ‘The Lasting Legacy of the 1970 FLQ Manifesto.’ October 13, 2020. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/the-lasting-legacy-of-the-1970-flq-manifesto-1.5760337.
Cohen-Almagor, Raphael. ‘The Terrorist Best Ally: The Quebec Media Coverage of the FLQ Crisis in October 1970.’ Canadian Journal of Communication 25, no. 2 (2000).
Hewitt, Christopher. ‘The Dog That Didn’t Bark: The Political Consequences of Separatist Violence in Quebec, 1963-70.’ Conflict Quarterly (1994): 9-29.
Hudon, R. “Bill 63,” 2024. The Canadian Encyclopedia
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/bill-63.
Kelly, Stephen R, ”The FLQ a Canadian Insurgency” NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIVERSITY NATIONAL WAR COLLEGE, 1995. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA441035.pdf
Langlois, Simon “Quebec as a Distinct Society,” The Canadian Encyclopedia 2020. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/quebec-as-a-distinct-society.
Naidu, M.V. “DEMOCRACY VERSUS TERRORISM: FLQ TERRORISM IN QUEBEC, A CASE STUDY.” Peace Research 27, no. 4 (1995): 1–15. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23607375.
Plourde, Francis. “The 1964 Robbery by the FLQ That Foreshadowed the October Crisis.” http://www.cbc.ca, 2020. https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/longform/flq-francois-schirm-quebec-october-crisis/.
Salee, David. “Identity Politics and Multiculturalism in Quebec,” March 19, 2010.
https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/identity-politics-andmulticulturalism-quebec
Seljak, David. “Why the Quiet Revolution Was ‘Quiet’: The Catholic Church’s Reaction to the Secularization of Nationalism in Quebec after 1960.” Historical Studies, no. 62 (1996): 109–24.
Stevenson, Garth. Parallel Paths. McGill-Queen’s Press – MQUP, 2006. https://www.fulcrum.org/concern/monographs/5138jf58h.
Stevenson, Garth. ‘The Politics of Remembrance in Irish and Quebec Nationalism.’ Canadian Journal of Political Science 37, no. 4 (2004): 903-925.
“The FLQ and the October Crisis,” The Canadian Encyclopedia 2024. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/timeline/the-flq-and-the-october-crisis
“Trudeau’s ‘Just Watch Me’ Interview Impromptu Interview of Pierre Elliott Trudeau with Tim Ralfe of the CBC and Peter Reilly of CJON- TV On,” 1970. https://historyofrights.ca/wp content/uploads/documents/OC_Trudeau.pdf.
Warren, Jean-Philippe. ‘The Powerful Message of the FLQ’s October Manifesto.’ October 12, 2020. https://theconversation.com/the-powerful-message-of-the-flqs-october-manifesto-147609.
Identity Hunters 