Sociopolitical Polarization in Quebec

In conclusion, as the younger generations of teens join the “adult world,” we can anticipate a scenario in which all of these trends continue their upward course. Unless, of course, we can re-engage these young people with society.

We will refrain from speculating on the future findings of the Crime Severity Index, but current trends do not bode well!

Let’s hope we are wrong!

The divergence of Quebecers on each of these issues is quite striking. While a few themes show a slight majority, in almost all cases Quebecers are divided into various pluralities.

No theme has a consensus. Quebec is manifold.

Polarization is more apparent when we consider the different sociodemographic segments that make up Quebec society.

Young people are distinguished by their great concern for the environment, their welcoming attitude to immigrants and their desire to strengthen the State and increase the services it offers (even if it means raising taxes).

At the other end of the spectrum, the older generations prefer much tighter immigration controls, a more conciliatory approach to the environment and a role for the State that fosters economic growth by supporting entrepreneurship.

People with higher education are more open to immigration and more likely to favour environmental protection over economic considerations. They prefer diplomacy over national defence and a government that provides more services. They are less sovereigntist.

Women are more open to gender diversity, while Montreal-area residents are more open to immigration and are less sovereigntist.

Thus, depending on where they fall on the social landscape, they tend to adopt specific positions on the sociopolitical issues confronting society today

Politics is one of the prime areas where polarized positions are articulated, and Quebec is no exception. Fortunately, compared to certain other countries, there is very little extremism here.

Supporters of the Quebec Liberal Party are very welcoming to immigrants and are obviously not pro-independence.

Parti Québécois supporters clearly favour stricter immigration controls while naturally being more pro-independence (although only 60% of PQ supporters are completely convinced).

Québec Solidaire supporters’ welcome immigrants, support gender diversity and are very concerned about protecting the environment.

Finally, CAQ supporters are distinguished by a strong desire to control immigration and little interest in independence.

These numbers speak for themselves! Two out of three people in Quebec (65%) find themselves, at least occasionally, in “polarizing” situations and two out of five (40%) could lose friends as a result. This almost harkens back to the day when the Church would opine: “Hell is red and heaven is blue.”*

It should be noted that young people are the ones who most often find themselves in exchanges of potentially conflicting opinions, which strains their friendships.

Quebecers are known to dislike conflict, so most try to avoid certain topics of conversation so as not to find themselves in conflictual situations.

However, some occasionally venture on to these slippery slopes, at their peril.

The following table is conclusive on this subject:

 

Once again, young people stand apart from their elders. They clearly find it more difficult to remain silent in such situations and more often than not end up in awkward situations.

The political views of romantic partners can affect the sustainability of their relationship. While the majority can live with radically different opinions in their relationship, for one in four Quebecers (26%), this is non-negotiable.

It should be noted that young people stand out here again, this time by their openness to differences of opinion, as is the case for men, too.

Women are much more unlikely than men to tolerate significant differences with their partners on topics as sensitive as the ones we measured.

Obviously, young men in Quebec have other selection criteria for choosing their partner.

 

When faced with such a diversity of viewpoints pointing in every direction, we decided to take a synthesis approach.

First, we started with what is known in the trade as a “dimensional reduction.” This produced a synthesis of the data collected, identifying the major factors (or axes) that could encapsulate or even explain the different attitudes of the respondents.

Two “axes” were identified:

1. A profoundly humanist mentality among Quebecers, expressed notably by a benevolent and welcoming attitude towards immigration and gender diversity, and a preference for democracy and diplomacy over national defence.

In contrast to this mentality is a type of conservatism that supports strict immigration controls, completely traditional gender identities, as well the precedence of national defence over investment in diplomacy.

2. The second axis pits committed sovereigntists advocating environmental protection as an absolute priority and more government intervention and services against committed “Canadians” who favour less State intervention to promote economic prosperity and more support for entrepreneurship.

We can clearly see how these axes of values and mentalities influence the different polarized positions expressed by the respondents in this study.

Additionally, this synthesis approach required that we quantify the people within the Quebec population who share these different value schemes (which our “major factors” allowed us to identify).

By subdividing the opposite sides of each of the two axes, we can identify and quantify the four major “families” of Quebecers – the four segments that illustrate the different points measured.

Conservative Separatists are deeply pro-independence. They are also rather protectionist, favouring strict immigration control. There is an over-representation of individuals in this segment who favour defence and the army over diplomacy and democracy.

An overproportion of Quebecers in this segment would never agree to date or be romantically involved with a person whose political opinions radically differed from their own.

We should also point out the over-representation of men, people 55 and older, regional residents, people with incomes and levels of education below the Quebec average, and Parti Québécois voters.

As the name suggests, they are protectionist and favour strict immigration controls, a lesser role for the State, along with measures that promote economic growth by supporting entrepreneurship. They also feel deeply Canadian.

They are not very open to non-traditional gender identities and comprise an over-representation of individuals who favour defense and the army.

They are over-represented in the Quebec City CMA, among middle-income earners, people with low education and CAQ supporters.

They, too, feel deeply Canadian, but they firmly believe that investing in democracy, diplomacy and dialogue among countries is key to promoting peace.

They also strongly believe that it is urgent to adopt drastic measures to protect the environment and are very open to immigration and gender diversity.

They are over-represented in the Montreal CMA, among women, 18–34-year-olds and supporters of the Quebec Liberal Party.

This last segment stands out, above all, for the strong urgency they feel for environmental protection and their insistence on greater investment in democracy, diplomacy and dialogue among countries.

They are also completely open to non-traditional gender identities.

In this segment, we find a plurality of separatists who want a more interventionist government that offers more services to its citizens.

Note, too, that there is also a clear over-representation of Quebecers with a high level of education, households with children, and supporters of the Parti Québécois and Québec Solidaire.

Since the purpose of this study was to take stock of the polarization in Quebec, we have focused on its importance among the population.

However, despite the diversity and sociopolitical division in Quebec society, the polarization here seems to us to be much less pronounced than in many other countries around the world.

While opposing positions are certainly clashing in the political arena here, the situation does not compare to what is happening in the United States or in France, for example.

The “extreme” right and left are not at all in evidence in Quebec. We don't have a Donald Trump, a Marine Le Pen or a Jean-Luc Mélenchon.

We consider our Conservative Party headed by Mr. Duhaime to be rather moderate compared to the above-mentioned politicians. Moreover, the polls give this party only about 10% of the popular vote.

It would have been interesting to conduct a similar study in English Canada, where polarization and populism seem more pronounced. (Witness the popularity of federal politicians like Pierre Poilievre and Danielle Smith in Alberta).

The next federal election should be very enlightening in this regard.

Thus, despite the very real polarization observable in Quebec, for the moment it is expressed in a way that is customary for any healthy democracy and is promoting a pluralism of ideas.

Let’s hope that this situation persists over time.

 

* For younger readers, we should explain that the saying “Hell is red and heaven is blue” was used in the past by the clergy and some politicians in Quebec to refer to the Liberal Party (red) versus the Conservative Party and the Union Nationale (blue).