Destruction as a choice

As Quebec’s sovereigntist politics regain momentum, it is worth asking what this could mean for Montreal’s future. The concern is not merely political; it is also economic, cultural, and civic.

A Lesson from the Past

After the 1976 election of René Lévesque’s Parti Québécois government, Montreal entered a period of uncertainty that many residents and business leaders experienced as a turning point. During that time, I regularly commuted between Montreal and Toronto and witnessed Toronto’s rapid rise as a major international metropolis.

From my perspective, Montreal lost ground while Toronto gained influence, investment, and global recognition. What had once been Canada’s dominant city seemed increasingly constrained by political uncertainty and cultural division.

The Current Concern

The prospect of another Parti Québécois resurgence raises familiar questions about Montreal’s direction:

·         Will Montreal remain open, competitive, and internationally connected?

·         Will divisive nationalist rhetoric weaken the city’s civic and economic confidence?

For those who remember the consequences of the last major shift, the concern is clear: Montreal should not be pushed backward by another wave of narrow, exclusionary politics.

Montreal Must Look Forward, Not Inward

Montreal needs to be firmly connected to the 21st century, not pulled toward the fantasy of an imaginary country. The more Quebec turns inward and disconnects from broader economic, cultural, and technological currents, the more some regions may be drawn toward an isolationist “Yes” project.

As a French-language publisher in Montreal for nearly 20 years, I often heard the same question from reading committees: “Is this too advanced for readers in the regions?” That recurring concern revealed a deeper problem: too often, ambition and complexity were treated as obstacles rather than strengths.

I no longer believe Montreal should dilute its ideas, language, or cultural ambitions to satisfy parts of Quebec that remain resistant to change. The city’s future depends on confidence, openness, and the courage to move forward. 

Choosing a Wider Audience

To stay connected with a broader sense of humanity, I founded an initiative in 2010 that publishes primarily in English. Since then, it has reached more than 65 million views worldwide—a level of visibility I do not believe would have been possible had I continued to publish only for Quebec’s separatist and French-speaking regional audiences.

The Limits of Being “Too Local”

Over the years, I participated in literary fairs around the world, including:

·         Frankfurt

·         Los Angeles

·         Bologna

·         Paris

·         New York

·         Washington

The response was often the same: the work was seen as too local. In my view, publishing for narrowly defined regional markets can make it difficult to speak to universal themes—precisely the themes that allow a work to travel beyond its immediate cultural setting.

This tension has long shaped Quebec’s cultural debates. The criticism directed at artists who sought careers in English, including Céline Dion, reflected a broader discomfort with ambition beyond local boundaries. Yet her international success ultimately showed what can happen when talent is allowed to reach a global audience. 

A Political Warning for Montreal

In my view, it is time to name a troubling resemblance between certain ideological positions defended by the Parti Québécois and the divisive politics promoted by movements such as the AfD, Reform UK, and the MAGA ideology current now shaping public debate in many countries.

The issue is not that these movements are identical. Rather, they share a political method that relies on division, fear, and the promise of national renewal through exclusion.

·         They define identity narrowly.

·         They frame openness as weakness.

·         They treat pluralism as a threat rather than a strength.

·         They present division as a path to renewal.

That is why, in my opinion, Montrealers—at least those in parts of the island that reject this path—must urgently consider political alternatives to any unilateral sovereigntist push led by Plamondon.

My response to Plamondon is simple: I am not reducible to a language or a religion, and I do not want YOUR country built on this constraint. 

Robert Savignac

As the developer of Stigmabase, I primarily identify, myself, as a Montrealer. As business manager and president of a ten-bookstore network, I have published 161 books, including 49 translations from English to French.