>>>>>I would appreciate understanding this is all. The idea of a "Nation" is what I don't understand.
>>>>
>>>>I think it is clear. A nation is a people with a distinct culture, history... Quebecers in the context of North America fit that definition. Confusing country with nation is why people become become cheezed off.
>>>
>>>Unfortunately, that definition can be also applied to Newfoundland, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and probably a few others.
>>
>>Nope.
>
>I agree that "nation" is different (by some of its definitions) than "country".
>But certainly Newfoundland fits as well as Quebec. Newfoundlanders are different, and for a long time, than any other collection of people in their language and culture and they've only been a part of Canada for a comparatively short time (thus history differs too).
>
>Canada has had many "nations" within it for a very long time. But I'm still struggling with a Quebec (or a Newfoundland) "nation" within Canada. It just has a wrong feel to it in my mind at this time. But I may yet come around.

I agree. One of the problems is that nobody has really defined what it means to be a 'nation with in a nation'. Until somebody comes up with a workable definition and all interested parties agree to that definition, I don't see how I can ever feel comfortable with the situation. Of course, if that does happen, I might find myself even less comfortable with it.