Interpretation
The Michaud Affair re-awakened the bitter, very emotional and controversial divisions within the Parti Québécois between proponents of "soft nationalists" (aka "nationalistes modérés") versus "hard liners" (aka "purs et durs"). The first wants a modern and inclusive nationalism, while the second is exclusive of minorities, unless they adopt and vote for the sovereignty of Quebec. From this second point of view, immigrants have a duty to agree to their political agenda.
This Affair must be interpreted in the context of long-standing historical tensions between some more radical factions within the Quebec nationalist movement and the English-speaking and Jewish communities of Quebec ("anglophones"). Consequently, whereas most members of the Jewish and English speaking community and the general media consider Michaud's allegations to lean towards antisemitism, to Michaud supporters within the PQ and the sovereignist movement generally the Michaud Affair is the result of censorship and defamation against the "ethnic Quebecer" minority and its "rightful quest for political independence and autonomy". This question is an extremely emotional one for both the PQ's more radical ethnic-nationalist supporters and the more radical Anglophone federalists of Quebec.
Read more about this topic: Michaud Affair