So what's the problem? Are the Montcalmites sorry they missed their date with Robespierre and Madame Guillotine? Do they wish they had stood with Napoléon at Waterloo, and Napoléon III at Sedan? Quebec nationalists didn't exactly rush to the colours when France was threatened in 1914 or needed rescuing after 1940. What's wrong with British self-government, suppression of the slave trade and defeat of Hitler that you'd rather be part of, say, Vichy France?
Not bad, but I would take that much further. For example, I doubt France would be shifting over billions in transfer payments to them all these years. I liken a Paris controlled Quebec to Newfoundland with the British. The Newfies had to beg Britain to take over full control of them in 1934, after they tried quasi-independence. (As Wikipedia humorously notes: one of the few countries that has ever voluntarily given up direct self-rule.) Shrewd Brits managed to fob them off onto Canada in 1949. (To my Newfoundlander friends, I apologize, I'm just trying to make a point.)
Quebec has had a sweet deal with Canada. They can be independent if they want. All they need is 50% + 1 of votes.
UPDATE: Here are my posts: Why Isn't Quebec an Independent Country? And this one recently: Quebecers Interested in Sovereignty but not Separation
