Unity based on ethnicity or religion is very common for nations, though, so what your or I as Americans might consider important is not at all necessarily the most common impetus for nation-forming nor the most common cause for national unity. The U.S. is unusual to the extent that it is based on an idea or philosophy and not purely on Anglo white supremacy.
Even within Europe, having a national idea of some sort tends to be better than just an ethnic state. Take France for example: "Libert├й, Egalit├й, Fraternit├й" is a much more unifying message then "we're a bunch of people who speak a vaguely similar language and have some shared culture and history." That's how you get a Yugoslavia.
How a country starts its existence doesn't necessarily make it more or less real afterwards.
But it may make it more politically cohesive.
Is more important that there's a unifying narrative though than any "real" point of unity, especially not one based on ethnic or religious identities.
Sure, narratives help, and Quebec definitely has one.
Unity based on ethnicity or religion is very common for nations, though, so what your or I as Americans might consider important is not at all necessarily the most common impetus for nation-forming nor the most common cause for national unity. The U.S. is unusual to the extent that it is based on an idea or philosophy and not purely on Anglo white supremacy.
Even within Europe, having a national idea of some sort tends to be better than just an ethnic state. Take France for example: "Libert├й, Egalit├й, Fraternit├й" is a much more unifying message then "we're a bunch of people who speak a vaguely similar language and have some shared culture and history." That's how you get a Yugoslavia.