I beg to differ ... there's quite profound differences between Canada and the US without bringing the French into the picture. For starters our 'Right Wing' is a little bit to the left of their 'Left Wing'.
I always tend to get a chuckle out of those who would have Canada swallowed up by the States. I wonder just how Uncle Sam would successfully choke down or assimilate well over 35 million hard core socialists?
The Republicans already think the Democrats are socialist ... that would leave Canadians holding party membership in the Liberals branded as communists, and the NDP would probably be anarchists!
It would be interesting to see ... might even make a good comedy ....
I have met a good number of American expatriates in Canada, and when I lived in the States I was often asked about Canada and what it was like to live there. I found that the Americans almost to a man said that America would be a better nation if they took a bunch of the ideas that Canada. Both nations are made up of strong, staunchly independent people, the primary difference being in modern times that Canadians did, and still do, pay more attention to the collective good and the good of future generations than Americans do. Now, this is not all Americans, of course, but a goodly number of Americans really do believe in the "greed, for a lack of a better word, is good" ideals, at least when it comes to economics and politics. Canada is rather different, of course. In government finances, for examples, the problems numerous provinces and Ottawa itself faced as a result of a large debt load in the 1980s and early 1990s drove home a real point about the future. It doesn't matter if its the Conservatives, Liberals or NDP leading, they all talk of putting Ottawa's financial house in order. They do it in very different ways, of course, but they all pledge to do it. The same is true across all of the provinces, Quebec included.
I do think that in some ASB scenario where America took over Canada, it would Canada's influence that has an effect. All politics aside, the ideas of government health insurance and better schools and social safety systems are things that I think most Americans, even the very independent ones, would be big backers of. You want to know why people get mad when Washington talks about trimming Social Security and/or Medicare? That's why. There is no way Washington could get rid of those systems in the provinces - even Alberta would keep theirs - and the fact that Canada's healthcare system simply works better would be seen by many Americans, who would ask themselves "Uhhh, why can't we have that?"
As far as the difference, I think most people have their own reasons for being proud Canadians. It varies from each individual person, but Canada's view on that is that the culture of our nation is still fluid, which is why there is people who think Canada is America Light. Most Canadians (this one included) would take real offense to that.
As to Quebec leaving, whether then or in the near future, if they want it, let them go. Keeping it amicable will be hard as Quebec is the spoiled child of confederation. They'll want to have their cake and eat it too, while keeping everybody else's cake in the fridge to have when theirs is done.
I think you are making a bit of a judgement call on that one. Quebec has the extra money from other provinces to keep the separatists down, though it has the after-effect of making the separatists think the current state of affairs would continue. I do believe that it should be weaned off over time, but I wouldn't jump to this conclusion. Quebec has lots of strong, hardworking people just like all of the rest of Canada, and I would argue that some of the things they have done (particularly in the field of child care, for example) should be emulated across the country is possible.
Quebec's idea of separation last time around was based on a special relationship with the rest of Canada after the split. I really don't think The rest of Canada would be up for something like that.
I think we would be in some ways, but if the separatists think they will getting money from Ottawa after they become independent they are on drugs. That ain't happening. If the special relationship includes open trade and freedom of movement, I think it would work just fine. I don't think much would change in Ottawa - by 1995, Canada has been working on the multicultural idea for a quarter century, and Quebec leaving won't make the nation more conservative or anything of that nature. I don't think the bilingual idea would go away, because there are a hundreds of thousand French speakers outside Quebec - New Brunswick, northern Ontario and Manitoba have considerable populations of them. (Shit, the ideas of multiculturalism have spread everywhere in Canada, pretty much. Calgary has a Muslim mayor, for starters.)
Why should we be? With the damage it would do to our economy alone in the initial stages I can't see how in hell we would even bother to try. There would be no special status for Quebec, no dual citizenship, and a proper and fair division of national debt.
On these points, I mostly agree. Politics in Canada would demand it, whether the Chretien government liked it or not. I don't see the problem with dual citizenship, honestly.
As to a joint currency, I can't see why we would be bothered to take a risk on a national entity which will have just caused our nation it's biggest body blow ever.
I wouldn't say that it would be the biggest body blow ever, not by a long shot. If done well, it wouldn't even be a huge blow to Canadians. It would change Canada's politics quite dramatically - as Ontario would now be
the dominant player in Confederation, I can see Quebec's separation as being a bigger problem for Western Canada politically.
While Quebec is at present an important part of this nation, we can get along without them, and in the mid to long term we will do better without them than they will do without us.
I think this is kinda being harsh, don't you think? I know somebody from Western Canada probably is not a big fan of their dollars going to Quebec, but the "to hell with them, we'll be better off without them" is a bad attitude to have about the country. After all, couldn't that be said about the whole country to some example or another? Could Alberta not say "Hey man, we got mountains of petrodollars, wouldn't we be better off without the rest of Canada mooching off of us?" Ontario would counter that argument by saying "Hey, you know, the fact that our dollar has gone up and Ottawa doesn't give a damn about Canada's manufacturing sector is hurting us, but we could get it back if we told Alberta to kiss it." I loathe the idea of Canadian regionalism, which is a large part of the reason I so loathe separatists. Truthfully, I have no issue with bilingualism or multiculturalism, and I'm saying someone whose French is absolutely awful. The modern Canadian identity has been born from the idea of Canadians being able to be born nearly anywhere, and while I'd rather the country do more to forge a collective identity, I don't want that to go away, and a large part of the reason it came to be in the first place was Quebec and its Francophones. Western Canada is part of that mold of Canada, too, just as much as Quebec is.
What has always amazed me is the hidden agenda behind the whole separatist issue, and the fact that nobody has ever caught onto it. It is a way that Quebec can bring the nation's attention to them at the expense of the rest of the citizens. The Federal government will pour billions of tax dollars into them while the rest of us do without. Everything else will go on the back burner until Quebec is placated.
Oh, people know about it, I can assure you. I think that the problems of regions of Canada having such levels of wealth disparity as they do now will have to be solved one day, and one can't really solve that by hammering on Alberta. They need to build up Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes to the level of the Prairies. I don't even think that would be hard - Western and Northern Canada provides the resources that Ontario and Quebec turn into more goods and services, benefitting all. Why Canada does not encourage the growth of a major shipbuilding industry and an wide-ranging fishing fleet to carry the Maritimes is to me an odd decision. If it was me running Canada, I'd do that, along with establishing a Canadian automaker, expanding Canada's aerospace and electronics industries and set up some new ones. Cheap Quebec hydropower could make a large-scale recycling industry possible, for example. Lots of materials collected as "recycling" end up being dumped someplace. This is idiotic, if you ask me. I loathe the fact that the oil sands use natural gas for the process of turning oil sands into synthetic crude - why not have a nuclear power plant built in Fort McMurray and use both electricity and waste steam heat to do it instead, and then sell the natural gas to the Americans or somebody else?
Hell, it's starting all over as we speak. The province of Quebec has just elected a separatist government again. So the fun begins once more.
Lo and behold, it was announced that another Trudeau has announced his intention to seek the leadership of the national Liberal party. The last one, along with Cretien who followed him, turned their back on Western Canada to pander to Quebec, this one in all likelihood will be no different. For according to them Canada is nothing without Quebec, a sentiment apparently shared by others around the world.
I wouldn't say its nothing, but I would say that our territorial integrity is worth keeping. As for the PQ, they won't get far trying to aggravate people - Harper isn't gonna play Marois' games, and Trudeau won't either. Let's not forget that Pierre Trudeau played a pretty public role in wrecking the Charlottetown Accord. He didn't do that to fuck with Brian Mulroney - he knew he was screwed by that point already - or help his old protege, who in 1992 knew he was gonna be the next Prime Minister. And as you know, times have changed since the 1970s. At the time of the NEP, Peter Lougheed (RIP to a great man
) was ignored by Trudeau and his remarkably-stupid National Energy Plan, and Lougheed made him pay dearly for that, a mistake that his successors have not made and will not make again. Now, Alberta's days as a right-wing hardass province are gone. The resource boom and Alberta's growing population have ended that forever, and I'm rather surprised that Ontario Premier McGuinty, who was good friends with Jean Charest, hasn't called Edmonton up and asked to meet Allison Redford. As I said above, Alberta resources and Ontario monetary and manufacturing muscle would make for a very mutually-beneficial arrangement for both sides. But Quebec separating would if anything make life harder politically for Alberta, as the majority of voters would live in Ontario, and Alberta's political leanings on the federal level are still obvious.
...Where is Mel Hurtig and the Western Canada Concept when you need him?
In obscurity, where he belongs.
Well I'm pretty sure there'll be a Canada after a Quebec separation. It will be hurt, that goes without saying. But we will manage, and soon enough be back on track. We have the economic muscle backed by the natural resources, agriculture and manufacturing base to do that. Our economy is much better balanced than it would appear at first glance.
And it will recover reasonably quickly, aided in part by the potential movement of manufacturing out of Quebec.
The current government's decisions and dedication to advancing the interests of energy producers is not helping matters here in Ontario. Toronto's financial boom and huge condo boom is making for the center of the city being very rich, but the middle class is dying away here, in large part due to loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs which I really do believe Canada should fight to get back. Western Canada got real mad at Thomas Mulcair's dutch disease comments, but to an extent, he isn't wrong, as much as many of them don't like to admit it. Now, I would not advocate slowing Alberta down, but rather using that oil wealth to get Ontario back moving again, preferably by supply Alberta with what it needs. I hate the Keystone XL and Northern Gateway pipelines for this reason - as with Danielle Smith, I want the mega-pipelines heading East for Ontario and Quebec, to build refineries here to supply our own fuels, and provide feedstock to any industry that uses petroleum.
More importantly we have a populace who have come to expect not only a certain standard of living, but the social support structures that go along with it. We can and will get through the challenges faced.
On this we agree.
As well I would imagine that any nation that showed too much interest in Quebec's separation may well be looking at the loss of some favor in their dealings with the Canada remaining, and multinationals which are now based in Quebec so that they can access the Canadian market may well find that their operations are now in a foreign country, and may have to look at relocating.
And some probably will, on that we agree. As far as nations losing standing with Canada, that will depend on how the separation goes. If it goes badly, yeah any major Quebec backers won't find as Ottawa as friendly. But there are many ways that can go.
Quebec itself will find itself losing, for while in Canada it has enjoyed a dissportionately larger share of the civil service, as well as demanding and receiving the same treatment in the dispensation of government contracts. If they think that these will be forthcoming after a separation, they have another thing coming. But what is a fiscal loss for Quebec will be of some little assistance to the recovery of Canada.
I already commented on this above, and we agree.
Quebec does not have a good record of dealing with any other group which are not Quebecois. I would wonder that there might not be an exodus of sorts out of Quebec after a successful separation. The threat of it before caused enough to leave. As well the First Nations people are not likely to embrace separation and would opt to remain in Canada.
This is a possibility but I'm not sure its a big one. Many of those who were going to leave left in the 1970s and 1980s - that's why all the big banks are in Toronto, for starters. As for the First Nations, that's obvious - they are massively, wholeheartedly against the idea of Quebec separation, and them moving way is a very big potential problem for Quebec.
As to Montreal staying in Canada, that city has traditionally been a federalist stronghold in Quebec. There is a large non-French population there and strong ties to the rest of the nation.
And that could be a thorny issue, because Montreal is Quebec's economic centerpoint. The idea of them breaking away to stay in Canada is gonna drive the Quebecers absolutely nuts.
