I think the phrase “appeasing of Quebec” can more accurately be replaced with “appeasing of Quebec-based leaders of political parties”. Jean Charest is the leader of a Quebec-based provincial party and Gilles Duceppes is the leader of a Quebec-based “federal” party. I say “federal” only because they run candidates in the federal election not because of anything to do with policy. Anyways most politicians blindly do what the party leader tells them to do, so that’s really all that is required to satisfy most Quebec-based politicians.

In a FPTP type electoral system that is what happens. Anyone who is 19, a Canadian citizen, and can take over the riding association of political party has a good chance of getting elected. In a few years climatology may become an issue of primary concern to French-speaking humans in Quebec, remember the ice-storms of 1998. Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and all the others that served to set a new record of most hurricanes in a single season show that politicians do not always get to set the agenda.

"...he's (Harper) hastened the departure of Quebec"

Wasn't Chrétien and ultimately the apathy of Canadians over the Lib`s corruption that has hastened things up?

Am all for massive decentralization but the issue of trust with Harper is not going away with the Christian right, the Fraser Institute and the old reform special interest groups acting up in the background.

Trudeau said he wanted no hyphynated Canadians, but since Piere left the scene we seem so afraid that seperation is possible, anmost anything goes to keep that from happening. If we were presently in quebect we'd push for everything we could get. Why not? the fed needs Quebec votes to form a majority government no matter which of these slighlty useless characters fighing for the job gets it. And while we are at it, we would prefer a Liberal majority , Thank you very much. and we arn't Liberals
We spent a few years stationed in Quebec, loved the place, loved the people. One of our children was born there. Are we Frence. No but if a majority of the province ever votes to go their own way, well that's the way it is.

So lets stop panicing and throwing promises that way.

I find the whole Quebec issue nonsensical. Seems that all "soverignty" means to Duceppe is an Olympic team and a flag. Let's remind ourselves where the Bloc came from" Lyin' Brian Mulrooney, that is where.

Harper appears to have changed from a card carrying Reform/Citizens'Coalition Ideologue
into another shameless opportunist, willing to drop previous principles at the drop of a writ,
for short term political expediency (sufficient seats for a Conservative led minority, he now hopes).

Are they all the same, in the end?

It was clear at the time of the Constitutional debates in Charlottetown and Quebec City in 1864 that Quebec was not like other provinces but that she would come into Confederation on the same basis as the other three provinces and those to come.

By your lapse in memory, Rafe.., you do every reader in this column certain irreparable harm..

Indeed.., what you seem to disallow is the 300 years that preceded the beginnings of the CANADA you seem to want to only remember *...

The very roots of our beginning as a Nation started long long time ago.., way before the 1867 historical benchmark you refer to...,

Indeed.., were it not for LES CANADIENS.*... along with British Military Governors of the day... ( MURRAY in particular ) circa 1759-1760 *... to the 1763 culmination of that process..., ( and of course we must not forget the contribution of the AMERICAINS to the south who , by 1775-76 were to rise up and create conditions that made the British
`enlightened`..., and what can we say also of the 1755 deportation of Acadians... that clearly was to have an impact on the fate , not only of America itself.., but Canada... *
These are the underpinnings that need to be addressed when attempting to discuss the very idea of Nations...,

That Canada Sir..., needs to be better understood..., in her 450 years in the making!!

How else to explain away the enduring existence of the Montreal Canadiens*...., and
LES HABITANTS..*.. ( THE HABS...)..within our vernacular.. Be it in the french language or English language .., Hockey does indeed provide a clue to our earliest of beginnings as a Nation..

. Indeed..., in a Province speaking of Sovereignty ... yet keeping the ICON vestiges of the very first European Canada...,

Of forest and trees... mr. mair.., you are indeed in need of EXPERIENCING THE VERY ROOTS OF CANADA...and perhaps , then and only then will you relent in your tales of a CANADA that never existed to begin with but in the fabrications of your unique brilliant yet eclectic mind *..

All the history Villager recounts may be true but the heirs to all that history gathered in Charlottetown and Quebec City in 1864 and they made a deal ... and the deal was not Two Founding nations but one federation which contemplated not just Canada as it then was, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick but Prince Edward's Island, Newfoundland and British Columbia as well. I don't believe any of the last three but especially BC would have joined Canada if it was constituted as two founding nations and appendages.

Interesting article Rafe:

Quick comments on Harper however. I disagree strongly with the previous comment that has gone from a reform idealogue to an opportunist. Harper needs to be understood as an extremely right wing politician who has emerged from but has not grown out of the far right of the Alberta political spectrum-ie.far more conservative than Klein. As such, emulation of current US policy in Canada is paramount and some of the strongest opposition to that would likely come from Quebec. In this sence, from an extremely conservative western base, Quebec is simply a pain that can go its own way with no great loss-this is not appeasement, this is cordial separation.

I strongly disagree with this view and
I would hope that my analysis is incorrect, given that Harper is running for PM and is trying to look less scary however, I think that we must be careful to vote for something, in this case Canada, than against something, the distasteful behaviour of the Liberals.

In a province where the People used to think of themselves as les Canadiens while the Canadians were still calling themselves subjects of her majesty, should we be suprised that sovereignty runs a whole lot faster? The appeasing has more to do with the ROC itself than la belle Province IMHO.

I won't vote Conservative. Lots of reasons. However, I do think the use of the CP photo used in this article is a bit tasteless, as Harper has said. Even the Liberal Party itself has said they will not use it. Not surprised it shows up here in the Tyee though.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/23/harper-elec051223.html

While I respect that Rafe and others may want 'their Canada to include Quebec', I have changed my mind on this issue. During the first major referendum I had thought the need for Quebec to be part of Canada was what made us 'a whole'.

No longer.

I have examined more closely the context of BC entering confederation and found that the commisioner minority report by Helmcken was ignored, that one of the commisioners did not participate in the closing stages of the debate regarding BC's entry into confederation, making the 'vote' of the report a tie, one for, one against and one absention (due to illness).

The lie of the railway bringing any prosperity to BC has now come true and Helmcken's thoughts about BC becoming a source of raw materials that would never be compensated has come to pass. As for the 'west' it was progressively stiched into the confederation, held in place by military force from english Canada when francophones and catholics tried to wrest the 'so-called' powers that provinces were supposed to have from central control in Ottawa.

The modern context has only rhymed with the past. However it is the economic advantages that are different. Those who say that BC cannot stand alone from Canada are missing the boat of opportunity that is present from the comparitive advantage to operating in a smaller dominion.

Whether Harper starts this break-up or the BQ/PQ manage it forcably in another referendum, or some other Federal or Provincial does it is immaterial. The age of the large nation-states is coming to a close, we do ourselves and our decendants a disservice by further ignoring these sweeping changes to the way economic prosperity will be gained in the future.

further thoughts:

Examine a possibility on Jan 24, 2006.

1) the Liberals get another thin minority.
2) the Bloc holds #2 position in the list of parties as the NDP and Conservatives split the remaining seats behind the Liberals in english canada.
3) Due to the conflict between the 'big 3' of english canada, the Conservatives will not vote with the Liberals, nor are the NDP likely as they are both standing against a 'corruption' position that the Liberals (quite rightly) will not be able to 'scrape off'. Given that the BQ may change their tune if they hold all Quebec seats, but if they are in the #2 slot they are very unlikely to support the Liberals in power.
This will lead to another 'hung parliament' with the Liberals unable to get anything done unless they really whore themselves out to the NDP or BQ (read lots of health and welfare spending or anything the Bloc wants it gets).
4) Unless the Liberals do the whoring and spend tax money into bigger and bigger deficits (to keep power) they will not hold on to government. Possibly with no time in office at all PMPM (or his replacement PM) may need to go the Governor General and ask her to dissolve Parliament; tradition says that the GG should turn to the next largest party and ask them to form a coalition, in my argument this would be the BQ!
5) Now what with the BQ attempting to form a canadian government? Why? No need for any more waiting for a referendum, they can 'do a deal' in a federal context and get Quebec out of confederation right away. Or better yet ask the GG (Mikail Jean, you remember the former PQist, Parizeau and FLQ supporter?) just to dissolve Canada, sending all the Provinces packing. The other option is to see the Liberals, Conservatives and NDP form the government? How likely is that? How about Prime Minister Jack?

I know Rafe likes to say that Politics makes strange bedfellows, are we seeing the sheets being arranged by the next pair?

I thought Gilles Duceppe was far the best in the debate - he represented his constituents and threw Martin's misrepresentations right in his face. As for Harper and Duceppe working together, Quebec and the western provinces have always had common ground in wanting the Provincial powers granted to the provinces under the constitution honored. This is far from a sellout by either of them - it's the rare case of right and wrong winning over right and left. I say more power to both of them. The benefits of an all - powerful Federal Government that routinely assumes powers it has no right to have been wildly exaggerated by Liberals for years.

Rafe's got it right, we have prostituted ourselves to Quebec and they will leave Canada anyways.

BC will soon follow as Ontario will fail in keeping what's left of the country together. I see nasty things on the horizon and to the Liberal Party and their spawn, take care, what's left of Canada will want bloddy revenge.

All the while the Americans are licking their chops, taking over what's left of Canada, fullfilling their manifest destiny for North America.

Things are going to get hot and nasty!

The appearance of the infamous Harper-Duceppe photo in Tyee's web site is reprehensible and drags down this web site's reputation. As both the CBC and CTV have said, it is a photo of the 2 opposition leader at the National Holocaust Commemoratiosn this year--and it fails to show either Layton or Martin who were in attendance there too. This is hardly a Forum for Harper and Duceppe to 'plot' Canada's break-up rather than honour the millions of Holocaust victims. The furore over its appearance became so bad that even PM Martin had to apologise to the Canadian Jewish Congress. I am surprised the Tyee would post it on their web site. Its misleading and plain disgraceful.

As for Harper's campaign tactics in Quebec, I may disagree with some of his moves here but I can understand it. At present, Harper's Party has only 8-10% support in La Belle Province and he needs to do something to grab Quebecker's interests and win something like 18-20% voter support there to win some seats here without alienating his Western base. I think Harper got the balance right when he said Quebec could have a seat on UNESCO among other international institutions. After all, PM Martin himself endorsed this same idea in May 2004--one month before the June 2004 elections--but now that Harper has adopted his own idea, Martin feigns outrage and tries to play the Captain Canada card. It's not a very convincing move by Martin at all and Harper will make sure Martin's previous words in 2004 will be in the News if he is as smart as I think he is.

If Quebec leaves Canada, it won't be because Harper became PM without any seats in Quebec; it would be because a majority of Quebeckers became genuinely insulted and angered at the idea that they could be bought off by the governing Liberals. The best boost for the separatists would be another Liberal minority government after June 23; it would just boost Quebecker's alienation of Ottawa, undermine the Federalist forces there and boosts the chances of another heart pounding referendum in 2 years time. I'd take a Harper-Layton coalition any day to ward off the possibility of Canada breaking apart.

In a province where the People used to think of themselves as les Canadiens while the Canadians were still calling themselves subjects of her majesty, should we be surprised that sovereignty runs a whole lot faster? The appeasing has more to do with the ROC itself than la belle Province IMHO.

When I see the terms CANADIENS and CANADIANS used side by side as GAULOIS does in the above quotation , I am reminded of the lack of underpinnings and roots that most of us has..., when it comes to explaining away our BEGINNINGS AS A NATION..

For you see , for a very long long time..., LES CANADIENS found their true identity in the land that shaped them , in a land that liberated them from the Old World thinking and point of view..

Indeed they tasted the freedom that the English settlers to the south of Canada also tasted, and once one experienced that sense of freedom there was no turning back...

Thus in the so called NEW WORLD.., emerged two peoples.., LE CANADIEN and THE AMERICAN..., both having had roots in Europe and both transformed by the land that nurtured them.

But what are we to make of LES ANGLAIS/THE ENGLISH.. while these transformations were in progress? Clearly the revolution to the south must be factored in the equation , as to what became in the land of the CANADA`s.., ( upper and lower ).. - as to the LOYALIST - who wanted nothing of the revolution in the America`s , yet was offered land to the north.. so long as they swore allegiance to the king*... ( Thus , for LES CANADIENS , was the beginning of the division which one day was to create the two solitudes that exist within our bosom., )

The English and the loyalist themselves who came from colonies to the south clearly understood the deeply rooted sense and identity of LE CANADIEN*.., and it was from this reality that the BRITISH developed their BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT of 1867 .. thereby guaranteeing a foothold for themselves in the NEW WORLD.., ( a foothold that they were in danger of losing completely after the revolution of 1776*...,)

( to be continued in the next post )..

( continued from the previous post )

A REVOLUTION OF ENGLISH SETTLERS.. THAT WAS TO EVENTUALLY CREATE A NATION , WE NOW REFER TO AS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA*...

Within that framework , the British saw that
LES CANADIENS would become the shield from total north American domination of the revolutionaries . Thus a people , called LE CANADIEN was to play a pivotal role for the BRITISH in their need to maintain a presence in the North American framework.., and though 1759-1760 and eventually 1763 did see the King of France hand over CANADA to ENGLAND.., it is more significant to remember that the British by then were outnumbered by LES CANADIENS and claimed possession of a NATION 300 years after LE CANADIEN created a revolution of his very own..,by adopting and adapting to the very land called CANADA.. ..ultimately claiming it for himself/herself by cultivating the land .. ( Resulting in the endearing term of l`HABITANT , which became part of our folklore ).

Thus we have the complex situation of three Nations - The American, Le Canadien* , and of course what remained of the BRITISH aspirations in the New World.. - emerging along with what remained of the other first nations that clearly were to be deprived of any treaty rights that had been guaranteed to them.. and we have - to this very day - unresolved issues of trust and commitments that were made..., to many settlements that found themselves.. within a `hurricane ` of sorts.., creating for one and all irreversible changes that were to determine and test the resilience of even the most rooted of peoples of the new world...

And so we now fast forward to the dawn of a 21st Century to ascertain whether the inheritors of such a grand experiment.. - whether they deserve the blessings that came with all of the sacrifices of those that preceded them.., in a land - it must be said - of great beauty and bounty...,

Thus our greater need , more then ever to discover our roots and clearly identify our individual and collective roles.. , so that we can tell our story.. , once and for all... , and get it straight !

Harper's original agenda is the decentralization of power,of a dissemination of power to the provinces. That he implies that Quebec will get more power relative to TROC is semantics. He hasn't changed his stripes - he's merely made the connection between what he says and what he intends more circuitous. In other words, he is learning to become a true politician.

Anyone....please tell me why we shouldn't
assist Quebec into seperation. Would we not
save trillions in tax dollars ? There is no doubt in my mind that they
would soon flounder and be begging to
re-enter "confederation"....

netscaper2:

I think that we should no longer worry over PQ separation or not.

We, in BC, should work towards devolving of power and responsibility to where it belongs = closer to the hands of the people, either within the confederation, or out.

What is needed is a simple yes or no referendum across Canada, continue with current confederation or start with a clean slate?

I am in favor of the clean slate, if the way to get it is to just stay out of Quebec's way as it leaves, then so be it!

Better if the dissolution of Canada is the way to that clean slate, lets get BC out of this system before more of our collective resources are pissed up the advertising wall.

The eternal trouble with dissolution is, where does it stop? Everyone who advocates this envisages the provinces as separate entities. But why so. Many residents of northern BC have no use for the lower mianland, in much the same manner BC has no use for Ottawa.

I repeat, where does it stop? Right down to each municpality? Each neighbourhood? Or do these advocates simply want to reproduce the present dichotomy between Ottawa and TROC, only writ small?

B]All the history Villager recounts may be true but the heirs to all that history gathered in Charlottetown and Quebec City in 1864 and they made a deal ... and the deal was not Two Founding nations but one federation which contemplated not just Canada as it then was, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick but Prince Edward's Island, Newfoundland and British Columbia as well. I don't believe any of the last three but especially BC would have joined Canada if it was constituted as two founding nations and appendages.[/B]

Rafe , I am unclear on your statement re: THE DEAL MAKING that occurred in 1864... ( are you about to tell me that you are not aware of what UPPER and LOWER CANADA represented in those days of negotiations..? ) indeed , if one is at all honest about one`s lack of understanding of one`s homeland ..then it must be said that we all need to get back to the understanding of what happens to a people that does not know it`s history.., that does not know it`s stories !!

It seems that you do not want to factor in a good 300 years ...1534-1834 .. in which many milestones and benchmarks were embedded within our great ability and collective psyche as a people to not only compromise.., but arrive at a reasonable accommodation to not only survive in a North American culture that was -and to this day .., still is!!- dominated by the consequence of a very powerful and successful revolution to the south of us..

The very first CANADA *.., and LES CANADIENS*, I contend ,made all of the difference.., in holding back the expansion of the manifest destiny claimed by the Americans..( as it`s descendants are doing today..in a misguided attempt to arrive at a sovereign state without acknowledging the roots of LE QUÉBÉCOIS who happens to root from LE CANADIEN *.. ) , indeed..doubly accelerated by the lack of understanding of our individual and collective road travelled , as a NATION ....

The British understood and fully grasped the importance of settlers who had taken to the land , so to speak , and this very clearly..[B]!, when they established the 1867 BNA ACT... giving them absolute control over the building of a ( British presence in North America.. - thus the BRITISH NORTH AMERICAN ACT ,rightly named ! ) ..

Thereafter.., -as was the fact that the constitution resided in Westminster by design -and thus ENGLAND was able to keep an eye on the object of their greatest interest..., ( [B]the United States of America..)...

( to be continued )

( continued from the previous post )

Meanwhile.., LES CANADIENS , within the complex formula of a redefined homeland.. kept his/her true identity.., only to be diluted by the enculturation of language and the fact that both FRANCE and ENGLAND had absolutely no intentions to historically recognise the contribution that these earlier settlers..., made to the nation of Canada..,each for their own different reasons..simply ignored the existence of LES CANADIENS,- as you are doing in your `recollection`of a CANADA that , for the most part is a product of your imagination* - such as my CANADA is..in many ways and existing within the memory of LE CANADIEN.. - by extension of our mutual confused state of individual and collective NATIONHOOD *.. )

Nevertheless , my CANADA did exist way far into the distant past in experience and memories.. and your CANADA , rafe , exist in the far far future of tomorrow.., if we manage to get there!..., creating in between these distant times a void within our individual and collective MINDS....

Indeed.. neither France nor England wanted to recognise what had been for one - France - an abject failure of settlers to stay true to the ways of the old world of France....along with a failure to support adequately the settlers themselves.. And as to ENGLAND ..,an immediate reality ( le canadien)was to be assimilated at all costs.., and yet , and yet! .., certain larger North American necessities encouraged the British to grant concessions to a people of the first Canada , by recognising that LE CANADIEN was vital to his - the British`s -
EMPIRE and empirical interests..

And so our story continues..., needing but the open minds of a genuine people in the making.. such as is the CANADIAN of tomorrow.., guided by the understanding that he roots from a first peoples determination to survive..,

( LE CANADIEN was indeed and is to this day a reminder of our uniqueness , of our resilience and of our -made in- Canada identity* )...

I do not want to leave the reader with the impression that I do not recognise the role that the very first nations played.. in helping LES CANADIENS become the people that they became.. ( in fact they were instrumental in these peoples understanding of the technologies of the day.. - the canoe - along with providing to LE VOYAGEUR and COURREURS DE BOIS.. the vital knowledge that would make them great woodsman.., and most important [/B]free men*and women .. ) indeed.. the relationship that ensued of the meeting of OLD and NEW WORLDS , was responsible for the offspring's of the European and aboriginal cultures through marriage .. we refer to that invisible Canadian/Canadien as MÉTIS*.., , perhaps the only really true CANADIEN*/CANADIAN* ..for He,She and their Children are the true Heirs of a NATION that was created through a meeting of world cultures..,at a crossroad to a Human Experiment.., such as CANADA has become.

It will be noted that I put asterisks on both of these words.., as a reminder that one.. is from our distant past..( le canadien* ), and the other , as a works in progress.., is far far away in our distant future.. - if we manage to reclaim the memory of all the pieces of the historical puzzle together.. - [B]meanwhile we are left with all of the 21st Century inhabitants/settlers.. ,( which , by the way , describes all who live in CANADA today... )..

We are left with their ( and yes OUR individual and collective )search and quest for meaning.., for a sense of place.. , a sense of belonging and a sense of identity*...-as is clearly in evidence in these postings - without which .., we are left becoming a void..,- ( an empty shell of a nation that has abandoned it`s identity*)

THIS IS THE CHALLENGE WE FACE INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY TODAY*...

It may be that the Canadian 'experiment' is more threatened by attitudes in Alberta than in Quebec. Harper, it seems to me, is the mouthpiece of a group of neo-conservatives at the Univeristy of Calgary who have never had much affection for the ideal of this country as a bilingual and bicultural federal nation. Because he, and his mentors, believe in defacto economic independence for the provinces west of Ontario it is entirely consistent for him to express the position he has relative to Quebec. His politics is a politics of resentment based on advancing provincial power and weakening the centre - Ontario and Quebec. He further has no idea about the part of Canada east of Quebec. Ironically, by promoting these ideas he is in danger of tearing up the weak bonds that hold the country together. The continuation of the Canadian experiment requires, more than anything else, a federal government that practices a messy pragmatism. I suspect that Harper is far too much of an ideologue for this. He would be a disaster.

Murdock wrote:

This is crazy. Are Canadians in Vancouver that different from those in Toronto or Calgary? Are our values and needs that different that a new nation-state is required?

No, but if we carry on that line of thinking, we may as well go on and push towards "city-states".

The whole Seperation/Western Alienation theme is garbage. It is based on emotion rather than on the true needs of the people. Those that push for it enjoy conflict and wish to divide people for their own purposes.

Geography is no longer an excuse to divide this country.

G West, I don't know why you are saying Steven Harper would be a disaster. I mean the Liberals are already a disaster. Haven't they run this country forever ? Why haven't they been able to find a solution to this Quebec alienation ?
I believe Harper when he says the Liberals feed off of this problem, so they can say to the rest of Canada " we are the only party that can be trusted to fix this "
Why should we believe this. What is the evidence ?
When I look at a liberal area like Toronto, who's MP's are Liberal, who's local govt. is liberal, who's Provincial Govt. is Liberal. Where people are running around shooting each other with very little consequences cannot be scared by Mr. Harper, I am already traumatized by the Paul Martin.
How could the Conservatives possibly do worse ?

G. West, that gang of so-called conservative intellectuals in Calgary, in my books have far more interest in Canada-US ties.

Separation talk to them whether its Alberta or Quebec, is just part of the formula to remove the border between Canada and the US.

They are dangerous and will continue to sow hatred and division in this country.

These are the same brains that brought us Stockwell Day, the America loving born again fundamentalist who thinks the old bones around Drumheller are from a recent Tory convention.

If Stephen Harper were to get a majority, I would expect to begin hearing far too much out of this Calgary school of toadyism.

These are dangerous people. Treat them as you would treat Ron Erwin.

Use a very long pole.

Geography is no longer an excuse to divide this country.

A very important observation Moat, as to the fact that this country has been defined by it`s Geography ! ( and of course it`s people`s determination to settled in these Northern lands.. )

What comes to mind when I read your thoughts is that as far as a land of communications goes .., we are the best example of a people who did what they had to do to span this awesome country..., and this we did with our propensity and genius for all things COMMUNICATIONS !... Indeed..,need I mention Satellite Communications technology.., and our ability to create some of the most sophisticated multijurisdictional communications policies and guidelines that have made us leaders in most fields considered to be COMMUNICATIONS*..., and so from our GEOGRAPHY and the earliest of surveyors.., including and up to the creation of MAPS.. , that creatively communicates the vastness of our land.., GEOGRAPHY indeed.. !! ..

Oh Rafe, what a gross misreading. And there's that silly photo being trotted out again too - trying to make Harper & Duceppe look like co-conspirators.

Anyway, what Harper really means is "I will give more power to Quebec to regular the Fish Farming industry; Quebec's Fish Farming regulations will become a model for a national Fish Farming policy."

Rafe - how can you possibly disagree with that?

Allan:

These are not same brains who brought us Stockwell Day. Those would be the populist, highly democratic members of the Canadian Alliance at the time.

Perhaps you'd prefer Mark Merrisen's hand selected candidates for every party? Only those who are deemed appropriate by the anointed one get to run - no matter what stripe you wear.

Make no mistake: I think the Conservatives need to choose candidates more carefully - look at Gurmant Grewal, Jasbir Cheema, Jesse Johl, Russ Hiebert & John Reynolds for only a few examples of people who don't match my mold of "fit to hold office" - but the process they're using is at least somewhat open, honest and transparent.

And the party's not $34 Million in debt.

And they haven't stolen money from your pocket. (Has that really been paid back yet, BTW? Could somebody show me a copy of that cheque? No? Why would we believe them then.)

Village

You know your history, (or at least appear to) so I will not challenge your passionate post. However, looking at the past is a necessary, but dangerous exercise. The problem is, when looking at history, there are always “winners” and “losers”. The creation of Canada did create many winners and losers. As Canada continues to evolve, hopefully “winners” and “losers” will be less divisible by nationality or regionalism. Dividing people in any manner is a dangerous proposition. In fact, maybe I will go reread The Prince by Nicolò Machiavelli.

I do soundly agree we need to focus on what we do well. Communications was our key (the CBC, the film board). However, part of our culture (like knocking Americans) is knocking ourselves. Yes, Bombardier has been a bit of a leech on the taxpayer, but the company does have some solutions to our transit and even dare I say, unity issues. For example, what happened to the Windsor/Quebec corridor? The Edmonton/Calgary connector?

And can communication continue to be the key? It sure can…. But not if we continue to bash each other.

Good post Village, love the passion.

Murdock. Your scenario falls apart on step two. The Bloc will not win more seats than the Conservatives, unless the Liberal Party of Canada hires some of Alfonso Gagliano's friends to start executing candidates.

Village is just mostly hysterical. Which is quite different from passion, which can and often does include rationality nonetheless.

I'm certainly not going to get into a prolonged debate here with the anglo national chauvanist wingnuts, still unrecovered from the Solstice festivities as I am. But just so that not everyone who reads Tyee thinks there is unanimity on a "hard line" with Quebec, I advance an alternative view.

I buy into the notion that Quebec is not"just another province" like all the others. Which I've stated here many times before. And such as Village certainly misreads the concept of a "confederation", which is the actual language that was used as a convenience anyway, to keep Quebec at least in more or less passive acceptance of the early Canadian union. Village and others mistake "confederation" with US style "federalism" over and over again, as do many "system politicos", depending on when and how it suits them.

There were or should have been three main founding peoples to Canadian "confederation", one Les Canadiennes in Quebec, one predominantly "Anglo" west of Quebec and in the Maritimes, and the original "Aboriginal/Native" population who have similarly also always wanted to be included as "national equals" in any larger actual "confederation" of Canada-, largely unsuccessfully to here in time anyway.

So, the point being that Canada is in fact, if not effectively, a "confedertation" of three nations, each with its own internal (provincial/county) divisions, within what will not rest in peace or tranquility until it is at least, one Confederal State. (Which is not a unique phenomena in the world, in that there are a number of States which include even more nations/autonomous national groups within them, Russia and China to name but two, as well as England, Scotland and Wales of Great Britain.)

To cut to the short of it, my view being that unless this is faced up to by what has to here been the dominant/overbearing "control group" to here, the Anglo/mixed immigrant part, the Canadian union is likely destined to either come unglued or slide into civil war. And as the native populations continue to rapidly increase in number and suffer serious economic and cultural inequities, they too are destined to begin to raise more militant demands and similarly enter into the "national fray" with their own particular set of "national group" demands, especially as the Old Anglo control group's numbers languish and decline.

It's there, in my view of events and trends, emerging already out of the future as plain as only the old national Anglo chauvanism refuses to see it.

Intransigence and Anglo national chauvanist certitudes no longer impress anyone. There needs to be a renegotiation of the terms of the Canadian Union, built around a true "confederal" as opposed to "federal" model. And if we fail to do that, the greater risk is that eventually, off the battlefield of the civil war, only the US Empire is destined to pick up all the shattered pieces, and make them its own, in my parallel view. Which is already much effectively done anyway, certainly at the level of established/ put in place economic betrayal developments.

All of which reunifying processes would be much assisted by a social transformation at the same time, getting rid of the old intra-national ruling class rivalries and establishing more egalitarian and democratic relationships within the economy and the other institutions of society.

Without a new unity built around a "new and negotiated concencus" amongs Anglos, Natives and Quebecois, eliminating all the vestiges of national chauvanism against each other, amongst all the parties, the Canadian union is unlikely to be able to prevail against the already really threatening and burgeoning Empire to our South, aggressively straining against its seams for more Lebensraum and control over and access to the world's resources, of which ours are still the handiest, amongst the most varied and plentiful.

Village's passion is commendable but by his reasoning The United States would never have had a constitution. If Village is saying that if the Supreme Court of Canada were to have the term "two founding nations presented to them as a condition of the BNA Act and would look to evidence scores, even 100s of years ago, he is wrong. The Court will look at the intentions of the parties on at least four occasions - the conventions of 1864 in Quebec City and Charlottetown, the actual approval of the Act, the debates leading up to the 1982 Constitution Act (essecntially the BNA Act with a Charter and provisions for natives) and the passage of the Act. In so doing they would find that even by 1982, when the dreamy term "two founding Nations" was part of the political lexicon it had never been seriously advanced by anyone. The Court would certainly look at the speeches of the Quebec leader, Sir George Etienne Carter in 1867 and find that he took quite the opposite view - he and his colleagues were founding a new nation based upon one citizenship for all, to which other British Colonies would be invited to join. He was very emphatic, as Village will see if he wishes to research the matter, that previous national relationships were merged into one. British Columbia, in 1871,to all intents and purposes a self governing colony, bought into the BNA Act (so called, because that was the territoy being delat with, not to denote British overlordship.)
Incidentally, from the earliest days the British Parliament routinely amended the BNA Act where there was consent of the provinces and the federal government, certainly since 1931 she would have been bound to legally as well as out of courtesy. The sticker, since 1931, of bringing the constitution to Canada was the inability of provinces and Ottawa to agree upon an amending formula - 1982 did just that until it was thrown to the winds by Jean Chretien in his vetoes for all parliamentary motion of 1996.
In short, Two Founding Nations is a phrase utterly without effect when interpreting the rights of provinces and the federal government of Canada.
Sorry, Village

It may be a surprise to some (Ron Erwin for example) that the Liberals have run the country for as long as they have because they got more votes in a succession of federal elections. That's the way democracy works.
When you've convinced enough folks to move to Alberta (or have enormous families for a couple of generations) so that the population of that province exceeds the population of Ontario then it shouldn't be too hard for Alberta to have a lot more influence on the federal scene. But don't be surprised if by that time a lot of Albertans have come to realize that governing a big diverse country isn't so simple after all. Maybe by then the majority of Albertans will realize that it's not just a question of who can make the most money the fastest and pay the least tax.

Legitimacy

Had Quebec actually decided to separate during Mulroney, Chrétien, or Martin's era, Canadians including myself would have seen negotiations between Canada and Quebec as actually being between Quebec and itself. A conflict of interest would have occurred. Canadian PMs from Quebec negotiating with Quebec? It doesn't feel good.

If Quebec separation were to take place with Stephen Harper as Canada's PM, he could still claim legitimacy as Canada's representative--something Martin from Quebec cannot do.

The Czechs

I visited the Czech Republic about two months ago. With the Czechs and Slovaks splitting apart, there doesn't seem to be any open hostilities. There does seem to be a feeling in the Czech Republic that the Slovaks and Slovakia do not matter as much. Slovakia is not the Czech Republic's sister country, but just another EU neighbour like Germany, Poland, and Austria.

When I saw signs and posters in more than one language, Czech was on top (obviously). English and German came next, then sometimes Polish/French/Italian. Slovak was not seen. Sometimes food products were Czech-Slovak bilingual.

Quebec

If Quebec and English Canada were to split apart, I wouldn't have warm feelings for sovereignty-association. Quebec will just be another foreign country--just like the US. English Canada will have enough on its plate such as having a governing structure that recognizes the regional component of what would be left of Canada (if it worked out).

As for an Ontario-Quebec union, it is not on in my books. Quebec is a neighbour of Ontario, but it is not a sister-neighbour. I feel no more attachment to Quebec than I do to Manitoba or BC. It's great having Quebec in Canada. It's great visiting Quebec from Ontario, but I get no special warm-tingly feeling having Quebec in Canada.

Slim
Toronto

Coytote and Rafe,

Coyote and Rafe,

Whoa! I am going to get over my head here in Canada’s constitutional history. However, I think that we should look at general themes, rather than “defining moments.” Most Canadians, although they are taught it in school, are not going to spend the time to research their constitutional history. It is selective ignorance…. although we all have a sense of justice and injustice, the majority of Canadians (including journalists and politicians) do not have the history to truly understand confederation.

Yes, I do agree with both of you that Village tends to cloud his arguments in trying to define identity, but the pessimistic view both of you take is disheartening. And yes, I did note that both of you in your posts use the terms “appeaser” (rafe) and “lebensraum” (Coyote). I think you to are both being alarmist. Yes, we are approaching a crisis, but not at the point where we need to start guessing when we will collapse.

Both of you forget how multi-culturalism has changed Canada. Our urban centers do not reflect the same anglo or franco dominance as they once did. Therefore, how do we draw in more groups other than those with an anglo/franco background? Surely they can be considered stakeholders in this country?

Rafe, I do agree with you on many points. Our constitutional moves since the Durham days were about gaining autonomy from Britain. Now that Britain wants nothing to do with us, our constitution moves are more about gaining autonomy from each other. However, is throwing in the “dynamite” the best way to put out this fire?

village, enjoyed your posts. I just wanted to mention one thing though, I don't see the Quebec people as living in a land of freedom until the Conquest. The political, social and economic conditions of New France weren't that great. Which is why so many young men decided that rather than stay in the settled areas they would venture into the bush to seek their fortune.

This ability to simply walk away from the authority of New France, which could be even more stifling than in other parts of the New World, was the only real source of freedom.

G West
Alberta is under represented in parliament, so is BC. It's no secret that this is the case. Electoral reform is needed.
Why does P.E.I. have 4 MP's ?
Alberta would have a more deserved influence if we reviewed where the population actually lives and works.
And thanks for admitting that Ontario expects to govern the country. But when I see the way they run Toronto I get scared.

Dear Ron Erwin:
I didn't admit anything. Ontario has the most people and the most seats - simple fact!
An independent federal body distributes the seats according to Statscan data. There may be disparities between various regions in the country from time to time and PEI is certainly an anomoly from an electoral point of view. Still, you can't deny that more people vote Liberal - time after time - than vote Conservative - for whatever reason...and I'm not particularly enamoured with that either - but it's still a fact. Ontario doesn't govern the country because it's Ontario but because it has the most people living and voting there. Get over it. Convince Ontarians that Stephen Harper isn't scary or increase Alberta's population relative to the rest of the country or admit you're not really in favour of representative democracy.
(Frankly, if I lived in Alberta I wouldn't be too proud of the government the electoral system gave me there either.)

Toronto's a big city with big city problems - not very different from New York or Chicago or Detroit or Los Angeles - is that so surprising?
Compliments of the season to you!

G. West, you're kinda fun. I like your contention that the group of guys (mostly guys) at University of Calgary are a bigger threat than all of Quebec's separatists. And I'm absolutely confident that there will be no separation until we all learn to spell the word properly.

Help me on this one. Does Gilles Duceppe travel with his own hairdresser? Hair is so important in an election, don't you think? Well, check M. Duceppe's coiffure ... soft grey ... with perfect little bunches of perfectly bouffant hair lined up just so ... don't take my word for it ... look! look!

No, Tom Flanagan outranks M. Duceppe as the Evil Chicken any day of the week.

Indeed, other than the Native population of
Canada, and they are by now much mixed too, we are an entirely immigrant-based population, recently so and ongoing-, which this latter point matters. Nonetheless, again save for Natives, the bulk of immigrant groups have joined, become a part of, and are in the process of merging into one or the other of these two "founding national groups.", one Anglo and the other Quebecois French. Such, even though there has been a huge recent wave of immigration from Asia and other parts of the world, these persons are largely "in the process" of becoming one or the other. (Similar to large black, east indians and Arab populations now being absorbed into France, England and even Germany, yet they remain what they have been historically-, French, English and Germans, how e're true, not entirely uneffected or changed by the effects of immigration.)

Even in Quebec, since the last referendum, amongst the large Anglo populations, for example of Montreal, there has been a huge change noted by many observers, in their group attitude towards their place and role as Quebecois, and the reality of their need to accept the "francophone" reality of their position. Anglophones even, are being found in some increasing numbers now amongst the Bloc and even stronger "separatist", read "Quebecois nationalist" groups, and being accepted by them.

So the "three founding nations" remain a reality, in my view, even in face of "internal and external immigrant influences upon them. Which needs to be faced up to by all parts of "the greater national package" and dealt with in a way that meets the needs of these three groups for "national equality", before the stressors driving them apart become unmanagable and/or are actively and actually encouraged by outside forces interested to gain from the breakup of the country. And if one doesn't think such an imperialist interest is present and lurking out there, one is blinder than a bat, and to more than NAFTA and the mechanisms of continental military defense, and who interests those are driven by.

So, I don't think that I am, in fact, alarmist. It is simply reality that too many, because of numbing familiarity with the betrayal of the nation, or ignorance, have not caught up to yet, or lack the intellectual huzpah to be able to even-, like Ron Erwin. They are simply incapable, due in large part to their cold-war induced naivete and little dog envious fascination with the ass kicking, bone stealing, bullying behaviour of the Big Dog.

"Oh boy, Oh boy! Can I hang out with you huh? Can I? Can I, huh!"

Though I do agree with Mary, just about, "G. West, you're kinda fun. I like your contention that the group of guys (mostly guys) at University of Calgary are a bigger threat than all of Quebec's separatists."

Certainly, it is true that Alberta is emerging as no small threat to the unity of the country either, and its ambition to strengthen to its southern Sugar Daddy should come as no suprise.

But which only further underscores my point, that there are just too many potential fracture lines emerging in the country to wisely ignore, concomitant with the rise of Neoconazi Economic Fascism within capitalism, all of which irritate what was already a much "unequal" national and social situation. And note even here, that those like Erwin who play the loudest and most chauvanistically to anti-Quebec and Ontario sentiment and a kind of Western Separatism and admiration for Alberta, are also the most pro-US Empire apologists here or anywhere.

If that doesn't tell you something about the forces and interests involved in the background here, fanning of all these reactionary, rightist and national chauvantist policies that are driving deep wedges into the national unity of the country, and who stands to benefit from them, then you are walking through life with your eyes closed and intellectual reasoning capacity turned off.

Instead of drawing hardlines and talking loose around the history and unity of the country, we need to be moving fast and creatively in those directions that will truly make all aspects of the country feel that they really have an investment in the unity and future of our state. Otherwise, get ready for a messy divorce, or to send your sons and daughters back onto the Plains of Abraham, and learn to sing Amerika The Beautiful.

There is a more thoughtful and reasoned course, and that is to reconsider and, if necessary, renegotiate our "Confederation" and the most essential "national" parts of it-, of which as I suggest, there are three; Anglo, French and Native.

A GREAT DOCUMENTARY DONE BY JACQUES GODBOUT AVAILABLE IN FRENCH AS WELL AS IN ENGLISH ...
ENTITLED.. THE FATE OF AMERICA, LE SORT D`AMÉRIQUE , would fit well within the dialog that I am witnessing here..,and especially in this context of having a look at one film maker who wanted to get at the very roots of explaining away an event that was to become very significant for the future of NORTH AMERICA itself., hence I highly recommend the viewing of this film which is still very timely and which offers up many creative approaches to begin the process of a thorough investigation of history itself..*..

this was funded and produced by the NATIONAL FILM BOARD OF CANADA .. and is well worth the tax dollars that went into it`s creation*.,..

BC Mary:
Interesting, but I didn't say: "that the group of guys (mostly guys) at University of Calgary are a bigger threat than all of Quebec's separatists." Glad you find it 'fun' to misrepresent someone's words but I guess that's what one asks for when one wastes one's time writing comments to sites like this.

What I said was that Harper would be a 'disaster' because he is too much of an ideologue to be an effective prime minister for the whole of the country. That was pretty clear from the context, I should have thought.

It's the people of Ontario who are frightened about that prospect and that's why he'll have such a hard time convincing a majority of Canadians from that province to vote for him. As for Quebec, the people of that province are entitled to determine their own future too and I don't find them particularly scary.

Democrary sucks but it's a lot better than the alternative.

Moat writes:

Excellent proposition, I am in full support, now how do we convince others to take advantage of the opportunities thus created?

Coyote writes:

Sounds like a vote for 'clean slate' and 'fresh start negotiation' to me!

the conservatives vision of canada has always been closer to the quebec nationalists' than the liberals. they would like the provinces to have more powers within the federation, rather than giving ottawa carte blanche as they have now. chretien and martin have proven that policy to be counterproductive, but martin waves the liberal (see pearson) flag when he is confronted with real debate on the issue. quebec is indeed a 'distinct society', and if anyone doesn't believe that they need to spend some time a la belle province.
the conservatives vision would be much better for the west and for atlantic canada, but ontario and the federal liberals will have none of it. too bad really. it's probably one of the things stopping this country from achieving greatness.

of course we could always continue on this path set by trudeau and his minions. after all, chretien had a great idea to bring quebec closer to the rest of canada. give them lots of money and flood them with liberal flags. since then separatism has practically disappeared.

So the existence of Canada prevents its people from enjoying a hypothetical prosperity that could be had if it was the provinces that ran 100% of everything.

Glad to see myth-making isn't dead.

Here's to Point Grey separating from Vancouver, it never shoud have joined in the first place and maybe New Westminster separating from BC and Canada. Logically that should make New West the richest place on earth.

Huzzah

I actually agree with this observation of Elliot's. The Conservatives are our equivalent of "states rightists" in the US. It is also why trying to get at the issues around Quebec's "difference" AND those of Natives or, more accurately, both their "nationalisms", by treating Quebec as "just another province" and Natives as "less than dirt", and giving the same powers of governance to all of the real "provinces" of Anglo-Canada is such a dangerous formula. It effectively turns each "actual" province of Anglo-Canada into "nations" as well.

Now contemplate dealing with that can of worms. Which Alberta much pushes and favours, of course, because frankly, at least its current governance really wants to take it out of the "federation", so-called "confederation". Ditto with the rightist alliance around the BC Liberals, though they are a "little" less brazen about it. They just have a greater preference for deception and stealth.

Yup, the reality is, we'd be better opting for a "clean slate" and at least, exploratory "fresh start negotiations."

And I'm anything but a Liberal, a Conservative or an NDPer. Indeed, I am no formal "ism". I merely want to see the Canadian "experience" and "greater national territory" survive in tact against the multiplying forces pulling it apart, and against the pressure coming from within capitalism and its corporatist/quasi fascist stage of development, to allow ourselves to be "absorbed by degree" or out of a civil war, into the US Empire.

Again, better a clean slate start over than this, or fragmentation alone, were that even possible, which I doubt, for it leads to the same thing, in my read of the likely outcomes.

And when I say "fresh start negotiations", I do not mean all the provinces of Canada. I mean between Anglo-Canada as a single entity, Quebec as an entity, and Native peoples, after they've arrived at a single voice for themselves. (**** Alberta. It's really is just a province of Anglo-Canada, along with the Maritimes, the other prairie provinces and BC.)

And I'm not saying it would be as easy as it sounds to say either. These "provincial mandarins" like Klein have been treated as "national rulers" themselves, for too friggin' long.

That's what you said, G. West. Then I said:

And then

What I said was that Harper would be a 'disaster' because he is too much of an ideologue to be an effective prime minister for the whole of the country.

Yeah. What I said. In addition, Allan helped you. Coyote even described the strong Alberta-U.S. ties. Why so grumpy all of a sudden.

There was an interesting documentary on CBC on Monday around 6:30 on Western Alienation and specifically that which exists in Alberta and Saskatchewan. It really was curious because it shows how very little has changed. At the time, the territory basically covered the entire NorthWest Territories, Sask, ALberta, and Northern Manitoba. This land was orignally ruperts land, and was bought by the government of Canada in response to the Americans buying Alaska from the Russians.

The territorial leaders wanted to create a single province, but instead, Laurier, had the province territory split into two provinces (creating saskatchewans symmetrical shape). In doing so, at the same time, the government of Canada stripped all mining rights, minerals,and public lands for themself, and offered the new weak provinces an allowance to operate on.

When I was watching that, two things came to mind, first, how on earth did someone manage to get the CBC to recognise western alienation, and secondly, how little have things changed. The attitudes of Laurier at the time was never to treat the provinces as equals, but to have Ottawa play the role of a lord and the provinces as surfs, which would be granted money as they found fit.

We still see that today. Our country has changed a lot, but most powers of taxation are controlled by the federal government. They play the role of handing out money to the provinces. And yes Canada is a democracy, and thus the populous provinces of Ontario with 40% of the population can with some seats in Quebec or the Maritimes easily define what is Canada, and what is Canadian. Our Vision of Canada is a Vision of Upper Canada and Lower Canada, fighting to keep the American republic at Bay. BC jumped into this Vision out of fear of American Annexation following the purchase of Alaska, and Alberta and Saskatchewan were merely purchased and proclaimed. Even with the NEP, did Ottawa try to enforce this vision, and continues to do so with control over fisheries and offshore drilling.

I don't know, but to me it sounds like what you said, Mary. 8-#

We're not disagreeing with you, bro. By and large anyway, on that point about Alberta, we are agreeing with you.

As much as Canadians do not want to become part of the American Empire (and I certainly don't), you have to at least give the Americans credit for designing their government as a nation and not as a colony.

Canada, while a minor international player, still functions like a rogue British colony. While our constitution outlines specific federal and provincial jurisdictions, the federal government routinely steps over that in the name of Peace Order & Good Government. (Even if it has nothing to do with the literal meaning.)

The US, at nearly every level of government seperates the powers. They have an elected head of state rather a head of state who is appointed by the PMO. (While the Queen is officially, the accent is given by the Gov General who is appointed by the Prime Minister). They have an elected Senate which serves as the protector of the regions, granting each state, big or small, the same number of senatorial representatives. So that even if a piece of legislation was popular in the eastern seaboard, it still would need a majority of the states on side. And not just token federalist appointees, but regional representatives. So yes, we in Canada live in a country which is far more of an elected dictatorship that others.

Quebec sees problems with that, they see themselves becoming ever a minority in this country, while the federal government takes more and more steps of its own impeding their jurisdiction. Alberta has always felt like a Canadian asset, and B.C has always felt attached more by convenience and fear than by real Canadian loyalty. Heck, we're proud to drink Canadian and cheer on a Canadian Olympic Team, but we don't even have a Canadian army stationed here.

BC Mary
I'm talking about the "attitudes" of Albertans and everyone else who thinks that an idealogue like Harper is going to be able to solve the unity problems of this country. It is the attitudes of individual voters who have swallowed the neo-conservative kool-aid that is the threat here. I hope that majority of the folks in the rest of Canada have enough sense to recognize this.
My point, about what you said, was that I thought you hadn't accurately reflected what I was saying. The guys at the University are irrelevant, the problem, and the threat, comes from ordinary Canadians who can't see the problem with what they're saying and who actually believe that Harper will make everything better. I think he'll make it worse but I hope events, if he's elected, will prove me wrong.

By the way, I know what you said and it misrepresented what I had written. For the record, I don't think Harper's mentors are motivated by anything but their own selfish desire for power and influence and I don't think they care about the outcome for average Canadians in "any" part of this country. Sorry if you thought I was being testy.
Cheers!

Alberta, there is no publicity like bad publicity.
It's an anomaly in Canada. You all know my views, which are in an encapsulated version is " Alberta #1 due to a lot of hard work "
And the hard work has manifested itself into a force unknown to Canadians up until this time.
Wake up and smell the roses, these guys are rocking us.
If you want to look at Saskatchewan versus Alberta, knowing the natural resourced such as Uranium, Potash, rot for methane etc. I know you will agree that this futuristic view of Canada is the sole property of the C's.
We can be the happiest country in the world if we can realize our true potential.

hey coyote; you actually made some sense for about one sentence.
frank; you're still wasting everyone's time.

Ron Erwin says

. And oil and natural gas have nothing to do with it I guess. What baloney!

No one, repeat no one, begrudges Alberta its resources and nobody wants to "rock" you either, whatever that means. What exactly does 'our true potential' constitute? If the kind of life style I observed when I was last in Calgary constitutes happiness then I'd prefer to be miserable, thank you very much! And no, I don't think Albertans work any harder than Canadians in the rest of the country do.

Sorry I had to shoot down your rare attempt at constructing an argument Elliot. Hope those night classes are working out for you, one day you'll make a point, keep your fingers crossed.

G West:

No, not a bit! Alberta would have retired their debt without all that O&G, because of their hard work! Thank God for Ralph Klein, whose vision and foresight steered Alberta away from the maelstrom of debt and dispair, delivering a plentitude of prosperity to the plain people of the prairies.........

I think Queer-bec should separate. The sooner the better.
Then we should go too. BC is the only province in this country that could pull off separation, and stay that way. And if it's done right, the yanks won't get us either. We'll just have way lower taxes, and enjoy a comfortable standard of living.
Not having the federal leaches will mean that we can take proper care of our own poor, educate our own kids properly... the list of perks is long.
taximike at telus dot net.

If BC seperated and became a republic, then all treaty's would become null and void, as they would be Canada's resposibility not the new republic's.

With the mass of South Asian immigration to BC, this will look better and better in years to come as the population will have less and less WASP baggage. A Republic of BC, starting with a clean slate, so to speak, without the ancient anglo treaties, pacts, or constitution.

Think about it.

Grumpy

This and many other reasons, such as those quoted by freebc, place BC as the sole 'province' that should be first to stand off from 'confederation'.

It is good to get this material out in this forum as far too many of the main stream media in BC is unwilling or afraid to print or broadcast thoughts like this.

Gee , maybe folks if we stuck together we would have a better chance of effecting change, just a thought that maybe tiny separate kingdoms ruled by local elites is not going to save us. As one country we are strong
and can face the giant to the south. Or would we be stronger all broken up like the Balkans. I don't get the mentality really, do we feel more self righteous talking about separation, maybe its just an easier way to do nothing
meaningful, kind of a scapegoat. Regardless it changes nothing and gets us nowhere, don't you see folks its just a tactic.

We are so separated from each other, I live in the neighborhood in this city in this province etc. Who the F**ch cares about what's happening in Ont or Quebec as I live in BC, this is what makes us weak. We need to
make national links and not be so me focused, if we pitch in to help progressive forces succeed in other places they will came here to help us when needed , this is why we have places like the DES as folks in other areas think it is not their problem, we need to make links with power folks. We need to make links we each other no matter where we live, and I also mean progressive forces in the US, injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere.

BTW Alberta has many progressive forces at work , the last provincial election seen many lost seats for the Kline crowd, their not all red necks as we like to believe , just some.

I am reminded of what Harper said in the spring of 2004 about Duceppe. “Duceppe is a straight talker, if he says he is going to do something, he will”. Harper knows that win or lose he is going to have to deal with Quebec and the Bloc. The Liberals have given the bloc new life with the corruption scandals, Harper is going to have to play his cards right and close to his chest. If he becomes PM, then he will have to try to appease his own party, while not pissing off Quebec. By building a relationship with both Duceppe and Charest, Harper can avoid a lot of trouble and conflict. If the conservatives win, they will have a lot on their plate and a vertical learning curve. Harper will have to keep Quebec happy, without giving away the store.

A Liberal minority government will sell us out and do it with our money.

A vote for the Liberals is a vote for corruption and lies, I don’t care if you vote NDP,Green, conservative or Rhino. Even if you are a die-hard Liberal, the best thing for Canada and the Liberals is to kick them out of power, it will be the only way for the grassroot Liberals to purge their party of corruption.

Quebec likes to talk separation, but if Quebecers saw the real costs involved, they would lose their appetite for it quickly. You can also bet that none of the First Nations will be interested in being part of the “Nation of Quebec” They may not like English-Canadian’s but they know they are better off with us than a Independent Quebec. Then there is the niggling little issue of Labrador. Plus any desire to maintain a bi-lingual Canada will go into the toilet the day they leave. The Quebec separatists reminds me of a teenager living at home, they want all the rights and privileges of an adult, but for someone else to pay the bills and do the chores.

Drawing different lines in the sand as to voting blocks is not a cure its a distraction. We need to make global coalitions and not more trade borders. We need to start to address issues united and use money and power , use the courts and use each other and stop acting like 2 yr olds in the sand box trying to be the biggest victim. (fine I am just going to
separate then waaah) Lets work together and make plans to address power and our needs, lets take over the political process and not watch as spectators.

The Liberals may have scandal but please you can hardly say the conservatives are going to save us from scandal, we all remember lying Brian and what a decade of conservatism did to our economy. We had massive growing deficits and a complete sell out to the US via NAFTA, yes the home depots of the world did very well but I seen local small business decimated under NAFTA.

Plus as far as a coalition with the Bloc it can never happen, if it does get ready for a massive back last of western support. Lets face it if Harper wins and he won't but lets just pretend for a moment.

He as most progressives know will say everything's a mess and take Canada threw a Mike Harris style economic shock therapy, which translated means deregulation( have industry regulate itself) and huge tax cuts for the wealthy while cutting major services for the poor. This will never fly in Quebec and the Bloc will not agree to it, so Harper will have a choice to make, water down his plan or have another election or treat Quebec different from the rest of Canada which will not fly in the west.

Liberal domination must be curtailed at all costs. What a bunch of phonies. They will do or say anything to get elected.
I am listening to Reg Allcock ( I hope I spelled that wrong ) on CHED Radio from Edmonton right now.
He is the minister of money. He has my money.
I cannot stomach the thought.
These Lib's are going to be very negative about their opposition.
If someone hits you with a hammer, you must reply with a canon.
Start the battle like I am, by being the a..hole you will need to be.

Medication time Ron, Canadians (outside of Alberta) will never accept a social conservative, Imagine Stockwell Day as our foreign minister, imagine Canada marching of to Iraq and climbing on the lap of baby BUSH, to vote Harper is to vote for the republican party.

http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20051201-081526-4938r.htm

All you American wannabies I have provided a nice porno story for you above.

Ehh, I had the same thought about yourself. :-) As usual though, you turned out to be just another braunshirt Ron Erwinesque disappointment.

Though in the case of this observation too, while G. West gets it mostly right, in my view, I would pose it a little differently by saying, "While the guys at the University of Calgary are part of the problem, feeding pro-US integrationist sentiment with ideas, the greater threat comes from ordinary Canadians who can't see the problem."

But even with that rejigging of the way you posed it, I would say that a big part of the problem there is, that "the public" are even then more confused by virtually all the same or near same "official" political (party) voices out there that sound so much like each other, in their obsession with "ignoring" the "national question" or with their silence on "deep integration" with the US suggesting that it is a non-issue. (And Martin's simplistic "nationalist" statements of recent, in an election, being but a small fart in a windstorm.)

The voice of "the masses" probably really sounds more like, "Ohhh, just being a lunchbucket myself, I guess if they don't really see it enough of a problem to address it head on and categorically, and rouse the nation, I guess there is no real need for me to be fussing about it."

The public apathy and apparent ignorance, I would suggest, is a consequence of "centre concentrated/obsessed" politics in the country. It is another one of the consequences of the "Politics of Bland".

Until there is a national voice of sufficient volume and credibility that breaks with this centre obsessed POB (Politics of Bland)-, and which can only come from the left in my view, due to the Yankee Bootlick character of anything right of centre in Canadian politics, at least thus far, the country and the people will continue to languish in what appears to be ignorance. (Plus, it is only the left, with its unique capacity for further seeing vision that can revitalize a significant and meaningful democracy in Canadian society, through "deep change" in the economic governance and political/electoral structure, greater utilization of our own resources through "self sufficiency" industrialization measures, and less reliance on the import/export nightmare we are caught in with the US.)

So, it turns out, I actually don't think the public is so much ignorant, though doubtless some, but merely that they don't really feel they can do anything about it, and are overly obsessed on the minutia of daily "consumer" life, which capitalism feeds like wood fuel on a flame, and more than a bit lazy about action. But then the whole of society has become more sedentary and divorced from civil or community life. Regrettably, the mass of people still need and look for leadership-, and it just isn't there in any current political grouping.

Stuart
So what did we do to Brian? We kicked them out of office and wiped out their party. You can bet the new conservatives have learned that lesson well.

I work in the Federal government, the way the Liberals abuse our money and government sickens me. The way they have “politicized” the senior civil service scares me. We were smelling corruption long before it made it into the paper. One of the people in a program aligned with mine, complained about the poor service of “Groupaction” and wanted to send the work elsewhere, they were ordered by senior management to use them, despite not living up to the contract. Also I wouldn’t be surprised if their was Liberal connections to Ryder Travel, that abused travelling civil servants for years. There is a reek coming from Ottawa and it’s time to clean the rats from the sewers.

why do always see a mistake just as you hit the "post comment" button their=there

There is no reason to vote the Liberal syndicate into power again. I really don't think Canadians will embrace this criminal organization again.
Pay attention to all the signals that this group of thugs are now toast.
Canadians can comfortably go with The Conservative Party. The party of the real people.

LOL

Does anyone remember David Orchard

http://www.davidorchard.com/online/2do-index.html

Some interesting articles, please don't ever attach the word ethics to this new party, the conservatives calling the Liberals crooks is like the pot calling the kettle black. The new party was founded on the backstabbing and robbing of David Orchard a true Canadian, not these elitist pricks we now have.

I will never forget Peter McKay yelling the words that he is a traitor a free traitor, with a grimacing Brian Mulroney in the back room. I wish he stayed on the farm with jack the Dog.

Elliot writes:

"the conservatives vision of canada has always been closer to the quebec nationalists' than the liberals. they would like the provinces to have more powers within the federation..."

I would agree, in part, with Elliot on his point about provincial power. What you describe as the conservative vision, Elliot, was the supposed design of the confederation. That is, the provinces were granted considerable power in Section 92 of the BNA, in order to control matters within provincial borders. That is what is on paper. But, the reality of Canada is that the purpose of the confederation was to ensure the power and supremacy of the St. Lawrence business and social elite. To that end, the Canadian federal government has, and continues to operate correctly.

Political power remains in the hands of the filial and economic descendents of the Family Compact (Chateau Clique in Quebec), that controlled the political and business life of Upper and Lower Canada. Of interest to everyone in this thread, is that the Family Compact kept power in the hands of the elite, through the Executive Council who advised the Lieutenant Governor, and gave little real power to the elected Legislative Council or Assembly. Sounds pretty much like the power centralized in the PM’s office today (and the useless MP’s.

Where I differ from Elliot, is whether I believe that Harper will, in any substantial way, change the balance of federal/provincial power in Canada. The central Canada elite will not give up control and the changes from Liberal to Conservative governments over the years did not represent any change in the core policy. Just as the change from Republican to Democratic administrations in the US does not represent change in political power. The elites just chug along. The one truth in politics is that those who hold power never give it up willingly, or peacefully for that matter.

Some of you remind me of 15 year-olds complaining about their allowance, the house rules and then threatening to move out….

Let’s look….

freebc wrote

then grumpy wrote

and finally Murdock (who supports city-states) wrote

Ok, let’s imagine your scenario and BC does “move out”.

Sometime in the near future….

“In ten years, those on Vancouver Island will wish to go as Mainlanders get fed up with the ferry system and wish to build a bridge. The new “federal” government in Victoria allows Islanders to hold a referendum which passes with a needed 61% majority. Islanders agree to sovereignty association.

The conflict in the North continues as First Nations continue to block roads and interfere with resource development. Chief Jason Smith states, “after the province separated, we though that we could finally work out a treaty as equal partners, unfortunately, we seem to just be supplying those in the south money for their projects.”

Several cities and towns in the Kootenays mull over the idea of joining Alberta (which stayed in the Confederation of Canada). Mayor Jane Simpson of Fernie believes that they always felt closer to Calgary anyways. These thoughts are being echoed by those in Ft. St. John as well. Resident Molly McTeer says, “My children have been to Edmonton several times, but never to Vancouver”.

The Prince George region, devastated because of the pine beetle and poor logging practices never did develop any other industries pins all of its hopes new mining exploration. Residents from Smither’s to Prince George simply don’t want any more red tape and would like more support from the south. “We are not the new Newfoundland,” says one angry resident at a local WalMartnald’s restaurant.

Finally, the mega-cities of Surrey and Vancouver continue to square off as Surrey continues to toy with the idea of joining with the Seattlle-Bellinghan corridor. If this indeed happens, it would be the first expansion of US territory in several years since the annexation of Saudi Arabia.”

Bizarre scenario? Of course. But pushing for BC separation at this point is bizarre.

My post from a day (or two) ago:

commentor: RickW posted: 1 Day Ago
The eternal trouble with dissolution is, where does it stop? Everyone who advocates this envisages the provinces as separate entities. But why so. Many residents of northern BC have no use for the lower mianland, in much the same manner BC has no use for Ottawa.

I repeat, where does it stop? Right down to each municpality? Each neighbourhood? Or do these advocates simply want to reproduce the present dichotomy between Ottawa and TROC, only writ small?

Right on, Moat! Glad to see another who thinks separation is absurd (at least the way it's been presented by its advocates. And for those who think Alberta will seek separation, think again. With all the money in the world, there is about to be a shifting of power in the Canadian political scene, whether Ontario, Quebec, and PEI like it or not. Alberta will begin demanding it (and will get it).

LOL, good posts Moat

Can Port Moody separate from Van because I don't support RAV, will separating change RAV or the ruling structure of Port Moody. How about we start a republic of East Van, or maybe we can all work together for effective change and stop crying for change, good things have never come from on high,usually the winers crying for separation are just to lazy to do anything to change the current system
or get involved . Although I think separating the Fraser valley and making it part of the US bible belt would be a good fit.

But then you'd have to throw in a large chunk of the Okanagan as well............

Moat get ready for your 'imagined' scenario to start to come to pass...

It will not go all as you thought, but parts might. It will not all go that fast (this is Canada, so we will all drag and kick our collective feet screaming for a lost time of when Trudeau knew how to do it), but it will come to pass.

Vancouver Island will want to have more autonomy, but will not get it until enough electricity can be generated on the island to sell off the excess.

The native populations are already creating 'march' regions, remember Niska?

A 'separation' of BC should be along the natural frontiers, so regions in the north and southeast will likely become more associated with Alberta (as they already socially are) than with coastal BC.

If BC were to 'go it alone', then the creation of a 'free port' in Vancouver right away will press even faster for the creation of city states. Surrey, while it may want to move into a US led situation that you propose will find it more difficult doing that since the US already does not want more mouths to feed, not only that but within the 10-year time frame you are speaking of the US dollar will loose even more purchasing power, while a BC currency would be supported by our natural resources (bouyant now, but will be more volitile in the future, however the decline of 'fiat' currency will kill the US dollar = part of the separation of BC will involve a tie-in of BC currency to gold or other precious metal and allow BC funds to be directly convertible to real hard assets).

you are talking of BC separation as bizzare, I say that the lies believed in 1871 were more bizzare and Helmcken's minority report should have been the accepted decision. it was not, but that should not prevent anyone from pointing out the errors of the past and that we can still correct them.

'Can Port Moody separate from Van because I don't support RAV,'. i know you guys are exaggerating but this line of reasononing is absurd. quebec has never been a willing participant in confederation. lord durham suggested union in order to assimilate them into british culture in 1840 and it has never been a harmonious fit. pretty much everything that has happened since has served to separate the two nations: the northwest rebellions, the manitoba schools question, the boer war, the tin-pot navy, conscription in wwI and II, official bilingualism, the patriation of the constitution etc. at some point canadians have to realize that, at least in their view, quebeckers have a beef. it's not a good fit and probably never will be. what would be so horrible about having good relations with quebec as a sovereign nation?

The harm would be that it would make us a weaker and more fragmented country especially when dealing with Trade issues with the bully from the south. We are a huge country with a small population that has held together this far, a country this size is going to have regional differences etc but they are not a good reason to split , once Quebec goes this confederation will fall apart and the conservative US wannabies will get what they
want , deep integration with the US . Not to mention it is not in Quebec's best interest, over half of Quebecers do not want to separate and what about the Natives etc. It will not be a nice split as the Bloc says ,

you may be right stuart but i don't buy it. quebeckers don't want to be annexed and all of the above potential problems could be worked out cooperatively. the fact that quebec has been a part of canada for 200 or so years doesn't automatically mean that it's the best solution. things change. countries separate and unite constantly. simply saying that it won't work is narrow. perhaps it's time to find a real solution to a very profound problem, rather than the useless bandaid solutions trudeau and his minions have been devising for the past 40 years.

Stuart says:

I say that the fact that we are forced to operate at a trade disadvantage due to our continued association with other regions of Canada has been a trade barrier for BC. Not only softwood, but electrical power and environmental issues. We cannot get the 'linkage' we need to leverage our position because anything we want to link to would be bad for another region of Canada that has more votes in it. So we get our resources taken by central Canada over and over again, while it is only with these resources today that we have any hope of building a better future for tomorrow.

Ottawa takes $1 and gives back $0.70 in value, continued support of this waste will wipe out all hope of future prosperity. Separation will occur, the only question is who will be first and under what conditions.

Well, I certainly agree with Moat more than I disagree. That is not an entirely unlikely scenario he paints for us.

Mostly, I just think he then fails to draw the appropriate conclusion , as do numbers of others, about how we prevent that from becoming reality. Taking a hardline on the status quo "federal/confederal" arrangement will simply not work a whole lot longer. And the evidence stares us in the face. The memory of Canadian troops such as Trudeau put in Quebec will/is faded, and there will, with a continuation of the current deep integration model into the US, put in place by the ruling class elites and their neoconservative allies, will simply force Quebecers to decide to accept that risk of civil war. Unless as Meech attempted to do, we really are prepared to grant every real province of the rest of Canada, the same essential powers of "national statehood" as Quebec. (Actually, though they do not generally say it, I think Quebecers at some level must realize that as much as Canada may not provide room for their national/cultural values, separated from Canada and up against the US Empire on their own, they are no less in danger of assimilation. Which is a large part of what holds them back even now, I think, for which there is evidence-, the hope that in the end they will arrive at an agreement with us.)

Which be why Anglo-Canada needs to be less intransigent as to the "form" of our national union with Quebec and Natives, and a whole bunch smarter and more flexible. No doubt there is a time and place for being hard and intransigent, but here, around the issue of our vital "greater" national unity is not it. Not yet anyway. Not by a long shot. Not while there is still negotiation and wiggle room-, which I suggest there is, indeed clearly is.

Whatever one thinks about the old Meech Lake Accord, (which fatal flaw was, in my view, it treated each of the Anglo-Canadian provinces in a special "national" way, conceding them dangerous powers of independent statehood, though they never said it, in order to placate Quebec's more valid claims to "national interest",) we did nonetheless have the agreement of the Quebec State, and which would have ended this continuing separatist impasse. What needed, fundamentally, to be taken out of the Meech Lake deal was its Balkanization element, created by treating all provinces, of Anglo-Canada, as though they were separate "national founding groups" as well.

How "nations" organize themselves internally is one thing, provinces, non-nation states or counties whatever-, but the relationship of a nation to other nations, maybe even especially within a "Confederation Union of Nations or Nation States" is quite another and separate matter.

Which means, in my view, that we have to come to see, if we are going to make our peace and maintain our unity with Quebec and Natives, over the long term, that they are entities unto themselves, as is a larger English-Canada made up of provinces within itself.

We are not talking really here about the union of ten provinces etc., but as a consequence of a particular history, three major national groups into one larger entity, that respects the "national interests" of each. Again, across a complex and not unacrimonious history of its own, a kind of Great Britain made up of Scotland, England and Wales, each of which has its own kind of negotiated parliament and powers today, and each with its own "internal regional divisions".

If we, especially in Anglo-Canada, and maybe Quebec and Natives too, can't get our heads around that, then it is likely the scenario created by Moat and others is all that we deserve.

Breaking up Canada is not change it's failure and will never happen as Murdock and others may imply. Nations do not break up when their an economic powerhouse on the world stage in which Canada is, name a country that is better to live in then ours, if you think living in Canada is a hardship and want to wine about
living in the west then leave, go live in your wonderful US, but leave this paradise to us, I see 1000's off tourist visit us a year and dream of living here, you conservative folks make me sick, its all about power and self
interest never about the good of the country. The fact that a conservative will never be elected in Quebec is a not a reason to separate.

You may want to admire the success in the Balkans. The new Canada

the lack of a long standing common market, chopped up territories and constantly changing borders prevented a similar process from developing in the whole of the Balkans and therefore created preconditions for divisions, economic backwardness and ethnic slaughter that this region would become famous for. Similar to the Middle East, borders in the Balkans are artificial creations created in the smoky conference rooms of imperialist powers which divided people in a perverse way. The Balkans were and remain a semi-colony inside Europe.

The Balkans were a result of the Ottoman Empire as was the Iran-Iraq war.

David Orchard, I can see why Stuart is so upset about this socialist who tried to kill conservatism in Canada being scuttled.
Thank God for this . Now we have a Conservative Party of Canada threatening to run this country. I couldn't be happier.
Good work Peter McKay, a true Canadian hero that will save us from being run by the Mafia.

RickW, Stuart,

Of course what these people who are advocating separation are simply going for a misguided notion that society will be better off if we do not have a central government in Ottawa.

Separation/alienation advocates claim to hate bureaucracy and government control, but are then willing to have the country carved up into little chunks. If they think the regulations and general bureaucracy is tough right now, then we will see what mess we can have with little sovereign states creating trade restrictions.

And RickW and Stuart, both of you are right to suggest that some of these advocates would suggest going right down to the Republic of East Van. Murdock himself is an advocate of the city-state. Lots of luck finding a healthy city-state in today’s world… ummmm, Monaco?

Ultimately, these guys would like to return to the feudal system. If Canada breaks up, they feel that they will benefit because they are “smarter” than the rest. They envision themselves becoming the manor lords or at least the loyal knights, and rising to the top of their local governments. To many computer games I suppose.

Coyote, you do point out that I am unable to provide any solutions to the break up of Canada becoming a reality. You are right to suggest this, as I really do not see how we can do this without interfering with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Although a separatist party may be treasonous, we still need to respect Section 2 of the Charter.

It would be interesting to ask Harper and Duceppe how they would like to be described in the History books 100 years from now. Do these two truly view themselves as freedom fighters for the rights of Canadians?

Harper and Duceppe ? The real enemy of Canada remaining whole is Paul Martin and The Liberal Party. They have been in charge. How can anyone blame Harper ? He hasn't been in power yet.
I believe the Liberals want this separation threat. They must, or they are inept, take your choice.
I only hope Canadians see through this con job the Liberals are pulling off on us.
The federal govt. was supposed to be a small group of bureaucrats that would handle defense and the collection of tariffs.
They diminished provincial powers and took over as much as they could while spending our money doing it.
A Conservative govt. would return most of these powers back to the Provinces. This will appease Quebec. Nobody wants to deal with separation.

Fresh news : The RCMP are investigating the Liberal Dept. of Finance over a possible leak of infomation regarding the Income Trust announcment.
Ralph Goodale should step aside until the investigation is complete.
Is there no end to the corrution in this party ?

Now, read this quote abover from Erwin, very carefully, and weight the implications no less so. He really does in his dumb, almost childishly naive way, lay out the essential Conservative blueprint here, for the nations of Greater Canada.

They, this US butt-lick and his neocon and anglo-chauvanist pals, are going to placate Quebec by giving all the provinces the same essential powers of natiohood, which not only Balkanizes the entire country politically, sowing the seeds of future divisions, but denies the "greater nation" a strong central government capable of the military defence of the whole, but also uniform standards of social care and standards of living coast to coast. Consider it carefully, before you listen too seriously to these advocates of not one, but multi-separations, and then consider their overall pro-US Empire sentiments, which they express over and over again here.

These Conservatives and Braunshirts are traitors to the greater nation, plain and simple working for its breakup, to serve their real Master's Voice, who whispers in their other ear; The US Empire. They actually want to be the Jeffrey Dalmer's lamb who lies down with the lion, and when its stomach growls, to be consumed by it. It is the fantasy of their perverse anti-Canada ideology.

The negotiation of a new social contract and set of national arrangements between a unified Anglo-Canada, Quebec and both our Native populations, and the creation of a new, more truly equal "confederal union" is more unthinkable than this?

These guys are worse than the Quebec separatists, for phuck sake. They would feed us all piecemeal, to the precious foreign Empire they serve. Even Quebec doesn't advocate for that. It is merely trying to avoid that for itself. Which gets more repect from me than these quisling butt and bootlicks do. 8-o

The use of the photo is appropriate. Harper's crew is nothing but a bunch of phony balonies. My MP ran for two terms claiming that the MP perks were too generous and that he would never take a pension. He is now running for a fourth term on the mantra of change. After 6 years, as soon as he qualified, he opted into the pension plan saying it would be a crime not to take it. He was very sure to get his Ottawa Informer to me the day before the election was called. Inside I read that the Libs should be considered criminals for wasting dollars on partisan advertising in Quebec. I guess he thought he was "entitled" to send out the blatantly partisan broucher on the taxpayer's dime. Afterall, it's a perk of the job.

I am encouraged that this is the best Eddy can do to to slam the Conservatives on an ethical issue.
It hardly compares to HRDC, ADSCAM and now Income Trust Scam ( to name only a few )
I hope we can avoid further scam's from The Liberal Party by tossing them out of power.

And little Ronnie, only you could see Peter McKay's backstabbing as a noble deed, says allot about your character. Your a fool because folks in Ont and Eastern Canada would support an Orchard and not a Harper

You judge, a short snippet from a David Orchard interview. compare this to the wonderful show with Peter and Jack the dog.

JP: The Harperites are just part of a global right-wing onslaught that includes Australia, Israel, Europe, the Islamic world, India, and of course the United States. Do you think your brand of conservatism can help in the fight against that?

David Orchard : Yes, because it is based on conserving the best of what our ancestors have bequeathed us though their blood, sweat and tears. But the only way we will get anywhere is if thousands of people help to make it happen, with their presence, their support, financial and otherwise – and in any other way they can. I am in politics because I don’t want my country to cease to exist – to be assimilated into our neighbour. I have a vision for what Canada could be, a vision inspired by our founders, who created the world’s second largest nation and saw our potential as boundless. I want Canada to be a powerful nation that stands on its own two feet and is a force for good in the world.

Our country is one of miracles, the greatest of which, as someone put it, is that we exist at all. My work is dedicated to keeping it so. However, most of us in Canada don’t know our history. That is why I wrote my book, The Fight for Canada: Four Centuries of Resistance to American Expansionism. It has become a bestseller, despite being largely ignored by the mainstream press.

Moat, I have no idea where you get these delusions from, please stop making inflammatory statements like this:

Ultimately, these guys would like to return to the feudal system. If Canada breaks up, they feel that they will benefit because they are “smarter” than the rest. They envision themselves becoming the manor lords or at least the loyal knights, and rising to the top of their local governments. To many computer games I suppose.

Stick with either facts or your own observations, name-calling and the sort of inuendo you fling at me here is better left in the sandbox.

Further for Moat try reading

THE SOVERIGN INDIVIDUAL

You may find that you will start to question more of the status-quo leaders and parties, the whole left-right debate and popularity contests disguised as elections.

Moat:

Strange how no one envisages themselves as serfs..............

However, Peter C. Newman commented when he was in Victoria last, that his next work might possibly be the world's move back to the city-state.

THE SOVERIGN INDIVIDUAL
http://www.bidstrup.com/sovereign.htm

I read it. interesting points. However, it hinges on the continuity and enhancmenet of our communications systems. What if someone pulls the proverbial plug?

Murdock complained:

Now Murdock, I will admit that I took a bit of a side dig at you. However, it was far from inflammatory and if you read my writing carefully, I was really calling you out to defend your position. I do appreciate the time and thought that you take in creating your posts. Although I often do not agree with them, they sometimes make me think, and carefully consider mine. Is that not quality discourse?

You have been an advocate of the “city-state”, and I am challenging you to show me where it has worked. Questioning the city-state does not mean that I do not have an imagination or the ability to envision an evolving social structure. However, I do have doubts supporting a major social upheaval for the sake of making change. Left or right, in the context of human history, we have it pretty good in the state called "Canada".

Moat:

More like cataclysmic upheaval, if I have interpreted my history right. People generally do not seek change; they have it thrust upon them, and usually in a most unpleasant manner.

"The ways of the Lord are often dark, but never pleasant."

Good Article, Rafe:

This province wants more money, that province once more power, how easy it is to blame provincial problems on the feds and vice versa. Mature governments don't speak in terms of blame, but in terms of causal effects. Is there such a thing as a federal government who treats provinces unequally and can still be considered as a good federal government? I think not and I know I'm not alone.

At some point, we'll all have to decide on whether or not federal powers should be decentralized. A decentralized federal government speaks for itself. It becomes a puppet to the provinces, a mere toothless tax collector. Matters of human right violations become a matter of the courts to decide, unless the feds decide otherwise,through changes in our constitution, or the provinces, through their own constitutions, decide otherwise. And they will.

People under a decentralized federal government, will be at the mercy of their provincial governments of the day. Services will be even moreso unequal than they are now, from province to province on a host of issues, including healthcare, education, well, pretty much everything socialists get bashed for when they voice ideas and reforms with equality in mind.

A centralized federal government ensures our human rights are protected under our charter, with an added strong unified voice to be heard internationally, not so much for what centralized governments do to protect and ensure human rights, but for what they won't do in dismantling or destroying the systems we have in place to protect them.

Whenever we hear the words "we will reopen the constitution" signalling what's on the wishlist of parties like the PC's, we should get very worried as to where it all will go... especially when the Reform and Alliance name changed Progessive Conservative Party had their roots in promoting federal decentralization since the beginning of their conception. To me or anyone else who follows political history closely, the Reform and Alliance is just another westernized bloc party and that should make anyone question what Stephen and Gilles were really talking about in the pic up top, regardless of when it was taken.

Hot damn! I had forgotten how well informed Sir Rafe is on what constitutes nations, especially our nation.

Back when it still used to snow in Vancouver, when my grandfather and grandmother in Newfoundland voted to join this promising land they voted to get into one boat not two. It is a better idea to stop the leaks in one ship at sea than carve it in two and start anew.

P.S. Rafe, you should hear the bloody twit they have on in the afternoons at CKNW!

Confederation is absurd. There is no fairness. Ontario and Queer-bec control the country. Period.
We are only milk cows for them.

Stuart, you must now know I am conservative. David Orchard was a socialist. For the sake of my conscience, I cannot support you in promoting this man.
Why would you even bring this up around me. And me was who you were trying to skewer.
Just to clear the air here, because of the multitude of posts regarding separatism, I would avoid this solution until there were no further options. I don't think we are anywhere near this point yet.
But yes, I do agree with diminishing the powers of the Federal Govt.
I come to the conclusion that there is enough pissed off people in Quebec and Alberta to admit we have to pay attention to the same emotion we all feel when we feel things are dangerously out of our control.

..ultimately I believe Quebec will indeed achieve independence...but then what? May I suggest : We need a new federal political party in Canada...how it shall come about and what it will be named is still unknown.

I would suggest that the single most important element of such a party's political platform is to submit to the people of Canada one clear referendum question, something like this draft proposal:

"Do you favour the creation of a Constitutional Constituent Assembly to write a new constitution for Canada, members to which gender-balanced Assembly are Canadian citizens elected by proportional representation, and that said new proposed constitution be submitted directly to the citizens of Canada by referendum?"

The elected Constitutional Constituent Assemby then debates and writes such a constitution, vesting sovereignty in the people, not the Crown; putting in checks & balances, ensuring rights, re-distributing federal/provincial jurisdictional competencies and taxation powers, etc. Vital to this all is the equality of our three founding nations: French, English and First Nations.

...Otherwise, with the existing dysfunctional constitutional frame and inherited bureaucratic institutions of senior civil servants at both the provincial and federal levels, and an overlayed fabric of hyper-mobile capitalists who have zero allegiance to any country, including Canada, there is not, in my view, a hope in hell this country will survive as a sovereign nation. We need not just a new political party, we need to understand that the "mess" we are in is the direct result of our inherited and mostly colonial constitution (Charter excepted) that allows elites to privilege themselves and to sell this country's sovereignty for a proverbial "song." As a response to "Deep Integration" continentalist policies, we need "Deep Democracy." This issue of sovereignty is THE primary issue facing Canada as it enters this century - to be, or not to be, a sovereign nation...Two fundamental questions that we, the citizens of Canada must eventually answer, are: "under what new legal relations & institutions of governance will we democratically choose to govern ourselves? and secondly, "by what democratic and fair process should this question be best answered?", and lastly, "who ultimately should decide, the federal government, the province, the current constitutional amending formula, or citzens themselves who demand that ultimate sovereignty be vested in themselves?.......

...should read "three" fundamental questions...not "two"

Peter
If you ever give a presentation, I’m bringing my copy of “buzzword bingo”

Moat:

You say that there are no 'city-states' now, I say that in Canada RIGHT NOW there are! These 'city-states' are not the same as Venice in the 1600's, but more like a proto version of it.

Consider this, Toronto wants something (at the moment some relief from the wild-west like attitude from the youth) - presto it becomes the most important item on a Federal stage! We get a PM, who is supposed to have all of Canada on his mind (and according to him in his heart) yet his first reaction was to re-ban hand guns then get a 'snitch-line' specially set-up, so that more federal employees would be needed!

The ice-storms of a few years ago happend in the vote rich and separation threatening Quebec. BINGO! Federal money was found to pay for regular forces (who according to military accountants I knew said there was nothing left in the fuel budgets of the entire Airforce, it was all allocated or even spent!) and more was found to pay for reservist activations. I say that if that had happened in Saskatoon, tough love baby, get over it yourself and good luck finding any military anybody around there!

Unless a nasty event befalls Vancouver (the BC city 'proto' state) you will not see federal support coming.

As it is the 'Canada' (RAV) line is getting that Federal help, yet we have northern BC needing transportation and port improvements (which will aid in asia-pacific trade, a real value enhancer - not the passenger mover from airport to downtown Vancouver (the city state)).

Increasingly more and more new immigrants to Canada are settling in the cities, as they do we are going to progressively see more and more of the functions of 'city-states' take shape.

One day, in the not too-distant future, Toronto or perhaps Montreal will face a real disruption due to civil disorder and find that Canada is unable to supply the needed force to restore order. They will then assume the powers needed to restore that order and not relinquish them, following that day such a city will be in-fact a city-state, falling like nine-pins other cities in Canada will be forced to follow the same path, mostly to protect thier citizens from the tax-predation from a desperately bankrupt Ottawa.

RickW good article,

These global elites feel that have the natural right to govern. A good book to Read is
by Michael Parenti , Democracy for the Few,

Remember more for the many means less for the few and the few will not tolerate this.

http://www.michaelparenti.org/DemocracyForFew.html

So it is good to understand the global trends but we must also get ready for it and resist them

Look around the world , this entire continent is resisting, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and now Bolivia, Bolivia has moved left and elected their first indigenous leader in the history of their country. Mexico is on the verge of going left and every country in Central America is has a huge socialist movement at this time.

We ask ourselves how did all these countries resists' and win power over their lives . They all have the corporate media pushing the right wing agenda and the people of these countries have less rights than us.

But their weakness is this, they have big money and big media but they don't have widespread support on the ground, we are the many and we have them outnumbered 100 to one. If we show up in tiny numbers we still win. Democracy was born in Rome as a victory of the people over class power. We also have the truth on our side which is much more powerful than propaganda.

We can develop our own media http://www.iwtnews.com/ , support independents like the tyee or start your own.
We can hold the MSM media accountable, by launching complaints, they can get fined or their corporate license revoked. Lets take back the airwaves we built

http://www.cbsc.ca/english/complaints/howto.htm

Attack the MSM for unethical or outright dishonest or racist comments.

Next is to hold power accountable , get involved in politics yourself or make demands on your local MLA or party. Make a list of 10 things you want them to address before the election and make them sign of on it,
judge their record and pull support if your requirements are ignored , don't let anyone assume your support without demands etc, remember the only way to contront organzied power is to have organized people.

Sorry for the typos, remember my riding was won by less than 160 votes, if I had a list of demands and represented say 1500 - 2000 voters than thats my power friends. If you follow politics you seen who gets the spoils and who supports who. Lets start making demands now.

If you support a party at least make them a beter party. Lets stop being so passive.

Braunshirt wingnuts not withstanding, I agree almost entirely with Peter Dimitrov. His articulation of the need for a constituent assembly of labour, the poor, professionals and others of the great progressive mass of the Canadian people, in which I include the citizens of the nations of Quebec and Natives, is spot on. It is being proven by some of the backward looking Braunshirt Wingers here, for example,, and some of the even more way out fanciful "City State" thinkers, to be an absolutely necessary response to the neoconservative direction in which the ruling class and its butt licks are driving and betraying the people and country.

It is well past time for a reexamination and rewrite of the social, economic, political, class, sexist and national structural assumptions with to here have underpinned and maintained the ruling capitalist system, and which is now in the process of betraying the very existence and sovereignty of the larger country itself, including Anglo-Canada, Quebec and our Native peoples. And as far stretched as this may sound to some City State and US Empire, Neoconservative proponents here, or even others, it is certainly no more outlandish a call than their fanciful racial, national and destruction of Canada theories.

The reality is, as time goes on from here, the "deep integrationist" theory and drive of the pro US Empire ruling class of Canada, of which part includes making the country unworkable and driving divisive wedges between the various national strata of the country, between Anglos, Quebecers and Natives, the need for such a constituent assembly to put down these destroyers and to mobilize and re-invigorate the the "nations" of Canada is destined to become ever more obvious, IMHO. It is but "realism", in the face of ever more obvious attempts of reactionary and anti-Canada forces to carve up the nation, in order to serve it up in digestible fragments to the US Empire.

It is becoming ever more obvious, even here on little Tyee, whom and what class and political forces are the real enemies of Canada, arising up out of the wealthiest and most privileged class strata of Canada itself, and served by their neoconservative loyalists-, amongst all the three main national groups, but especially Anglo-Canada and Quebec.

As Peter says, the response of progressive nationalists and left radicals to these Deep Integrationists and national chauvanists amongst us has to be Deep Democracy. I agree entirely.

To repeat Peter again:

Like I say, it's fast becoming that or lie yourself out prostrate, throat exposed, and learn to sing Amerika The Beautiful-, with real patriotic feeling.

(If you ever see me agree with Colin, you will know I have gone over to the Dark Side. He's a shape shifter, but always obvious enough. :-D

Only Erwin could be encouraged to learn that our Tory Trash MP, Paul Forseth, is in it for himself.

BC seperate from Canada? Haaa! Wouldn't last five minutes. I guess it was the moment I saw Jimmy Pattison taking the Carlyle guys (Bush etc.) on a little fishing trip up the inside passage, I realized we were all just roadkill on the Great Marine Highway to Alaska.

And the next "roadkill moment" I had this year was when seeing the Canadian Air Farce practice war games with the Israelis at Cold Lake Alberta. You'd think that going to war (er...humanitarian intervention...) with Bush and Co in the Middle East next year would be a major bloody campaign issue, no?

wiley,

given your statement:

BC separation is unimportant as the real shift has already occurred.

By separating from a 'canada' that is dominated by PQ/Ont, BC would be in a position to negotiate freely and have more impact than a gopher on your 'roadkill'

(at least as much as a deer or a moose?)

;-)

Indeed one would, Wiley. It is a conspiracy of silence in which they are ALL participants, from one side of centre to the other side of centre, amongst all bloody four of them. It's what depresses Canadians and causes them to throw their hands up. And they are all playing the, "Don't rock the ruling class boat, and keep it simple and non-controversial game."

The NDP even, in its new more "Liberal", right of centre garb" refuse to beat the bushes about it, or to champion, and I mean CHAMPION, loud and long, the sovereignty issue.

We are caught in a conspiracy of betrayal in which virtually all the ruling class and political elite are to one degree or another complicit. It's as if, other than rhetorically if they are backed into a corner from which they cannot retreat,especially in the frictional heat they generate amongst their opportunist selves at election time, they have struck a kind of "Gentlemen's Accord", wink, wink and nod amongst themselves. So unless serious opposition and progressive alternatives emerge from the Unwashed Mass, and sooner rather than later, I fear "Deep Integration" is a done deal too. (Though each might prefer that it was the other one who signs the final Quisling papers of betrayal.)

But not friggin' yet it ain't. And it's important for us all to remember that. The Ron Erwins, Colins and Murdocks haven't carried the day yet.

But I see what you are seeing as well, Wiley.

Murdock wrote:

The city-state idea is not happening right now, and it will probably never happen. This is because of the communication and transportation improvements that we have. We can be in Toronto in three hours by plane. The psychological separation between Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver is quickly being minimized. However, at the same time we have children, who say, have grown up in Chilliwack, having only traveled to Vancouver once or twice in their lives. But still, more than ever people in Vancouver now consider Chilliwack an easy day-trip, not an overnighter at Cultus Lake.

As for city-states, you claim that Vancouver essentially functions as one. Yes, Canadians do settle in the cities more than ever, but that does not mean that the connection between the hinterlands has been discounted. You can drive to the Yukon border in two days. 100 years ago, this travel would have taken weeks. The connection between Vancouver and the rest of the province is there and strengthening.

Canada only has a population of 30 million, but New York City has a population of 8.2 million and yet it does not function as a “city-state”. However, it is probably to only city in North America that could possibly function as a one.

However, the “city-sate” had its time, and it did not work. Although competition is healthy, city-states of the past were not, and that is why they did not survive. Those running and living city-states eventually need to form alliances when they were threatened economically or militarily.

The Quebecers always fail to do the math, once Quebec leaves Canada, the legal requirement for bi-lingualism leaves to. The English and Immigrant Canadians will quickly vote to change the laws, which will save bundles of money. After that Quebec would be isolated in a sea of English and would not have the economic clout to force companies outside of Quebec to print dual language or French only labels.

France will quickly lose interest in the Independent Quebec and go back to complaining to the EU about the contents of bread.

Let’s see what other economically successful countries have French as their first language that they could trade with? Let see, hmmmm, still thinking, hmmmmm

Of course I am sure that the Old French who’s families came off the boats would welcome the French speaking immigrants from Haiti and Africa, not likely..

I lived with a French-Canadian girlfriend that was a separatist, I was talking to her about European history (Napoleon, Elizabeth the first, Catholic pope, 30 year war, etc,etc) and she replied: I don’t care about that “English” history it has nothing to do with Quebec. It was then I realized how insular they were and she was a school teacher! They seem to have learned a very narrow view of history in school.

Good work Erwin, but you forgot one little detail regarding your news tip, I don't blame you really because it was only at the end of the dispatch and only about 10 seconds long. It was the NDP that pointed out the irregular trading that took place . SO lets recap, The NDP a party with only 19 compared to the conservatives 99 broke the story for the media. Either the conservatives were sleeping or really didn't mind their elite buddies dumping stock.
And the MSM gives the conservatives more play on this, I think they left out the most important fact and that is without the NDP this whole thing would not exist.

Regarding sovereignty.

You have it or you don't , the conservatives don't feel it's that important. I was hoping I would generate some new ideas as far as black and white actions , we have all the power folks you are either a active sh** disturber or a spectator, so give you energy time or money . If you don't have the energy give up some cash .

I quote Clint Eastwood.

Opinions are like Asshol**s , everybody's got one.

I agree with your last post Coyote. In New West we can choose the incumbant Tory MP, Paul Forseth, who in over twelve years has delivered nothing to the riding except his 'Informer' newsletter. Or we can go with failed Gordo Minister, Joyce Murray, who's running for the Liberals. Her claim to fame was letter to the editor explaining how hard done by she was being an MLA. Or we can go with the NDP. They are running Dawn Black. She was an MP back in the Mulroney days and campaigned vehementally for Chorletetown and then told us all how stupid we were for turning it down. She's failed twice already against Forseth. I've come to the conclusion that all three parties want to lose the riding.

LOL, it sounds like you and her had allot in common Colin, sorry to easy.

Her with her French indoctrination and you with your military one. Tell me why killing 1000's in Iraq was necessary, how about how the US were never allies of Saddam or why it may have been necessary at the time. Or maybe how Sharon did not commit any crimes in Lebanon , poor guy and victim of circumstance.

Hey Eddy , brother,

Your in my riding, I get that warm fuzzy feeling inside.

Forseth as you know only won last time by 166 votes, I feel the NDP will take the riding
this time, people will switch from Liberal to NDP, I can't imagine anyone voting for Joyce
Murray (her biggest success was overseeing the closing of St Mary's hospital) and being a good lapdog by not saying a word.

Charlottetown was a long time ago, if you don't vote NDP get ready for more Forseth and
quarterly news letters. Come on do it for me, I promise you the Charlottetown accord is
history.

Stuart, Eddy,

Oh, that is an ugly riding isn't it?.And don't forget the other half of the city with Mary Pynenburg.

You would think that the Federal Liberals would throw in a couple of better candidates considering what a close race it is. Thank goodness both of them (Murray and Pynenburg) are away from the day-to-day running of the City of New Westminster. (Not a city-state, Murdock)

I generally support Liberals federally, but not this time. I will be kicking myself if Paul Forself gets in.

I can hardly believe Joyce Murray is showing her face after her arrogance against the wishes
of her community regarding St Mary's, she honestly thought she could win after snubbing over 80% of her constituents, you can't buy this kind of establishment loyalty folks. I wish her and her little wannaby rapper son would disappear.

I quote a poll

The poll was conducted in New Westminster, and parts of Burnaby, Coquitlam, and North Surrey. 806 people were polled by the Mustel Group Jan. 30 to Feb. 3.
The poll showed a high level of awareness about the issue; 83% of residents throughout the area were aware of the government's plans to close the hospital. 96% of seniors were aware.
78% of north Fraser residents polled oppose the closure of the hospital. 63% strongly oppose the closure. Only 4% of those polled support the government's decision. When the "don't know" factor is taken out, among those who expressed an opinion, 95% are opposed to the closure of the hospital.
Concern about waiting lists and overcrowding was the number one reason that people gave for opposing the hospital's closure.
Most area residents feel that they have not had enough input into the decision, and feel that the community, and not the government and the health authority, should have the final say.
80% agreed with the Save Saint Mary's Coalition's call for a public inquiry into the matter. Only 10% were opposed, and 10% were undecided.

The Bit** ingnored the poll outright

Stuart, before you have an orgasm about Income Trusts, get your story right.
The NDP merely were the ones to get information from the RCMP that an investigation was underway. That's it.
The Conservatives called for an enquiry and investigation a month ago.
This is old news. The only new news is that we now know for a fact that the RCMP are investigating. I bet Income Trust wasn't in your head until I posted the breaking news.
There were a lot of retired ( not rich ) people hurt when Goodale mused about taxing the dividends. They sold off there trusts.
Somehow the market heard about Goodales decision not to tax in advance and perhaps billions of dollars changed hands.
This could prove to be a bigger story than ADSCAM.
Goodale should resign.
Again a cloud of corruption hangs over the head of The Liberals.
Why has nobody been able to stain Steven Harper and The Conservatives with any scandal yet ? Because they can't.
The NDP are going down in support.
I feel good about the election. Anyway I crunch the numbers I see a slite Conservative minority or possibly a small Liberal minority, but add up The Bloc + Conservatives and they could topple the govt. anytime.
The NDP don't even have a place in any formula.
You might as well forget about them, they are gonzo.

Sorry Ronnie, I believe the RCMP and the dispatches of the wire, not your explanation. The RCMP investigation only came after the NDP pointed out the unusual trades, once again Harper was sleeping , just like when he lost all power in the house with 99 seats. Slow to the punch. LOL, thanks for your support Ron, I'm glad your starting to see the light and remove the blinders.

Hot of the press , go see for yourself, yahoo.ca check the left hand margin with the nice pic of Paul.

An RCMP review into the possibility of a leak came after complaints from the New Democratic Party that a series of unusual trades in the stock market suggested someone had inside knowledge of the income-trust announcement before it was made Nov. 23.

Hey maybe some of Harper's buddies had some stock to trade, or maybe Harper is just imcompetant , which one is it Ron

pssss , hey Ron,

I'm smiling right now.

Just say thank you.

I am not sure why you can't understand that everyone was calling for an investigation. Yes, The NDP, Conservatives, Security officials, everyone. Where have you been ?
I certainly didn't see anything in your posts about it.
Your party is losing big time. What do you do next ? Claim the NDP was responsible for the Gomery Commission, that's rich.
If you have informations about Harper's buddies, let's here it. Your problem is that you can't dig up any dirt on these guys and it's killing you.
Too bad, so sad.

Read it Ronnie Wannabe, and then give Stuart the apology for your lying, which he has a right to expect.

You're so full of shitt Ron, we are all laughing at you Even your fellow Neocon Brauns have abandoned you to clean up your own doo doo off your sorry puss.

Good one, Stu.

Eh, Ron. He gotcha. Go suck your thumb.

There is talk of seperation and the formation of city states, but even the most realistic regionalists, myself included, don't really put much merit into it. Sure Cascadia, sounds like a wonderful thing, but most of our ideas of seperation include liberating Washington, Oregon, and Alaska, from their eastern counterparts as well, and we all know that what happens in Quebec is not going to give any state the right to come along with us. It is a dream, but nothing more.

I think the real idea behind decentralization should be thought of a devolution of governmental powers downwards, so that fiscal imbalances between municipalities/regions, provinces (mega regions), and the federal state are resolved and programs can be implemented at the micro, rather than macro stage.

Homelessness, unemployment, welfare, those are problems that municipalities have to deal with, but the spending powers are split between the federal and provincial governments. The idea of regional equality fails to deal with the fact that each province and region faces unique issues. Having one national unemployment program that tries to apply the same solutions to East Coast Fisheries, Ontarios manufacturing sector, Quebec's agricultural, the Prairies graineries, Albertas cattle, and BC forestry problems is fairly ineffective.

As a whole, one government dealing with a country spanning the second largest land mass and with initiatives coming solely from the office of the PMO, is not as suited to deal with social issues and microeconomic issues to the same extent that the lesser levels of government do. And have their hand tied.

This debate is an social-anarchist/libertarian versus communist/fascist debate. One side wants to deal with problems at a local level, and one at a macro level. Decentralizing does not mean free market, laissez faire, no more values, it means working to dissolve the all powerful nationstate. Decentralization also does not inherently mean no redistribution of wealth, but it means that wealth is redistributed with less strings attached, allowing regions to better adopt to prosperity and poverty, rather than waiting for the federal government to open its purse each time a problem arises.

I like the term "Deep Democracy", Peter Dimitrov...with emphasis on the adjective deep.... which must sound pretty threatening to all those neo-cons out there, in more ways than one. :-)

How can sovereignty not be the main issue for our country? Along with its loss goes the loss of all our human rights and freedoms.

I have not read very much of Noam Chomsky but in this article by him, I think he brings up a salient point as to how the marketplace mentality and the god of advertising, has cleverly engineered the selling of our souls... along with the selling off our country... chiseling away at our sovereignty to the point of no return. Chomsky writes:

"In the 20th century, the literature of the public relations industry provides a very rich and instructive store of instruction on how to instill the "new spirit of the age" by creating artificial wants or by "regimenting the public mind just as an army regiments the bodies of its soldiers," and inducing a "philosophy of futility" and lack of purpose in life by concentrating human attention on "the more superficial things that comprise much of fashionable consumption." If that can be done then people will accept the meaningless and subordinate lives that are appropriate for them and they'll forget subversive ideas about taking control of their own lives.

This is major social engineering project. It's been going on for centuries. But it became intense and enormous in the last century."

It's why I liked the use of your word "deep", Peter, although I know you were using it in a different context - as a democratically-immersed, opposing force to Deep Integration.

Still, the meaning of our lives is important, central to this debate I would even venture to say, and the superficiality that market economics has darkly cultured is playing a big part in where the attention of the public is being directed... and the resulting depth of their understanding of what is really at risk here.

We are being tamed stroke by stroke to behave.

The noise and the revolt against this increasingly superficial, dead, world really has to come from us... because as Coyote suggests the politicians are pretty well all in the same boat playing a safe game of wink, wink and nod among themselves. No wave action allowed.

In our current federal election, the conservatives (one of the remnants of reform era, unlike some of there other social conservative platform), are pushing this, but it doesn't mean that decentralization only belongs to the right of the political spectrum. Any polisci test book will lay out the spectrum as having a left, a right, and then an up (big gov't), and down, small decentralized government, If you think about the problems with social housing in Vancouver, and look at funds being provided directly to city hall rather than having three layers of gov't grabbing away at federal funding and rows on rows of conditions on it, you would see a much more effective use of funds if discretion was made here rather than 6000K away.

The idea that Ottawa knows best is grossly misrepresented. It is the municiplaities and the provinces that have to deal with the real problems and they are in much better shape to solve this. But they can't rely on property taxes alone to supply modern services. They need access to the income and commodity taxes which revenues are going to be spend in their backyard anyways.

For those who have major problems with things such as the RAV line, you have to look at the resoning behind the decision. Ottawa was handing out money, and it had to be spent or it would be taken away. This happens time and again, with a take it or leave it approach to politics.

Always fine to read ya, good woman. You have the capacity for giving a very particular twist to your take on things, that is quite unique, which I envy in an admiring, not negative way. Perhaps it is simply a "feminine" thing, I don't know. But it also has an enlightening "cut" to it.

It works.

A few posts ago, Peter wrote: " This issue of sovereignty is THE primary issue facing Canada as it enters this century - to be, or not to be, a sovereign nation"

And while agree with much of what Peter has to say about redrawing our internal institution, I think the idea of Canadian soveriegnty seems to much to be based on only a US versus Canadian vision. While they are our most prominent relation on the global scene, the next century is not about the nation state but is about the international coalition.

The uniting of Europe, the rise of China, fundamental changes in Africa and southern America are the real problems of this millenium, and are much greater than squabling over the 49th parallel. Since the end of the cold war, this world is no longer divided into military superpowers (even if american militarism still dominates) While we must protect our soverienty, it is not to create an opposition to the US, but rather to use our presence on the international scene (blessed through geography and resources, not through population or economy along) and in relationship to the states to move away from the all powerful nation state, and to rather create a regional coalition that highlights the values that we see the world wanting to adopt.

International alliances combined with the devolution of the nation state as well as most governmental powers is what the next 100 years need. We need to be able to show redistribution working with as little centralization as possible, as centralization only leads to greed and power struggles.

Dangrice wrote,

There is a difference between the money coming from 6000 (actually 4600) and where the decisions to spend it are made. The flight from Ottawa to Vancouver is so short now, it is not like we have to wait for the PM to come and visit by train. In this day of communications, fixating on distances is so old fashioned.

Having municipalities making all the decisions is such a simplistic solution. Think about the battles over the years that the residents of EastVan have had with the Westside residents.

Again this is misleading crazy-talk. The vast majority of Canadians live within biking distance of the United States. Geography is such a red-herring.

Decentralization creates power struggles. How many leaders do we need? Let’s look at a micro level even… Add up how many city councilors there are in Vancouver, Burnaby, and New Westminster… no wonder there is such animosity during civic elections!

Lynn and Coyote,

The problem with this "Deep Democracy" idea is that it is so esoteric. I tried reading about it and lost interest. Now, you may call me shallow, but if I, a person with an interest in politics and change am not willing to research it, how is it going to be packaged for the masses? And face it, most people are not interested in politics unless their interests appear to be immediately threatened.

The Chomskys of the world are great, but their messages are only directly read by a few. We do have the Bill Mahers and the Jon Stewarts, but they are viewed as comedians. The Naomi Kleins (though good reading) simply point out the obvious.

What neo-conservatives do well is appeal to emotion and the immediate needs of the individual, and not bring attention to someone else’s plight.

A vote for the Liberals is a vote for corruption.

How much more are you going to take?

Vote for anyone but the Liberals and turf these thieving scumbags.

Hi Moat,

While distance doesn't mean anything as far as time and communication, it does have a lot to do with the issues that affect the people in the areas. IF you look at the industries, the demographics, the income levels, proximinity to US cities, resource base, you'll see very little similarities between Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Quebec City.. etc. For all general purposes, you will likely find that many aspect of life in Vancouver would be much closer to that of Seattle than that Toronto. There are common elements of Canadian culture, but we are not a homogenous lot. And the issues that face us our not homogenous. A bureacrat in Ottawa is not going to address problems in the downtown east side, any more than I'm going to come up with a plan for problems in Quebec City. The closer you are to an issue, the better you will understand it.

Unless you have some plan to abolish existing levels of government. None. We already have power struggles because our existing governments do not know how to respect the constitutional boundaries set out for them. Violating them with the POGG clasue.

Should we move control of traffic systems to Ottawa. How about community parks? Business licenses? Surely, we don't need local government. We already have this, and we know that local governments can deliver them much better than someone else would.

The question is not decentralization for decentralization sake, but re-examining the services offered by the government and saying at which level can it most effectively by delivered at. I mean, look, we elect members to serve on School Boards, even while education is a provincial jurisdiction. Would you think we should eliminate regional health and school boards and place them all in Victoria.

Certainly, there is electoral reform going along. We got to dump pluralities, and leader centric systems, and move to system where our local representatives and not Premiers, and PMs wield all the power. I personally prefer the way that CIty councils works to anything in Ottawa. Besides the West East split caused by either at large or wards, at least City council hears the public, at least council has the balls to vote against the Mayors, even if they are higly limitted due to funding constraints.

Instead, we get election promises to spend billions on things, for the sake of winning votes. We get no action, we don't get solutions that meet the problem, all we get are promises, and less $$ on our paychecks, more debt, and more useless registries, golf courses, and sponsorship scams. Replacing one evil with another in this election won't solve anything. Replacing one evil with a lesser evil will.

If Mr. Mair really believes that the Confederation arrangement of 1867 is what the Quebecois are chafing under, he's going to have to explain why that same document reserved all important rights to the provinces, and created a federal government whose functions were little more than residual. It's the intrusive expansion of the federal government into areas of provincial jurisdiction which is more likely the irritant.

Mr.Coyote, I am disappointed in you. You want to use some useless Yahoo link to discredit my claim that everyone was calling for an investigation of this "TRUSTCAM".
I rest my case. You are getting desperate my friend.
The fact is that you are now , without knowing it, supporting my cause.
And that cause is to point out the Liberal Party ( lie-baral party ( it's the charter stupid } what a con, is our worst enemy.
You were sucked into my point. I cannot see a way out for you. I don't know whwre you are coming from ???? but I appreciate you supporting the witch hunt.

Percy writes:

Which is why the pressure for return of those powers to the provinces will continue. The problem is that the massive money eating machine in Ottawa (conrolled in the star-chamber called PMO) will not release its hostages. The populace will continue to have its collective pocket picked to feed the money-eating machine until one or more of them stand up to that machine and fight back; or worse for those whom remain - the most elusive of them dissapear from the money-eating machine's view.

Stuart
Your response is typical, your plan was to leave a dictator in power that had already attacked 3 regional neighbours and committed genocide on his own people, excellent plan I must say.

I had said that Sharon had been critizced for allowing an ally to commit a crime, not for actually committing the crime, which the link you provided substantiated that. I added comments that Sharon was likely playing general and not being a Minister of Defence and paying attention to the political issues rather than tactical.

The US were never “Allies” with Iraq, they had agreements and some common interests and they both used each other. Saddam was a Nationalist and saw the US as a tool to achieve his own ends, the US did the same. The term “Allies” would be better used to describe the US relationship with UK or Canada

Colin, don't waste your breath on Stuart, a jew / american hating dickhead like him cannot logically determine what is real or a fantasy.
He actually thinks socialism is the path to happiness.
It's so sad that mental affliction is eating his brain.
Maybe he is wearing a brown shirt, hey Coyote ?
Coyote likes to dress me up in brown shirts. What an idiot, what a racist.

I certainly agree with Rafe Mair - even though he is no fan of Trudeau - who, in my opinion, was probably one of the best prime ministers our nation has ever produced. I say this knowing full well that he did not have Canada's financial house in order. He DID, however, have the continuing Quebec 'problem' analysed better than most.
Mulroney was a disaster - and Harper looks like he could easily follow in those footsteps....

[/B]It was clear at the time of the Constitutional debates in Charlottetown and Quebec City in 1864 that Quebec was not like other provinces but that she would come into Confederation on the same basis as the other three provinces and those to come.[B]

By your lapse in memory, Rafe.., you do every reader in this column certain irreparable harm..

Indeed.., what you seem to disallow is the 300 years that preceded the beginnings of the CANADA you seem to want to only remember *...

The very roots of our beginning as a Nation started long long time ago.., way before the 1867 historical benchmark you refer to...,

Indeed.., were it not for LES CANADIENS.*... along with British Military Governors of the day... ( MURRAY in particular ) circa 1759-1760 *... to the 1763 culmination of that process..., ( and of course we must not forget the contribution of the AMERICAINS to the south who , by 1775-76 were to rise up and create conditions that made the British
`enlightened`..., and what can we say also of the 1755 deportation of Acadians... that clearly was to have an impact on the fate , not only of America itself.., but Canada... *
These are the underpinnings that need to be addressed when attempting to discuss the very idea of Nations...,

That Canada Sir..., needs to be better understood..., in her 450 years in the making!!

How else to explain away the enduring existence of the Montreal Canadiens*...., and
LES HABITANTS..*.. ( THE HABS...)..within our vernacular.. Be it in the french language or English language .., Hockey does indeed provide a clue to our earliest of beginnings as a Nation..

. Indeed..., in a Province speaking of Sovereignty ... yet keeping the ICON vestiges of the very first European Canada...,

Of forest and trees... mr. mair.., you are indeed in need of EXPERIENCING THE VERY ROOTS OF CANADA...and perhaps , then and only then will you relent in your tales of a CANADA that never existed to begin with but in the fabrications of your unique brilliant yet eclectic mind *..

commentor: rafeposted: (3 Days Ago)
All the history Villager recounts may be true but the heirs to all that history gathered in Charlottetown and Quebec City in 1864 and they made a deal ... and the deal was not Two Founding nations but one federation which contemplated not just Canada as it then was, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick but Prince Edward's Island, Newfoundland and British Columbia as well. I don't believe any of the last three but especially BC would have joined Canada if it was constituted as two founding nations and appendages....

.Where to begin... ? .. Much like history itself., the reaction one gets when attempting to get at the ROOTS of any given story.., or in attempting to explore and discover the beginnings themselves.., brings to the surface the varying points of views that are much in evidence in the responses I`ve gotten so far on the comments I made on the search for a common ground explanation of our beginnings as a NATION..

CANADA.., has grown from many incremental steps and processes.., - none as significant as when it began it`s
gestation period, in the very minds of the settlers that saw and experienced within these lands a future *..- a future the settler began to call CANADA - and an identity also that he/she adopted whole heartedly.., and thus LE CANADIEN/ LA CANADIENNE and the very beginnings of CANADA as an idea , as a homeland , as a NATION , as an IDENTITY began to take hold . And this at it`s very beginnings.. ! ..some 450 years plus ago

The very idea and experience thusly of what it could mean to belong to a new homeland began to take hold deeply within the very settlers that were to till the soil and find a way to live off the land , all the while depending on the First Nations for an innate and imbedded intelligence of the land they came to.. !!

( to be continued )..

( continued from previous post )

This Canada* ( THE WORD ),used by Jacques Cartier to name and identify a territory and eventually coded and mapped for European and World consumption eventually as a way to communicate this NEWOLD found land . CANADA, (the word) was adopted eventually by the settlers as a symbol of their new beginnings , in a new land.., and this fact is not to be denied..( it goes to the very ROOTS of the Word CANADA and how we even pronounce to this very day*... CANADA EH!.. , YOU KNOW .., WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THAT THE LETTER A IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE PRONOUNCED THE WAY WE END THE SOUND OF THE LAST LETTER IN THE WORD CANADA *? .. JUST THINK ABOUT THIS AND YOU WILL REALISE THE VERY ROOTS OF THE CANADA NATION BUILDING IDEA AND PROCESS I`M THINKING OF.. ,and furthermore needs to be fully and deeply understood , for it ran through the veins of these settlers..., as powerfully as did the independence dream of the gradually transformed settler to the South of this territory ,

[Hence our ROOTS and beginnings are critical and vital to our understanding of our character and makeup... for indeed , LES CANADIENS AND THEIR EXISTENCE as a people.., stand there , as a reminder of our very beginnings..
And this historical fact needs to not only be acknowledged but fully grasped and understood.. , for it is what runs through our veins ( indivually or collectively - wether we are aware of it or not ).., and helps explain away our `dna`..... .

( to be continued )

The Genome type Historical story telling Project I am suggesting -which could identify all of the strands of our dna/identity ...,- is a way to stress that at the very core building block of what makes Canada CANADA... one cannot ignore this vital coded information ,a genetic code that - though out of sight and out of mind for most.., - still remains the key building block that can explain away our IDENTITY...,

The European Centric aspect of this identity unfortunately is the Canada that- on the surface- we are experiencing , in this day and age.., but underneath that thin surface.., can be experienced all of the contributors of what makes this unique entity.. what it is..,

From First Nations , to LES CANADIENS, and MÉTIS .., along with the BRITISH , and the AMERICAINS..,and obviously , though in lesser numbers.., the eternal flow and arrival of people`s from all of the cultures of the world..., engaged in a world experiment*..,
of unparallel scale and proportion....This is the CANADA we are made up of..., a works in progress, yet a works and a people at this juncture that is seriously in danger of existence .. of forgetting also the very fabric and nature and character of it`s original pioneers.. ( in danger also of forgetting THE STORIES ...,THAT COULD REINFORCE OUR STARTING POINT AS A NATION),..

It remains for all of us , who are the 21st Century Settlers of the Nation of Canada to take up our role.. by firstly seeking out the individual and collective memories that have been handed down.., ( indeed , a good place to start would be to start at the very beginning !).. and looking at our National Archives would be a good start , along with , [B]and this is a must..,-within the archives of the very first Canada itself.-. These Archives , for the most part, are written in the the language of the first european settler who gradually came to see himself or herself as CANADIEN ..*.., These ARCHIVES holds the documents of that earliest of the many CANADA`S we`ve come to experience in our lives..* and they cover some 450 years!

The only problem I see Rafe..,- in our challenge for the future - is how to arrive at an agreement in principle to seek out a STARTING POINT for our story telling.. , as to when CANADA actually began in the `New World `.., a beginning that was to create the conditions and strands and the genetic code of our ... DNA.., ( of our identity )...,

Can we begin at the beginning Rafe?..., and from there make our way to these later dates you refer to ?..., ( With this approach , we will be able to provide for each other some clear framework and benchmark.., which also for the readers of the Tyee.., will provide clear MAPS ,. HENCE WITH COMPASS AND SEXTANT IN HAND - having the instruments and the guide posts ..within our reach.. ( think stars ,and think of once upon a time , at the very beginning , as explorers sailed the vast oceans.. ) Indeed think of vast notions also.. - such as the very notion of CANADA.. -
WE CAN ,IN THIS WAY, ONCE AGAIN BEGIN THE EXPLORATION.

How would you begin the story of CANADA! ..
Would that beginning framework provide the foundation of a story that would not only provide clarity to a stranger but to all canadians that now inhabit this vast land ?

I feel that Village has gone a little overboard in his comments - in fact reading his contribution makes my eyes glaze over.

As far back as John A. MacDonald, Prime Ministers have been addressing problems of separatism. In his day it was not Quebec. I believe it was Nova Scotia.

Unfortunately, now we, outside of Quebec, are held hostage by Quebec - certainly in our choice of prime minister. A Harper win would expedite a separatist vote....that is, if any voter were idiot enough to vote for his party.

Quite frankly I think separatism is inevitable. If Quebec separated the only change for the following few years would be choosing our athletes for Olympic competition. And maybe we'd all be better off.

Well, you're ahead of me, Moat, because I thought Peter had coined the term, "Deep Democracy". :-) I hadn't heard of it before but googled it after I read your comment.

I think I'll stick with Peter's and Coyote's similar visions which are about putting the power of decision-making back in the hands of the people.

I think you raise a good point, Moat... that the simplistic black and white world view of the neo-cons has been made very palatable to those who wish to partake in it, partly due to the unquestioning nature and the love for authority itself that is embedded in that world view.

The left has a much harder road to travel, due in part to the rag-taggle nature of all our human lives - by that I mean that life is complex, far from perfect, and addressing social issues often involves a complexity... and a multiplicity of approaches that a more simplistic outlook has little time or compassion for.

It seems to me there are two very different psychologies going on, right down to the personal level between these two world views...and regimentation and love of authority and predictability, (all necessary elements of the marketplace) are definitely part of the neo-con psyche.

It is why I included Chomsky's quote, even though I'm a little reticent to even include it because he is so often referred to...his point being that the superficiality of consumerism is actually producing a regimentation and a taming of the human spirit that is playing right into the authoritarian hands of the neo-cons.

It is making us all more regimented and more fearful.

The meaningless lives created by this worship of things, has diverted attention away from the ability to control our own lives, in fact made us fearful of change... as well as keeping us very busy working to pay for all those meaningless things.

And how is this related to sovereignty? Because if we are losing sovereignty over our own lives...if our own personal lives are no longer in our own control, how can we even begin to take on this challenge?

Superficial, tamed lives will not take on the subversive actions necessary for change. This is where I think Chomsky is right on the money. This will be like waking the blissed-out bear of consumerism out of his cozy hibernating sleep before he is ready to wake from his slumber. It's going to take quite a jolt...but a jolt that may very well happen.

And thanks, Coyote, ... though I think I just went out on another oblique tangent...ahhh, got to learn to rein myself in more. :-) A very Happy New Year to you...

And to all the great people that write on this site.

It's a sad commentary on American society and US mainstream media, Lynn, that Prof. Chomsky is essentially persona non grata in his own country.

The media broadcasts a constant parade of liars
across the PUBLIC airwaves, while banning one of the most important and best informed American consciences.

The uncomfortable facts about the history of US foreign policy alone that Chomsky can articulately lay out ,
are perhaps more than the patriotic American public can bear - or so the media thinks!

...On the debate, or perhaps "exposure of Erwin's falsehoods" is a better term - re. the RCMP royalty trust leak investigation of Goodale's office. The NDP deserves praise for
bringing it to the RCMP as a complaint, but I believe some others deserve credit too : those who told the NDP.

I saw forensic accountant Al Rosen speaking out about it on ROBTV
the day of the announcement of the new rules affecting dividend paying stocks and trusts.
This would have been the day after the mysterious trades. Rosen stated the pattern of
huge sudden volume buying of affected stocks after 2:30 p.m. the day before the gov't announcement, left no doubt in his mind that
there had been tip off to well positioned Bay Street players, and that
it needed to be seriously investigated by the RCMP and the OSC. I believe it's likely the NDP were tipped. so to speak, by Rosen. Perhaps Rosen even preferred that the NDP be the ones to officially complain, because it would generate more media attention and put more pressure on the gov't and the RCMP, especially in the middle of an election.

Al Rosen is dogged advocate for improving a Cdn system that is in his view appallingly lax on investigating and prosecuting white collar crime. His Rosen & Associates regularly finds cases of cooked books and apparent crooked dealings by co. insiders.
But when he takes such cases to the OSC or the RCMP they almost never follow up by investigating!

Listening to him, it's easy to believe that while the US has begun to take corporate crime seriously the last few years, Canada drags its feet. I believe corporate crime is as ingrained here as in the US but our system still tolerates it while the US system is not so tolerant now.Who charged Conrad Black? Not our RCMP!

I applaud ROBTV for having Mr. Rosen on semi-regularly as a guest who is helping educate the public about the real deficiencies of our system and the seriousness of the corporate crime problem here.In contrast, The US equivalents of ROBTV, ie. CNBC or Bloomberg, never have guys like Rosen on.

The latest I hear is, the PMO's office has not been ruled out as the leak source, and will be investigated if evidence points in that direction.

...I echo Lynn and wish everyone who's a Tyee
person a Happy New Year.

while Moat may have googled "deep democracy"...and found various references leading to USA...I want to say that I did indeed coin that 'phrase' within the Canadian context...during a discussion several years ago...about the 'deep integration' threat to Canadian sovereignty..I did come up with the phrase 'deep democracy'...and defined it within the Canadian context. At that time I was not aware that some Americans had also used that phrase' deep democracy'...but - to allude to a different meaning that how I defined and articulated it. As an aside, once upon a time the Cartesion maps defined our image of the world and of countrys, and how we perceived ourselves in relationship....and of course those maps, were highly in accurate, distorted, and in fact did not at all accurately reflect the reality of place...Never was the phrase 'the map is not the territory' more vividly revealed to me...but when I was a director of a community mapping project for a society of indigenous peoples in Northern Canada. Their maps of their territory were full of important details respecting their economy, heritage & cultural sites, vital areas for various species of animals & birds, berries, fire-wood harvesting, fishing - etc...while the Cartesian map of North Canada...showed...such a vast and seemingly unused emptiness...and there could be nothing further then the truth. Thus, Google is not a map for the territory of 'deep integration' within the Canadian context...sorry to say Moat.

Wishing everyone a happy new year - and hopefully the comments about who the hell coined the phrase deep democracy etc. will subside and we can get on with what is happening in the real world.
Go, Canadian Junior Hockey team, go!!!!!!

Speaking of `deep integration`.., It is clear that most CANADIANS are inundated by `VOICES`
for the most part that are not from WITHIN.. rather : as the choices on magazine stands and on the AIRWAVES demonstrate, as with the CINEMA screens -FOREIGN owned and controlled.., leaving us with little memory capacity to think canada, to think of our identity , to in effect awaken to our distinct
and very unique journey as a Nation.., if only we could get some solid bearing and footing on our very beginnings !!

A first step of realisation re; the little we actually know of this country, should be a clear indicatort to all of us , of our vulnerable position when it comes to THINKING CANADA itself!
( manufacturing consent anyone ? )

Thus it is fair to say that our mental maps .. of who we are , or even how we arrive at communicating who we really are , is totally inundated/layered by `other voices`.., residing within our collective mindscape*

No wonder an astute observer pointed out to the conundrum and quandary of CANADA`S survival strategy ...which he described as `staying out of sight and out of mind ` as to how to deal with the GREAT COMMUNICATIONS JUGGERNAUT to the South of us...,

The parallel communications strategy called for now , is to be able to take up that precious time allotted by the stated strategy above. To, in effect, work at and MINE with the individual and `the collective`- a clear understanding of how we came to be.. ( A SENSE OF PLACE , A SENSE OF BELONGING AND A SENSE OF IDENTITY ) usually re-inforced with MENTAL MAPS OF our House of Canada !!

Meaning that all of us who happen to be CANADIAN 21st Century Settlers and emerging MIND CARTOGRAPHERS , that we can eventually provide a common understanding of our beginnings.

And create , by this strategy a benchmark of a National understanding. We also need to create along the way the ( story ) INSTRUMENTS and the ( measurement )TOOLS that will see us all become surveyors in search of new stories that will invariably help us in creating COMMUNICATIONS MAPS..

(Stories , really ),of a CANADA which resides very deep within our individual and collective psyche.. - we are after all the closest , to that ground reality - and it is ours to communicate!

We need to take up a technology that our earliest of human settlers ( first nations ) used when wanting to tell their stories , as by drawing on the very soil that we travel on.

Bob999 writes:

This is because of the Liberal continuity in governance that has seen the 'public' service become highly politicized. The worst of this came in 1968, with the Military Chief of Staff becoming a political appointee, then followed in 1973 with the RCMP Chief Constable becoming appointed by the same PMO. The morale drop among the rank and file serving members in both cases was measurable. Now those decisions are really starting to have greater impact.

I repeat again

[B]NO RCMP INVESTIGATION WILL EVER FIND A PROBLEM WITH ANY LIBERAL SERVING POLITICIAN./B]

If it is some sort of justice that you are seeking then the current Government, the Liberal Party of Canada as it is currently constituted and the current ADM's in all offices of the Canadian Government must be removed. Without these actions there will not be any action taken whatsoever.

Bobb999 continues:

While I am hopeful that such a statement, if true, will finally stick to the teflon man PMPM. I am not going to 'bet the farm' on that outcome.

Much of the Prime Ministers police force wants to have the freedom of action they had until the 1980's. This was all lost with the connection to Treasury Board and the appointment of the Senior Constable in the RCMP by the Prime Minister, since the 1990's these senior ADM's (that is their actual position title Assistant Deputy Ministers) have been unable to effective 'investigate' anything.

So now that 'officially' there are no ministers, nor active bureaucracies operating (during the election) these officers can finnaly DO SOMETHING. The only problem is, what if the Canadian sheep, umm public, re-elect the same Liberal government? With no protection those same officers that are now free to start actually investigating will be fired (or just moved off to Tuktuyuktuk).

Once again this is just another symptom of the dirty tricks squad that we have had for a Government and Bureaucracy for the past 10 years. The only way out, the only way out is to vote for anyone else BUT a Liberal!

If the federal Liberal Party of Canada is reduced to no seats in the House of Commons, and gets a low enough % in the total polling they do not even get that stupid $2 per vote that we are doing in this insane-system.

If you really want justice you must wash the Liberals out of office into the political wilderness and see that they stay there for at least a decade.

And when the GROUND is frozen..., we can , as we do , enjoy a FIRST NATIONS game created on ice.. to which le CANADIEN ( in a very distant time and memory ) adopted and in succession ( the works in progress ) THE CANADIAN took to , with great love and fascination *..

Hence out of that wonderful frozen canvas, we`ve become great at celebrating our national game ...,and indeed remains one the very unique roots and lasting indicators of our national identity !

However that very first Canada did not have the west coast within it`s bosom and could not imagine HAIDA ART for instance..., and yet ,and yet, it was here , out west that the 2010 Olympics rightfully chose the INUKSUK as a standard bearer and communication icon for the games that will see this province (BC).. step up to the plate..,

I predict that as this most western province of the 21st Century version of CANADA involves itself more intimately with the CANADA of old.. that a giant will emerge - A COMMUNICATIONS GIANT at that.., as he/she of British Columbia.., begin the exploration and discovery of the land that we are gradually reconnecting to.., ( having been separated for so many centuries by the sheer scale and size of the rocky mountains, we are now as outsiders withinthe CANADA we`ve inhabited since 1871[B , ready to take up the challenge of scale, scope and dimension and identity of such a grand experiment as this country has become. And furthermore ,we are well suited for the role we are called upon to play.. -having inherited no preconceived idea really ..,- of that other Canada. WATCH THE RESULTS OF THE JANUARY 23rd ELECTIONS , AND YOU WILL GRASP THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE WORDS .

We are a virgin canvas..,for the most part unaware of the other canada over the mountains.. HENCE WE CAN GO ABOUT AS 21ST CENTURY COMMUNICATIONS ARTISTS DEPICTING THE VASTNESS OF THIS LAND.., DEPICTING ALSO IT`S JOURNEY IN HOLISTIC AND GROUNDED REALITY* and we do seem to get it !!! You know! , the big picture of Canada itself..,is what I`m getting at. We are attached to a grand experiment and we simply need to better understand our very own unique experience as ..., for instance , where we got the name BRITISH COLUMBIA to begin with !!!! ?

WHAT SAY YE..., ( THOSE WHO ARE OF THE COLUMBIAN REGION.., THAT PART OF THE REGION REMAINING BRITISH while other parts joined the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , as many other part of the COLUMBIAN REGION DID !! ) .. Simply journey down as far as Vancouver , in the State of Washington ,then over the COLUMBIA river to PORTLAND to realise the immense region we were all part of... ONCE UPON A TIME.., ( In telling our stories this historical fact cannot be simply ignored as to this province`s beginnings ).. Even Captain Vancouver stands there in VANCOUVER , Washington ,as a reminder of that unique era of Explorers and Discoverers and the FUR TRADE that followed on it`s footsteps.., FORTS AND ALL..

OUR ANCESTORS MADE A CHOICE THEN , AND WE WILL INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY ONCE AGAIN MAKE A CLEAR DECISION TO STAY PART OF A GRAND EXPERIMENT *

AS to the role played by EXPLORERS and DISCOVERERS ..[/B] yes LES CANADIENS themselves..,[B]

You guessed it..!! , they were the backbone of the Europeans opening up this vast domain..,playing a critical role in the fur trade of the day ( helped clearly by the First Nations intelligence of the land , of their intimate knowledge of the animals ,and of the technology they developed.. THE CANOE*..,)

and so , YES , MAPS, as you can imagine , played a vital role in the communicating of this land.., and will remain as a mental tool for imagining our homeland called British Columbia , our greater homeland called CANADA !

Could Canada exist without Quebec? Yes, under the following conditions:

1. The seats in both houses of Canada’s parliament need to be redistributed fairly. The House of Commons needs to have its seats apportioned among the provinces fairly strictly by population. The Senate needs to have its seats either distributed equally or equitably among the provinces and territories. (I’ll present the equitable model based on the square roots of the populations of the provinces/territories.)

2. Canadians need to vote by proportional representation. There are many different methods. Essentially, a party that receives 40% of the vote in a particular province should get 40% of the seats in that same province.

3. For the Senate, I would reduce the eligibility age to 18. Don’t expect a mad rush of 18 year olds trying to enter the Senate. Eighteen year-olds are adults and they deserve to be treated as adults. I would also get rid of the minimum $4,000 property requirement.

Canada could have a parliament unique in the world where the members of the House of Commons would serve two functions when voting: deciding as individual MPs and tabulating results by provinces/territories. A bill could pass in one of two ways: 1) A majority of MPs in the House of Commons supporting the bill over those opposed AND representing a majority of provinces/territories over those opposed. (Ties or no votes would count neither in the affirmative nor negative.) 2) A majority of MPs supporting the bill over those opposed AND a majority of Senators. This way the House of Commons would still maintain the function as the primary legislative body while the Senate could be used as the house of “sober second thought.”

I did a quick calculation of seats in a new House of Commons and Senate and did the distribution of seats for each of the major parties. There were a few things I noticed: 1) There is little difference in percentage of seats given to parties in the House of Commons compared to the Senate. 2) Under coalition governments, bills could easily receive broad support of the MPs and Senators based on population and “regional” status. 3) Don’t expect the Senate to be the “Alberta” Senate. An Alberta Senate could be perceived as being highly conservative compared to a liberal House of Commons. In fact, the Liberal Party could gain greater support in a new Senate with the ample support of the population living in the smaller provinces and territories in Atlantic Canada, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and the north.

Non-monetary bills could still be introduced in a newly elected Senate by Senators who wish to present a regional viewpoint. With broad coalition support, a Senate bill may eventually pass in the House of Commons.

Here are my distribution of seats in the House of Commons and Senate:

House of Commons: Total 236

NL 5, PE 2, NS 9, NB 8, ON 117, MB 12, SK 10, AB 30, BC, 40, YT 1, NWT 1, NU 1.

Senate: Total 100 (Based on square roots of populations)

NL 6, PE 3, NS 8, NB 7, ON 26, MB 8, SK 8, AB 13, BC 15, YT 2, NWT 2, NU 2.

Atlantic Canada 24, Ontario 26, Four western provinces 44, north 6.

Could Canada exist without Quebec? We Canadians may have no choice but to prepare ourselves in case Quebeckers decide to vote “Yes” in another referendum. As a Canadian living outside Quebec, I would rather be pro-active than re-active in case Quebec decides to separate from Canada. This is why I have presented my proposal to all you readers.

First guest on CKNW's Peter Warren show today is Ralph Goodale. As we speak he has been on for over 20 minutes.
This is unprecedented. It must be a sign of extreme damage control. He refuses ro resign, I remember a cabinet minister in the Mulroney govt. resigning for being caught in a strip club in Germany.
Nobody resigns in this Liberal govt. inspite of HRDC ( Jane Stewart should have resigned ) and ADSCAM.
But then why should we be surprised, ever heard of the head of a Hells Angels chapter resigning ?

Hey Village, If you check out the Royal Bank logo, which hs been around as long as Canada, You will see a definate Haida influence in the lion's design.

Murdock:

Guite and Gagliano have been criminally charged
over Adscam...but of course they happen to be Chretienite Libs, not Martinites!

So, the theory you espouse about the RCMP not charging Liberals apparently still applies, with the exception of the out caste Chretienites. If you're a Martini, you're still safe!

Cronyism and political appointments is a scourge of the Bush admin, and, as you point out, a problem in Cda. as well.

From an outside looking in point of view I find slim`s comments interesting , and worthy of exploration .., especially if one factors in the COMMUNICATIONS JUGGERNAUT to the South creating as it does what would become a fragmented notion of a country with the scenario that he is considering*...,

THE BETTER PRO-ACTIVE APPROACH,IN MY EYES , WOULD BE TO TACKLE HEAD ON THE VERY REASONS FOR THE FRAGMENTED MIND OF CANADA AS IT EXIST TODAY...

We`re talking of an occupied mind here .., when we realise the omnipresence of outside `VOICES`that continuously creates chatter inside of our individual and collective MINDS..*.... indeed , we are rather like the patient that is recovering from an onslaught of COMMUNICATIONS, NETS REALLY ... - caught as we are like fish...-, being reeled in , by these vast webs..., ( read airwaves ) , pre-occupying our individual and collective minds - imbedded within our psyche so deeply, that we seem unaware of it`s presence..., - or in our case , so unaware of the absence of our very own unique ability to hear our HOME-GROWN THOUGHT PROCESSES , ( now that`s deep integration,if I`ve ever seen one ), or absence of an integration of identity if you prefer ... whichever scenario you care to consider !

Within that context ,the very approach you offer up as a pro-active stance on the founding nation conundrum and dilemma stems not from your lack of communicating per se..but from your unconscious need to create an outcome.., ( since the void you experience , within your own individual mind - as far as the certainty of knowing who you are - is hampering your powers of reasoning and creating in you ..., a way out of the empty feeling.., A SORT OF JUMPING OUT OF THE PAN ..INTO THE FIRE kind of experience , if you get the drift of my meaning..*

I do not mean to belittle you slim *.. but I want to simply point out that the conclusion you arrive at stems from that void.., of being able to come up with the reasons why we are , indeed , faced with a founding nation`s need to separate from it`s very own creation !!!!!

QUEBEC roots from LES CANADIENS .., and by that token, is in itself.., as confused as CANADIANS are of the very beginnings of CANADA .. ! For it is clearly the consequence of the manufacturing of histories by ENGLAND and FRANCE.., creating the confusion that resides within and without ....CANADA (indeed !).

Resulting in a vaccum which makes Les Canadiens then ..., as is the canadians today.., devoid of any deep understanding of their fate in a north american frontier and context.!

[B]Be it how they started their experience to what is now what will become of that experience.....

.

Now that is a revealing insight. Life is all in the details...in the details that support and uphold a reverence for life itself...what real civilization is all about.

Happy New Year to you too, Peter.

Dangrice wrote:

I am going to have to respectfully disagree here. As one who have been almost everywhere in this country (except for that Nunavut), I can tell you we are a homogenous lot. Much more than one would think. Globalization has really done wonders in Canada.

Let’s face it, the Canadian Tire store in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan is almost the same style as the one on Lougheed highway in Coquitlam. The Tim Horton’s in Sydney, Nova Scotia, offers the same products as the one in Maple Ridge. The Superstore in Whitehorse is of the same design as the one in Chilliwack. These large corporations are having a great time knowing that we are becoming homogenous. It saves them money.

Interestingly, the only corporation that I know that really takes into account regional differences is McDonald’s. They have this weird McLobster thing in New Brunswick, and poutine in Quebec.

Quebec (and maybe Newfoundland) and the only two provinces that can make a case for distinctness. However, in the case of Quebec, change the language, and Quebec city becomes similar to Halifax (but with cooler old buildings) and Montreal…. well I haven’t spent enough time there.

Yes, I have generalized, but if one spends some time in other communities in Canada, he or she how the differences between us are exaggerated.

As for issues? People complain about the same things across the country.

lynn wrote:

Good point, but remember that the "herd mentality" is not necessarily a bad thing. It is necessary for survival sometimes. For example, if we can all agree that polluting our water sources is wrong, then we can protect it as a “herd” by making laws to protect our drinking water.

The problem is, and you identify it, is when the herd mentality is exploited. We all know how the death penalty is “sold” in the United States.

There are always mistakes when a herd acts unconsciously. Hopefully there will be a few people out there to keep the rest of us away from the cliff!

But I ramble…

Peter wrote:

No, I was not challenging you on whether or not you “coined” the term. I was just describing my quest to discover what “deep democracy” means. Part of any effective discussion is defining common terms.

Good example here. But…you then write...

Ok then, your message is lost. Obviously you post on this board because you embrace the internet in one sense, but then you attack it for not telling the “full” story and presenting “deep integration” within the proper “Canadian context. Either that, or you are frustrated with me for not engaging in “proper” research.

However, your example of mapping and Northern Canada is perfect for illustrating how times have changed.

If you give an person (say a high school student) in Iqaluit and another person in Downtown Toronto an assignment to define “Deep Integration” in 10 minutes, they would most likely follow similar information paths.

Even though the person in Iqaluit and downtown Toronto are essentially worlds apart, they are most likely drawing from the same information sources. They would come to conclusions based on the easily available information.

Like it or not, the Internet is the most efficient line of information. Sitting here, at 2:20 AM, I can find out all the TV and movie work Julia-Louise Dreyfuss has done, the engine sizes of all of the Chevy S-series of trucks, to the smoking habits of Chairman Mao. On a personal level, I can find my work schedule, some stats from my recreational hockey league, and my Sun Run time from several years ago.

But I cannot find “Deep Integration”…

Wrong context? Yeah sure… but why should I care then?

To Peter and Lynn:

The Community Mapping techniques of involving people ( engaging them )in their neighbourhoods. In their Communities ! In their Cities and Villages . Does point to the kind of techniques and tools that are desperately needed . The ability and the familiarity ( The knowledge and Ground Intelligence of our most unique and individual/immediate Human Settlements offer up an opportunity for a new kind of Economy to prevail.).I am reminded of the existence of that group called THE BAREFOOT CARTOGRAPHERS and perhaps Peter was involved with them in his project up North?

And that`s the future kind of Intersocial Communications Exchanges ( ICE for short ) , that offers up a future economy of the imagination of Nations in itself*... if you will. An economy that nature will eventualy harness to the individual`s and collective ability to think and survive! ( one of the greatest abilities that we Homo Sapiens have -inherited through evolution!)

INDEED, THROUGH A PROCESS OF ADAPTATION AND SURVIVAL , THE HUMAN`S ABILITY TO THINK IN Her/His MOST EXTENDED WAYS -speaking of Marshall Mcluhan`s comments on the extensions of our abilities through the technologies we create - (INDEED LANGUAGE BEING A UNIQUE TECHNOLOGICAL ACCOMPLISHEMENT, ENCOMPASSING AN ABILITY AND A TOOL THAT BECAME UNIVERSAL AS WELL AS VERY TAILORED TO THE UNIQUE HUMAN SETTLEMENTS ( READ HABITATS ) THAT APPEARED ON THE EARTH`S LANDSCAPE ...., VIA THE MANY LANGUAGES THAT EMERGED.

BRINGING THIS SOCIAL ANIMAL SPECIES AT THE VERY BRINK OF (* imagining it`s past, present and future).., thus in a stream of consciousness individuals as well as collectives , practised then and still practices today, an art FORM of thinking,( OF DEVINING , they called it ) that goes to the very beginning of time itself.. , and offers up a clue to our mental tools and abilities ... In effect ,what needs now to be harnessed and focussed to the tasks at hand at this moment in time...

We keep hearing of the Creative Classes in today`s evolving Societies .., and it isn`t by accident that the most open and creative Societies are the Societies that are foraging ahead into what might become Human Settlements of the FUTURE!

Hence , with that thought in mind.. , here`s to the potential that CANADA represents.., here`s to all of us who have been given a most bountiful HABITAT *.., within which we can find the time to IMAGINE OUR VERY EXISTENCE!!

Here`s to the very idea of Canada , Here`s to it`s transcending qualities , to it`s communications abilities* ..!!!

Moat , you should care because you display a certain degree of intelligence and you know what they say about context !! ...

IT`S EVERYTHING..,

As to your observations on the ever increasing homogenous aspects of CANADA and the CANADIAN ( as a works in progress ) due to the result of GLOBALISATION .BRILLIANT!!, You hit the nail right on the head with that one and you display the kind of thinking that we need more of...

Take Care , ( I see we made it through another year!)

TO RAFE,

By the way , I did my research , circa 1759-60 and events leading up to 1763 and beyond .. especially leading up to the QUEBEC ACT of 1774.

I would think that the very language that exists in the documents that reflect that period.. be they ordinances or other important petitions and the like .., including the clear documentation of the IMPERIAL GOVERNMENT in ENGLAND..,and it`s deliberations when faced with a crumbling Empire dream of NEW ENGLAND in North America.., to the clear and obvious strategy that was taken at the time to preserve a footing in NORTH AMERICA.. !

Thus I would think that events and decisions made leading up to the 1775-76 events and beyond.., even up to the in house revolutionary events of 1837-38 would also need to be factored in,.. when speaking of the 2nd CANADA you allude to Rafe.

Bringing me back to certain observations I made on the very beginnings of CANADA.., and attempting to determine which of the two CANADA`S that you take into consideration when describing our beginnings as a country and nation..,

These documents I`ve accessed are from hard copy and I doubt that the INTERNET makes this kind of material available yet! ....

for Village,

Your observations and presentation about the past of Canada are interesting, now synthicize from that something to DO about the future for Canada, or parts of it.

My observations about the past of Quebec continue to point to an ever escalating agitation for Independance, and I think that all areas of Canada should be so...the drain on our collective efforts coming from the dead albatross around our necks (in the form of the Governance in Ottawa).

To Murdock,
Obviously the very idea of independence or the more developed `ever escalating agitation for Independence ` implies that the entity considering that `state of mind` or outcome, further implies a deeper sense of IDENTITY then what can be found in the `LAND OF THE MANY CANADA`s..., as I`ve learned to call our fragmented nation ( and fragmented notion ) of who we really are as a NATION..*

When I think of OTTAWA , and it`s role in NATION BUILDING, I see in them the only `big picture ` players in that field of endeavours.., and it is very difficult to think of any of the PROVINCES playing the role that they play... , up there in OTTAWA.*!!!!
(Our very provincial frame of mind proves time and time again that as a NATION, we require a different optic , a different approach when it comes to GOVERNING CANADA !

Indeed , time and time again , OTTAWA has shown itself able to deal with issues of NATIONAL UNITY by creating whatever was needed ... be they Royal Commissions or Political constructs ... - such as convincing the 3 wise men from QUEBEC , to come to OTTAWA in the late 60ies and become involved in the other CANADA*...as are many other decisions taken by Ottawa that was COLLECTIVELY arrived at from that perch..

( Never mistake the fact that PEARSON at that time clearly understood the urgency of the moment in bridging the OLD Canada and The NEW Canada in the making! ( Need I speak of the MAPLE LEAF flag..?) We forget too easily the fact that prior to certain very important decisions that were made , that our colonial identity was indeed very real and in evidence!
( TRY IMAGINING FLYING THE UNION JACK as an independent statement of who we are around the world and you will quickly get the picture I want to convey !! )

Thus , as was the 1982 repatriation of the constitution.., which clearly had to be brought back , if we were ever to get a handle on our collective identity.. - having been in a colonial state of mind , for way too long...!! )

OTTAWA.. ( and by this I mean and I hope we all mean THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA ..,) was also instrumental in getting the RAILROAD BUILT..., connecting the vast dominion of CANADA.... ,and on and on...

( TO BE CONTINUED )

( CONTINUED FROM THE PREVIOUS POST )

SO if you ask me to suggest an approach on what to do.. for the future of Canada or parts of it.. well, then ,I would urge all CANADIANS to do their homework and deal with the fact that they are almost totally ignorant on what makes CANADA what it is today.., let alone having any idea whatsoever on how we GOVERN OURSELVES.., or , as I`ve pointed out in successive postings that we are completely devoid of an understanding of our HISTORY.,*.. thus the work that is demanded of all of us is to get down to the fundamentals and the very ROOTS of CANADA ..., ( FROM THIS AWARENESS AND ACQUIRED KNOWLEDGE , WE WILL GRADUALLY HAVE CITIZENS THAT WILL JOIN THE CREATIVE CLASS OF CANADA .., IN HELPING DEVISE THE NEXT SOLUTION AND COMPROMISE.., SO THAT WE CAN GO ON BUILDING THIS MOST WONDERFUL HUMAN EXPERIMENT.)

So , what is needed? We collectively need an urgent wake up call... and interestingly the very observations you make about the province of Quebec.., as they forever raise the question of identity..., is a reminder that we need to fully grasp and understand that , LE QUÉBÉCOIS after all, roots from LES CANADIENS and not from the FRENCH...,

And this fundamental breakthrough , of realising that the CANADA that even Rafe alludes to at times.. - you know the 1867 construct - can provide to LE QUÉBÉCOIS/LA QUÉBÉCOISE a lesson in history..,

Simply ask yourself who gave the name QUEBEC to that particular province..,and furthermore ask yourself why it is that LE QUÉBÉCOIS/LA QUÉBÉCOISE `ne se souviens plus du Canadien`.. and this will begin for any explorer the long journey to our very ROOTS , that explains away LE CANADA.., (of old..) and THE CANADA ( of new ).

We are , if you will the BRIDGE BUILDERS of
a 21 Century CANADA under construction , and as pioneers , we need to do like our forefathers and mothers.., get down to the task at hand and EXPLORE/DISCOVER this great land..

PIONEERING A MIND OF CANADA ... IS WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT.

IT IS THE ACQUIRING OF AND NURTURING OF A CERTAIN COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE AND ATTACHED IDENTITY* ( AS AN INDIVIDUAL AND COLLECTIVE WORKS IN PROGRESS.. - OUR INTELLIGENCE THAT IS - LEARNING AS WE WILL, FROM THOSE THAT CAME BEFORE US..., THAT WILL SEE US TO THE FUTURE ..., ( A way of thinking - think mind of canada here - that our children and their children`s children will inherit..,

A MIND THAT KNOWS ITSELF ! , each of us needs to get to know that very mind of CANADA which consciously or unconsciously inhabits us...., for we are part of that stream of collective consciousness that makes us who we are.., even if we do not vote.. because in our system of government .., a vote that was not exercised , has simply been given to another who chooses to vote.. !..

So on January 23rd, one thing all readers of the TYEE can do is to ensure that people you know participate in that stream of consciousness.Pooling our minds at the task at hand.. ( involving more CANADIANS in the process itself ). `That`s an immediate must.. as to what can one DO!`