Should Canada Bend Over/Stand Up to America?

[Wilber]

Another case is the legalization of marijuana, a topic which I haven't brought up until now. There are many in Canada who would argue that we should not decriminalize marijuana because it would make the U.S. mad. If decriminalizing marijuana is in the best interest of Canadians, then we should go ahead and do it. We should not let the U.S. dictate laws to a sovereign nation like Canada. I thought it was funny how Mexico decided to decriminalize certain drugs, the U.S. opposed that idea, and Mexico completely backtracked.

The question is whether it is in Canada's interest to make the US mad and if so how mad can you make them before it is no longer in Canada's interest. That has always been the Canadian dilemma but whether we like it or not, it is a real one. We are a sovereign nation but that doesn't mean there won't be consequences to our actions from outside our country.

The US really does not have this one right. My state, New York, "decriminalized" pot back in 1977 or 1978 in exactly the same manner as the previous Liberal bill did. Bush might as well through up a barricade to keep New Yorkers apart from residents of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, Pennsylvania and New Jersey (the states with which it has a border).

I generally support Bush, but for once he is wrong on this one.

I'm not saying Bush is right but Canada is the mouse sleeping with an elephant and keeping that in mind is a reality Canada has always faced when trying to figure out what is in its best interest.

[August1991]

August, is this just another one of your anti-US rants. Please give us all a break, most people have more to do than cry and moan about something we can do noting about. THe reality is that we are tied to the US because of trade...

McQuuen, if you have read some of my other posts, you would notice that I can hardly be described as "anti-American".

Reading this thread, I have the awful impression that posters here have entirely misunderstood my point. Either I'm wrong, or everyone else is. Since I have yet to see an intelligent critique (or even a direct response to my point), I'm inclined to stay with my point.

To anthropomorphize is when someone turns an object or an animal into a human being. Well, Canadians seem to have anthropomorphized a country of 300 million people. English Canadians in particular (and posters in this thread) continue to refer to the US as if it were one (big) person. I suspect that this anthropomorphism is at the heart of English-Canadian identity.

No one seems to be able to fathom that in North America, individuals relate to other individuals. In such relationships, it is impossible to talk about Canadians as small and Americans as Big.

The US military is larger than the Canadian military. Well, so what? The US military is not going to invade Canada.

Microsoft is a big corporation. Well, it's as much a big corporation for John Doe in Detroit as it is for Mary Roe in Regina.

At the government level, if Canada and the US were totalitarian states, then I might be willing to go along with this perception of a small Canada facing a powerful US in government negotiations. But both Canada and the US are federal democracies - we have numerous governments, some small, some large. Both federal governments are hemmed in by all sorts of constraints. In any case, in both countries, individuals possess alot of freedom to do as they please.

What I mean to say here is that to understand Canada-US relations, it is better to think of the relations between hundreds of millions individuals on the North American continent.

For example, some posters have mentioned our trade relationship. Does it make any sense to speak of Mississauga's trade relationship with Toronto? Or Laval's trade relationship with Montreal? Or Sherwood Park's trade relationship with Edmonton? In all these cities, thousands of people go to work/shop in other places every day. The realtionship is evident in the traffic jams.

It is true that the US (and Canadian) federal governments can decide to impose a trade barrier (or make crossing the border difficult). But governments do that kind of thing all the time, usually in response to a lobby group. In Quebec, pharmacies lobbied the government to enforce Sunday closing laws - so that they could face less competition. The harm this causes to Quebecers is as great as the harm caused to Americans because of softwood lumber restrictions. No one would suggest that to remove the Sunday closing laws, we should impose restrictions on overnight parking - as a pressure tactic.

I wonder if both Left and Right have raised the importance of government, and anthropomorphized whole countries, because the thought of facing the world as mere individuals provokes an existential crisis. Everyone has the impression that the government is all powerful and knows about us. Team Canada, right...

[yam]

Of course both the left and right raise the importance of governance. In fact the left focus on government, whole political economic systems both nationally and internationally. This does not necessarily make them anthropomorphic - despite often being used metaphorically to debunk myth.

Perhaps canadians suffer an existential crisis but not particularly for those reasons you have outlined.

Your government is the 'all powerful'. People dont just assume this they see what the US government dictates world wide and they look to history. Are you sure its not you having an existential crisis .

Aferall; it takes the 'individual' citizens to vote the government in. They vote such in because they agree with their agenda dont they?

You could argue that not all vote for lets say . . . Bush. However, it could be argued that you do not have anything ressembling a left wing party. Which again is the mirror to what US citizens demand. On the whole the choice is between center right and the right . . .right?

[non legitimus carborundum]

The problem with this forum is that most posters are informed and reasonably knowledgeable even in cases where I don't agree with their conclusions.

So I just find myself reading, with nothing to add.

[jbg]

The problem with this forum is that most posters are informed and reasonably knowledgeable even in cases where I don't agree with their conclusions.

So I just find myself reading, with nothing to add.

Don't let the b***ards get you down. Thanks.

[Nyx]

Bend over? Well we voted for gay marriage.

Sorry I couldn't resist.

There are definitely some issues we should stand up to the US on. Like softwood lumber and illegal gun trade.

[jbg]

Bend over? Well we voted for gay marriage.

Sorry I couldn't resist.

There are definitely some issues we should stand up to the US on. Like softwood lumber and illegal gun trade.

Yes, Mayor Miller.

[Nyx]

Bend over? Well we voted for gay marriage.

Sorry I couldn't resist.

There are definitely some issues we should stand up to the US on. Like softwood lumber and illegal gun trade.

Yes, Mayor Miller.

You get our pot and we get your guns. Hardly seems fair. I mean how often has someone died from smoking a joint? Never. How often do people die from shootings? Quite often. Seems like there's a new one on the news every week.

[Wilber]

I'm not in love with the American gun culture any more than most Canadians but I think it is a stretch to blame Americans when Canadians decide to shoot each other.

[Nyx]

I'm not in love with the American gun culture any more than most Canadians but I think it is a stretch to blame Americans when Canadians decide to shoot each other.

What Americans? The American people in general or American gun smugglers? You are far too vague there buddy. Nobody is BLAMING the American people. That's just stupid. But you'd think officials would be paying more attention to the issue at the border (on BOTH sides). I mean are Americans the only ones who have the right to be concerned about their security? No. I live in a place where 10 years ago there would be maybe one or 2 shootings a year. Now it's like 2 a week. And usually done by people with handguns. And I'm sure you know those are illegal here.

And a large majority of the gun violence in places like Vancouver comes from gangs that moved to Canada. Usually Asian. The victims are usually gang members, innocent bystanders who got in caught in the cross fire, people who tried to break up fights (between gang members), and drive by shootings. Every so often some crazy Canadian walks into some institution and shoots up the place (like at Dawson College).

[jbg]

I'm not in love with the American gun culture any more than most Canadians but I think it is a stretch to blame Americans when Canadians decide to shoot each other.

Certain parts of America have a "gun culture". Certain parts, such as where I live, do not. We're a big country with many cultures, all American, and none "multi".

[Wilber]

I'm not in love with the American gun culture any more than most Canadians but I think it is a stretch to blame Americans when Canadians decide to shoot each other.

Certain parts of America have a "gun culture". Certain parts, such as where I live, do not. We're a big country with many cultures, all American, and none "multi".

Perhaps a poor choice of words. Maybe the degree to which Americans in general accept guns as part of their culture would be more accurate.

[jbg]

Perhaps a poor choice of words. Maybe the degree to which Americans in general accept guns as part of their culture would be more accurate.

It's more like, the way we're set up for voting in the Senate, gun control would never pass. Our many equivalents of Alberta have the votes to never allow it.

Also, our Supreme Court is much stricter than yours in separating state/federal functions. Crime, in general, is a State function.

[Wilber]

Also, our Supreme Court is much stricter than yours in separating state/federal functions. Crime, in general, is a State function.

Other way around here which also has it's drawbacks. The Criminal Code being a Federal jurisdiction makes it difficult if not impossible for regions to adequately deal with problems more specific to them. You wind up with municipalities trying to deal with crime through bylaws when it is a Federal responsibility.