What keeps us together?

[Saturn]

I've come to the conclusion that the only thing Canadians have in common is that we are a bunch of whiny bastards like no others. Every province in this country is convinced that it has the "rights" to everything that's good and ROC must take care of everything that's bad. We constantly complain that ROC is taking this from us or is not giving us enough of that. You can see it everywhere - in Parliament, in the media, on the forums. Than why the hell are we still torturing each other? If you think that you give too much and you don't get enough - GET THE HELL OUT!

If we all give more and get less (btw, where does the excess go?) and we keep bickering and fighting over it like a bunch of 5-year-olds, why do we even bother talking to those who are ripping us off and why do we share the same borders? We should all go our own separate ways and stop getting on each other's nerves. Or do we stay together just to have someone else to blame for our own problems? That's bull! Goodbye Alberta! Goodbye Quebec! Goodbye Canada!

[tml12]

I've come to the conclusion that the only thing Canadians have in common is that we are a bunch of whiny bastards like no others. Every province in this country is convinced that it has the "rights" to everything that's good and ROC must take care of everything that's bad. We constantly complain that ROC is taking this from us or is not giving us enough of that. You can see it everywhere - in Parliament, in the media, on the forums. Than why the hell are we still torturing each other? If you think that you give too much and you don't get enough - GET THE HELL OUT!

If we all give more and get less (btw, where does the excess go?) and we keep bickering and fighting over it like a bunch of 5-year-olds, why do we even bother talking to those who are ripping us off and why do we share the same borders? We should all go our own separate ways and stop getting on each other's nerves. Or do we stay together just to have someone else to blame for our own problems? That's bull! Goodbye Alberta! Goodbye Quebec! Goodbye Canada!

What keeps Canada together? I don't know really. Canada has never really had very good national myths. The big mythmaker of the twentieth century who basically defined how future generations would define Canada was Pierre Trudeau. Most of his myths (bilingualism, health care, just society, national social programs, smaller armed forces, multiculturalism, etc.) were designed to build on preconceived notions that Canadians had about the U.S. The idea was, if Canada is too complicated to be kept together through national myths, then Canadians should define themselves based on what they are not (American). Thus, the famous notion that every Canadian who studies Canada knows: Canadians are not Americans. Ultimately, I do not know how (outside of provincial nationalism) Canadians would define themselves if the U.S. was not our southern neighbour.

[Riverwind]

What keeps Canada together? I don't know really. Canada has never really had very good national myths.

Why must we have national myths? Nationalism is second only to religion as the source of bloodshed in history. You claim that Canadians identify with the province first but you are only saying half the story - Canadians that move from province to province will take up the identity of whatever province they are living in. So an Albertan that moves to Ontario becomes an Ontarian after a number of years. I think has to do more with the human tendency to relate more with things that are closer than those that are far away.

The biggest problem facing Canada today is the narcissistic Quebec nationalist culture. Too many Quebequers seem to take self-centered greed to new heights and show zero interest in the normal give and take that comes with any economic and political union. The self-centered greed of Quebec political culture has unfortunately started to infect other provinces like Alberta. There times when I think the kicking the spoiled brat of the federation out would be the best for the country. Unfortunately, the self-centered greed that created the problem in the Quebec in the first place would make it virtually impossible to carve up the country with years of civil and economic disruptions.

That is why I think the best solution at this time would require a return to principals that were enshrined in the orginal Canadian constitution. The federal gov't should get out of funding provincial programs.

[bush_cheney2004]

What keeps Canada together? I don't know really. Canada has never really had very good national myths. The big mythmaker of the twentieth century who basically defined how future generations would define Canada was Pierre Trudeau. Most of his myths (bilingualism, health care, just society, national social programs, smaller armed forces, multiculturalism, etc.) were designed to build on preconceived notions that Canadians had about the U.S. The idea was, if Canada is too complicated to be kept together through national myths, then Canadians should define themselves based on what they are not (American). Thus, the famous notion that every Canadian who studies Canada knows: Canadians are not Americans. Ultimately, I do not know how (outside of provincial nationalism) Canadians would define themselves if the U.S. was not our southern neighbour.

Outstanding assessment.....like the UnCola (7-up), Canada defines itself as the UnAmerica. Americans are happy to serve as Canada's foil in the spirit of definition.

[kimmy]

If we all give more and get less (btw, where does the excess go?)

Where d'ya think?

-k

[scribblet]

Ultimately, I do not know how (outside of provincial nationalism) Canadians would define themselves if the U.S. was not our southern neighbour.

An un-armed American

[tml12]

What keeps Canada together? I don't know really. Canada has never really had very good national myths.

Why must we have national myths? Nationalism is second only to religion as the source of bloodshed in history. You claim that Canadians identify with the province first but you are only saying half the story - Canadians that move from province to province will take up the identity of whatever province they are living in. So an Albertan that moves to Ontario becomes an Ontarian after a number of years. I think has to do more with the human tendency to relate more with things that are closer than those that are far away.

The biggest problem facing Canada today is the narcissistic Quebec nationalist culture. Too many Quebequers seem to take self-centered greed to new heights and show zero interest in the normal give and take that comes with any economic and political union. The self-centered greed of Quebec political culture has unfortunately started to infect other provinces like Alberta. There times when I think the kicking the spoiled brat of the federation out would be the best for the country. Unfortunately, the self-centered greed that created the problem in the Quebec in the first place would make it virtually impossible to carve up the country with years of civil and economic disruptions.

That is why I think the best solution at this time would require a return to principals that were enshrined in the orginal Canadian constitution. The federal gov't should get out of funding provincial programs.

Your prescription probably is a good short-term solution. Get the federal government out of provincial programs. You are also correct that a lot of people who move from one province to another will probably eventually become members of that province.

But nationalism, Riverwind, is what keeps a country together. If Canadians can't all look at the Canadian flag and think one common unified theme, then Canada cannot survive long term. Britons can look at the Union Jack, Americans can look at Old Glory, etc. and a national dream comes to mind. Don't make the mistake of always assuming nationalism means hatred or "I'm better than you," etc.

When Harper said that Canadians don't really know Canada, he was right. He apparently has written more about the future of Canada than anyone else who is currently involved in mainstream politics. I believe a Harper majority creates a whole new concept of the Canadian federation...this is something that is badly needed for Canada to survive long-term.

[Saturn]

That is why I think the best solution at this time would require a return to principals that were enshrined in the orginal Canadian constitution. The federal gov't should get out of funding provincial programs.

Canada is a political and economic union. Whenever a province does something it affects the whole country. When Quebec gets more money from ROC, obviously ROC has to pay for it, which means that it sucks away resources from ROC. When Alberta digs up large quantities of oil and gas, it siphons away resources from ROC, it pushes inflation up across ROC, and increases the value of the Canadian $, killing hundreds of thousands of jobs across ROC. An economic and monetary union means that the effects of actions by a province go far beyond the borders of that province. But every province figures that it deserves to siphon away resources from ROC and that it has the "rights" to all benefits flowing from these resources. And then we fight and bicker like a bunch of little children.

This has to stop. If we want to behave like separate countries, we ought to be separate countries. If we want to have the "right" to benefit from our resources, we ought to come up with those resources, not get them from elsewhere. If we want resources from elsewhere, then we ought to share the benefits accruing from those resources.

In short, we either stay together, do our part, respect our fellow citizens, shut up and stop whining OR we go our separate ways and shut up and stop whining. Anything in the middle is a bad marriage which is nothing but a detriment to all.

[Riverwind]

But nationalism, Riverwind, is what keeps a country together. If Canadians can't all look at the Canadian flag and think one common unified theme, then Canada cannot survive long term.

What national myth do Europeans share? Does that mean they should give up on the EU because they don't have 'national' myths? The only thing that is required to keep Canada together is a recognition that a economic and political union requires some giving as well as taking. I personally dislike flag waving and endless repetition of false hoods that are designed to brainwash people into supporting a cause. I would prefer to rely on mutual self-interest, goodwill and neighborliness.

[Wilber]

Ultimately, I do not know how (outside of provincial nationalism) Canadians would define themselves if the U.S. was not our southern neighbour.

An un-armed American

Or more accurately, where only the criminals are armed.

[Wilber]

When Alberta digs up large quantities of oil and gas, it siphons away resources from ROC, it pushes inflation up across ROC, and increases the value of the Canadian $, killing hundreds of thousands of jobs across ROC.

An odd comment. You believe Canada would be better off if Alberta had no oil and gas? Do you also believe that Canada would be better off if no province had any natural resources?

[tml12]

But nationalism, Riverwind, is what keeps a country together. If Canadians can't all look at the Canadian flag and think one common unified theme, then Canada cannot survive long term.

What national myth do Europeans share? Does that mean they should give up on the EU because they don't have 'national' myths? The only thing that is required to keep Canada together is a recognition that a economic and political union requires some giving as well as taking. I personally dislike flag waving and endless repetition of false hoods that are designed to brainwash people into supporting a cause. I would prefer to rely on mutual self-interest, goodwill and neighborliness.

Canada is a sovereign country, whereas the EU is a political and economic union of voluntary member nation-states, each of whom constitute a sovereign country with their own national dreams and values. Of course, much of what keeps the EU together is the thought that Europeans need to come together to challenge global American influence. The initiative to join the EU is based on the supposed economic benefits and the thought that open borders are a good idea. No one is realistically suggesting Italians, Germans, and the French have the same history or culture or values. France is still sovereign from Italy, etc. The French flag hangs higher than any other flag at the National Assembly in Paris.

Canada, however, is a sovereign country that supposedly unifies a common people from coast to coast to coast. You say the only thing necessary to keep Canada together is a recognition that "an economic and political union requires some giving as well as taking." Well, yes! That is one of the whole points of the Equalization Program and the theory of "have" and "have-not" provinces. But tell that to the NEP-era Albertan, or the offshore-revenue benefitting Newfoundlander, or the "Anglos are out to get us" resident of Jonquiere.

[jbg]

If we all give more and get less (btw, where does the excess go?) and we keep bickering and fighting over it like a bunch of 5-year-olds, why do we even bother talking to those who are ripping us off and why do we share the same borders? We should all go our own separate ways and stop getting on each other's nerves. Or do we stay together just to have someone else to blame for our own problems? That's bull! Goodbye Alberta! Goodbye Quebec! Goodbye Canada!

I don't suspect you love the US enough to want that to happen.

[jbg]

If we all give more and get less (btw, where does the excess go?)

Where d'ya think?

-k

Most of that map covers the Ungava Peninsula.

[PolyNewbie]

It sure isn't lawyers, they do an incredible amount of damage to our society, and demand a high price for it. The problem is that there are no alternatives to the existing corrupt, arrogant and often exceptionally stupid legal system filled with judas goats who are too arrogant to see their real position in things.

National beliefs are not enough to hold a society togather. Mutual respect is a critical but missing element in our society and there is nowhere where this more obvious than how our courts and lawyers conduct their business.

Our existing society is being dismantled by the North American Union and what I see as intentional corruption.

Lyndon LaRouche says that corruption is necessary to bring about our destruction, I strongly agree with that.

[Saturn]

If we all give more and get less (btw, where does the excess go?) and we keep bickering and fighting over it like a bunch of 5-year-olds, why do we even bother talking to those who are ripping us off and why do we share the same borders? We should all go our own separate ways and stop getting on each other's nerves. Or do we stay together just to have someone else to blame for our own problems? That's bull! Goodbye Alberta! Goodbye Quebec! Goodbye Canada!

I don't suspect you love the US enough to want that to happen.

No, I don't love the US. I don't love whining Albertans and Quebeckers either. I don't see why they should be tolerated by ROC. It's time for them to go and take care of themselves.

[Riverwind]

No one is realistically suggesting Italians, Germans, and the French have the same history or culture or values. France is still sovereign from Italy, etc. The French flag hangs higher than any other flag at the National Assembly in Paris.

The distinction between sovereign countries and the EU will disappear the day that the EU is given the power to tax.

That is one of the whole points of the Equalization Program and the theory of "have" and "have-not" provinces. But tell that to the NEP-era Albertan, or the offshore-revenue benefiting Newfoundlander, or the "Anglos are out to get us" resident of Jonquiere.

I think the people who need to learn about the 'giving' part right now are the have not provinces who think equalization is their god-given right. Nobody likes to give charity to people who feel they are entitled to it. The 'fiscal imbalance' myth which is treated as truth in Quebec political culture is the biggest problem in the country right now. If Quebequers would simply acknowledge that their lifestyle is being subsidized by the rest of the country then I think there would be a big change in the tone expressed by the rest of the country. Getting the feds out of the business of collecting taxes for provinces would help dispel that myth in Quebec.

[Saturn]

When Alberta digs up large quantities of oil and gas, it siphons away resources from ROC, it pushes inflation up across ROC, and increases the value of the Canadian $, killing hundreds of thousands of jobs across ROC.

An odd comment. You believe Canada would be better off if Alberta had no oil and gas? Do you also believe that Canada would be better off if no province had any natural resources?

I suspect that Canada would be better off with Alberta out of the picture. Having natural resources is good of course but unfortunately they are concentrated in a couple of regions, which on one hand gives these regions a lot of bad attitude, while on the other, makes ROC dependent on those resources. Effectively, Canada's economy is technology and knowledge poor and raw materials rich. We cannot even process our own raw materials. An economy based on raw materials involves too much risk and complete lack of self-sufficiency. It's not what a developed country should have.

[Ricki Bobbi]

I suspect that Canada would be better off with Alberta out of the picture. Having natural resources is good of course but unfortunately they are concentrated in a couple of regions, which on one hand gives these regions a lot of bad attitude, while on the other, makes ROC dependent on those resources.

Canada is better of without Alberta? Are you f*cking serious?

Would Canada have been better off without Ontario in the early 1900s when manufacturing was king and the Golden Triangle's proximity to American markets gave them a *bad attitude*?

[Saturn]

I suspect that Canada would be better off with Alberta out of the picture. Having natural resources is good of course but unfortunately they are concentrated in a couple of regions, which on one hand gives these regions a lot of bad attitude, while on the other, makes ROC dependent on those resources.

Canada is better of without Alberta? Are you f*cking serious?

Yes, I'm serious.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Yes, I'm serious.

Would BC leave as well or would Canada no longer be contiguous?

[B. Max]

I suspect that Canada would be better off with Alberta out of the picture.

I doubt it, but Alberta would certainly be better off.

[Wilber]

I suspect that Canada would be better off with Alberta out of the picture. Having natural resources is good of course but unfortunately they are concentrated in a couple of regions, which on one hand gives these regions a lot of bad attitude, while on the other, makes ROC dependent on those resources. Effectively, Canada's economy is technology and knowledge poor and raw materials rich. We cannot even process our own raw materials. An economy based on raw materials involves too much risk and complete lack of self-sufficiency. It's not what a developed country should have.

When Alberta digs up large quantities of oil and gas, it siphons away resources from ROC, it pushes inflation up across ROC, and increases the value of the Canadian $, killing hundreds of thousands of jobs across ROC.

Who would be in your Canada? Alberta is part of my Canada as much as any other province.

You have an odd way of looking at things. You seem to think that we would be better off with less. That depending on other countries for the resources we need for industry would somehow make us more secure and self sufficient. That Alberta having oil sucks the resources out of the rest of the country, never mind what they send to the rest of the country in equalization. That paying Middle Eastern or South American countries for the oil to run your Canada would be preferable and somehow make us more prosperous and secure. The value of our dollar is the value the rest of the world puts on our country. Evidently you feel we should be worth less. A balanced portfolio of resources, industry and technology would better but having less of something doesn't make you better off, it just makes you poorer. Like every other country we have to make the best of the population, geography and climate we were dealt.

You live in a country that is blessed, instead of being bitter about its good fortune, be thankful.

[jbg]

It sure isn't lawyers, they do an incredible amount of damage to our society, and demand a high price for it. The problem is that there are no alternatives to the existing corrupt, arrogant and often exceptionally stupid legal system filled with judas goats who are too arrogant to see their real position in things.

Lawyers do an incredible amount of good by aiding the peaceful resolution of disputes, and the rule of law.

[jbg]

No, I don't love the US. I don't love whining Albertans and Quebeckers either. I don't see why they should be tolerated by ROC. It's time for them to go and take care of themselves.

So, that leaves you with "have not" BC, Manitoba, NB, NS, PEI, NL, Nunavut, Yukon and NWT, and marginally "have" Saskatchewan. And Ontario, which McSquinty says is on the way to "have not" status. Doesn't sound to promising.