The Town Hall Archives

extraneous interference

I've been perusing this forum, reading some of the posts and realized that there are quite a few americans interested in politics posting here, and that this forum is worth more than a topic relating to Dan's views on the sky.

I'm currently writing a paper on George Grant's "Lament of a Nation." In this book he laments the loss of Canadian sovereignty to the capitalist giant to the south. Starting during the 1940's, Canada has become more and more dependent on the United States economically, and we have lost power to direct our country's economic affairs.

However, with the war on Iraq, I think that might be changing. I am ashamed that our country is not participating in this war, but I wonder if it is maybe an attempt to gain some independence from the "american empire." As I'm sure some of you know, the longest undefended border in the world is no longer the Canadian/US border (for two weeks) due to loose Canadian immigration laws. This will definitly hurt Canada economically due to a slowdown at the border. Perhaps Chretien is operating on anti-american principles, or perhaps he is operating on some pro-canadian principles in an attempt to show the world that Canada will not be ruled from Washington.

My question for the Americans:
Do Americans notice or care that Canada is not giving Bush the support he has asked for?

For the Canadians:
Is this just a statement to the world that we are independent from the United States, just like at the beginning of World War 2 when we didn't join the war for 6 days after Britain, just to make a point?
Do you think that Canada has anything worth saving that may be lost if we were annexed into the United States?

check out www.unitednorthamerica.org

hawkeye · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2003 9:47 pm Post subject:

I noticed Canada didn't help (or outright hinder) the war, or even try, but I didn't expect it... No offence intended.

smurfs · Guest

DUH im mad ,IM VERY MAD Evil or Very Mad

the countries I like the most are the U.K. Spain, Australia, and the best out of the group *AMERICA* well that was always my favorite country Very Happy

Jared · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 7:19 am Post subject:

Canada is reliant on the United States. In a country where 90 percent of the population is within 100 miles of the U.S. border, this is to be expected. And despite the size of the Canadian landmass, it's a country of few people. Industry is decent, but not particularly strong. There are of course natural resources... there are of course tech industries. It's not a country struggling, but it's a country that needs the United States to survive.

Without the U.S. and Canada as trade partners, Americans would face some higher prices. Canadians would face true hardship and the government system could collapse.

In this way, yes, the Canadian government HAS to stay on good terms with its powerful neighbor to the south. It doesn't have to be the same... but it should remember that if it greatly angers the U.S., there could be repurcussions. We're not talking about the President of the United States deciding he dislikes a Canadian parliamentary ruling and therefore will cut off trade relations. Nothing like that. But in a way, they need to be a little like Americans.

And in another way, perhaps they want to be more like us.

It seems that most Canadians are proud of the fact that they have a "friendly" nation or that they are "at peace," etc. The term "friendly," which is used frequently, is telling. Nations rarely brag about this type of attribute... but frankly, what else is there for Canada? They can't exactly claim strong power.

I remember about a year back... a small Canadian warship boarded a small vessel in the mideast because of suspected oil smuggling. Everyday event... if it were a U.S. or British ship. Instead, the story spread everywhere and every satirist in the country picked up on one key point: hey, the Canadians actually have a warship?

Obviously, that's overdramatic. Of course they do. But there's no question that the Canadian military is inferior to those of their neighbor to the south and that of their mother country.

If the current Canadian reaction to the war is a way of showing independence, it's a poor choice. Want to show independence? Fine. But can't you do it in such a way that, first of all, you don't make almost daily shows for a months time of your "what nasty names can we call President Bush today?" game. Moron, imbecele, Shrub, Bush Jr... even on this, the Canadians are hardly leaders. We've heard them all before from the crazy citizens of America.

I'd say that some Canadian politicians sound like they belong in the "loonie bin," but the loonie bins across the country are what would suffer if this attitude spread to largescale policy decisions. I think the average Canadian realizes that his loonies and toonies would dry up fast without America as a trade partner.

And nothing's worse than an empty loonie bin.

[Note to less informed Americans, as well as to Canadians who live in areas where this expression is perhaps not used: concerning loonie bin, think bank or, more realistically, personal stache. Or, in the younger venacular, a "piggy bank." You store your loonies (Canadian $1 coins, featuring a loon -- as in, the bird) in your loonie bin.]

Canada hasn't shown its independence from America. It has shown its friendliness to Iraq and its utter inability to fight for what is right. Right now, Canada is one of the countries that still accepts an ambassador from Saddam's regime and spurns the U.S. request that such ambassadors be sent home.

Canada is, not coincidentally, home to the international anual Hezbollah conference. That is, in case you don't know anything about it, the organization that helps Palestinian teens learn to strap explosives to their bodies and detonate themselves in crowded areas in Israel.

Do Canadians like Hezbollah? No, not really. It's just that diplomatically, the Canadian government never takes a stand against wrong. While freedom of speech applies to both countries and if a bunch of rather evil people decide to discuss these issues, it would have to be permitted in both, Canada should take a stand and not let these wicked men INTO their country.

Personally, I do not think that the Canadian government is currently in anti-American mode for reason of showing their independence from the U.S. They are in anti-American mode because the Canadian government, including leader Jean Chretein (Don't yell... Yes, I know that the Crown is the head of the country and that a Royal Governor is appointed that also has more power than the Prime Minister, but Chretein is, for all practical purposes, leading the country. The Governor rarely gets involved... so please don't complain that I got it all wrong!), are liberals, are pacifists and at least somewhat dislike or resent America's strong capitalistic system.

Also, and I may be unpopular for saying this, but I think the U.S./Canadian border needs far stricter enforcement. For as long as just about anyone can remember, it's been quite lax, as Canadians were our "good friends up north." That misses a key point, though. I'm not too concerned about a Canadian wandering down here without proper passport and identification. I'm far more concerned about someone using Canada as a way to attack America.

Canada has very little in the way of checks on those entering the country. Obviously, Hezbollah terrorists get in. Hamas terrorists do, too. And it's no coincidence that most of the September 11th hijackers entered the U.S. from Canada. It works like this: slip into Canada. No one will ask a single question because, well, it's Canada. Then, slip across the Canadian border, where you'll likely be unquestioned because, well, Canadians aren't a dangerous group of people.

See the problem?

Americans do notice that Canada has sided with a murderous regime instead of the United States, absolutely. Many are angry about it. But by this point, the general reaction is "Well, forget it. They're just the Canadians." In other words, what would you provide if you were with us, anyways? Does the Canadian Royal Navy consist of a canoe and two rafts?

Mean? Yep. But Canada has brought it upon themselves. Their attitude has not created great anger. Just indifference. As in, shame on Canada for not doing the right thing, but who really cares?

That doesn't say much about Canada. It's obviously exaggerated, overdone. But perhaps if the Canadian government showed that it had just a little fortitude, just a little willingness to stand up to evil, we would have a little more respect.

Now, onto your United North America thing. You show this link, but is it a general "let me toss this out" type of idea or do you support it? I strongly oppose it for one simple reason: it would be bad for America.

I don't need any others. The United States needs to look out for its citizens and such a merger of countries, obviously wildly impossible in the first place, would not serve the interests of Americans. It could mean some cheaper natural resources, but it also adds into the mix a new American state that doesn't speak English and will continually threaten to break away. And, as that page itself pointed out, it would place the burden of Canada's high number of welfare recipients on Americans. Yes, Canadians would see lower taxes, but overall, American taxes would end up being higher to cover all the costs. Lower than the old Canadian ones? Probably. But still, why should we want our taxes raised?

And, a rude but I think valid reason I don't want Canada ever being a part of a United North America: I don't want the liberalism of Canada seeping over here. We already have plenty of our own. We don't need the Canadian brand. We don't want that terrible universal health care plan. I don't WANT new members of Congress from former Canadian territories that are very likely to vote an ultra-liberal party line.

I don't want Canada's problems.

55 40 or fight was a long time ago... When it comes to Canada now, I say, you can have it.

We don't want it.

Sydney Bristow Vaughn · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 12:18 pm Post subject:

Jared, brevity is INDEED the soul of wit.

Jared · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 1:18 pm Post subject:

That may be true, but discussion/debate and wit are two different things entirely. Smile

Gandalf · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 2:20 pm Post subject:

Sorry Jared, I haven't read all of your post. I'll have to give it a 2nd try later... LOL.

Canada... I really don't care what they think. The only good they (you) have is your oil. Your government is liberal and your people hate America. Your socialist medicare has certainly helped our northern state's hospitals thus helping our economy I suppose, but we're the only people your helping with your socialist programs.

Really, in my opinion, Canada is very much like Spain, Austria, and a dozen other European nations (almost including France): you have no military to speak of and your governments are traditionally liberal. Who needs ya? If you want to support us (Go Austrailia, Spain and Poland!) more power to ya! If you don't, well woopdedoo. We'll probably change the name of Canadian bacon to some rediculous name like "Capotilism bacon" (and how much do you care?).

Now I have to say that I have a few friends that are Canadian and they really are nice people. In fact, they say that most Canadians are. My question is this: Why do you allow your government to make fools of you? As I understand, you have a parliment elected by the people, why don't you elect some people who have sense?

As far as annexing you, I think it would be a wonderful idea. Except for one thing- our liberals. We can't drill increase our oil drilling in Alaska because of them and I have a real feeling that if we did anex Canada, they wouldn't let us there either. (Canada is the #1 supplier for American oil)

So how's this for a plan? We'll trade all of our Bill Clinton's, Al Gore's, Tom Daschle's, and Dick Gerpheart's to you for the northern half of your country. Your Parlament will think it's wonderful and we can drill our own oil.

Or how about this? You let the Queen actually have some power, maybe build her a palace? and beg her to come save your reputations...

extraneous interference · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 3:33 pm Post subject: in defence of Canada

Gandalf:

interesting post... Crying or Very sad

You are right, the Liberal party has been in power more than it has not been in power. This is due to a variety of reasons

1) Canada wants big business. We like American capitalism because we see the wealth of the giant to the south. the Liberal party favours big business in its economic policy. Historically, this has meant getting American investors to pay for a cross-Canada pipeline, or a transcontinental highway. This stimulates the economy, benefiting both American interests and Canadian business.

2) the left wing parties in Canada are divided. In Canada, the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives split any vote for the right wing, making it impossible for any party to be elected. consider this: in the last federal election, the Liberal received 35% of the votes, but recieved the biggest majourity of seats in the house of commons that it has ever enjoyed. that means 65% of voters do not support the Liberals.

The Canadian Alliance, the official opposition party, has good vision for Canada, and has become quite vocal in the House of Commons over the last few weeks in an attempt to get the Liberal government to throw it's support behind Bush. they hold more conservative policies. But Chretien and his party aren't set to leave anytime soon. (just an aside, my prof today was talking about election rules in Canada, and commented on the decision in 1997 to allow the mentally handicapped to vote, he said "that's odd, because the mentally handicapped been ruling this country for years..." pretty nasty, but he made a good point.)

About hating americans? yes, there is quite an anti-american sentiment here. Canada started in 1867 in attempt to protect ourselves from the American threat (many of the american loyalists moved to Canada in the 1860's because of your civil war.) since then, Canadians have been in a constant struggle to avoid Uncle Sam. However, since World War 2 it has been increasingly difficult. As Britain collapsed as a world power, Canada has had to go elsewhere for trade, and what better place then the USA? But this dependence on the USA is slowly killing our nation and we relent that. There seems to be a delicate balancing act: independence from the USA vs. economic growth. If you forget either one, you undermine any Canadian nationalism. As Pierre Trudeau (former Liberal Prime Minister) once made the analogy, "if you're a mouse in bed with an elephant, you're terrified of getting rolled on."

As a Canadian, I love my country despite its weaknesses. Canada is the only nation I've ever paid my allegiance to. And there are elements of Canada that are worth saving: our political system for example, our multicultural society that we pride ourselves in vs. the melting pot of the USA, and the fact that Canadians are loved across the Globe as a peace-loving, delightful people. (think about it, would you rather go to Europe today wearing an American flag or a Canadian flag on your back pack?) Canada is an extremely complex country with an extremely diverse people, but I love it!

extraneous interference · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 3:49 pm Post subject: canadian socialism

just thought to add a bit about socialism in Canada

High government participation in the economy of Canada is vital to its survival as a nation. Government protection and support of industry is what makes industry profitable in Canada. No small country can depend on the loyalty of its captialist businessmen because money is more important than nationalism. Only in dominant nations can laissez-faire economics operate without the sacrifice of patriotism.

Gandalf · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 6:27 pm Post subject:

I don't mean to offend by what I said, I was only point out facts. As I said, I know several Canadians and I like them all. I've been very interested in the Commonwealth lately and I did a bit of research on Canada in particular, though nothing in great detail and I'm certainly far from knowledgable.

However, I'm not sure I would say Canada is loved by everyone right now. They have basically driven a huge wedge between themselves and the rest of the Commonwealth by refusing to support Bush and Blair. And I certainly wouldn't suggest wearing Canadian flags around my part of the country (after your people booed our national anthem). Americans are more than willing to be your best friend but we only take so much abuse and Canada is getting very close to giving us that much. And as far as Europe, remember that only two countries over there DON'T love America: France and Germany. Right or not, Canada sided with France and Germany against Spain, Portugal, England, Poland, and most other Eurpean countries (if I remember right, every Eurpoean country except one signed a petition asking France not to veto a UN resolution against Iraq). I think it would be perfectly safe to wear the Canadian flag over there but I also think it's safe to wear a US flag. BTW, when did Canada adopt it's flag? I was watching a movie from WWI and they had the Brittish flag everywhere.

About socialism in Canada, I don't live there and I don't know enough about your economy, but I do know that your socialized medicine has done nothing but hurt your medical community. All the rich people leave Canada and come to America to have any medical work done. Telling no? The sad thing is that America is headed there as well. *sigh*

Canada could be a great country. I'm glad that you and people like you love your homeland. You are what will make your country great someday. Just keep working.

And I wasn't kidding about the Queen. Just think about the buzz that would happen if Canada (or Australia) asked the Queen to come and take more control over it's government. She seems like a very stable and moral person and she couldn't do worse than the Liberal (is that what you called it?) party is. Plus that would sure upset the Brittains if she did it. The Crown gaining some of it's authority back can only help those under her. 'Course then you would have to deal with King Charles the-whatever when she dies and he might not be as good as she seems to be...