Should Canada expand if USA breaks up?

Tue, 2008-11-25 18:39

#2

Cueball

Yes.

Tue, 2008-11-25 19:03

#3

Fidel

Quite a few Canadians in California and Florida already.

all the leaves are brown
and the sky is grey
I've been for a walk
on a winter's day

Tue, 2008-11-25 19:24

#4

genstrike

First, I doubt that the US would politically split apart, especially into 6 pieces. Heck, this guy is even predicting that Russia can claim Alaska back.

Even if it does split apart (which is probably highly unlikely within the next couple decades), I'm not sure there are any states which would want to join Canada. I'm pretty sure any secession movements in the US have the goal of an independent state, not annexation by Canada.

500_Apples wrote:
Maybe Alaska could come in as a territory and be renamed the Western Yukon, that was even less likely however.

Oh yeah, we get Sarah Palin. Only if we can have Tina Fey too.

Tue, 2008-11-25 19:36

#5

Fidel

Ya if their multinationals are able to out-manuever our free trade genuses in Ottawa with lawsuits over a gasoline additive banned in several US states, we have little chance for reverse muscling them. Canada is close to becoming a rightwing Libertarian's dream for weak and decentralized colonial administrativeships selling off rights to vast preserves of valuable energy and raw materials for a bit of kick-back and graft. We need a real leader. Elmer Fudd might be an improvement over what Canadians have been used to.

Tue, 2008-11-25 19:57

#6

remind

No, absolutely not for any inclusion of US states into Canada.

Moreover, this is the pertinent part of the linked article;

Quote:
A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in
the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is
heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts.
Professor Igor Panarin....has authored several books on
information warfare.

___________________________________________________________
"watching the tide roll away"

Tue, 2008-11-25 20:04

#7

wage zombie

IF this were to hapeen, i'd say we should definitely let Vermont in.

We'd have a hard enough time keeping Canada together though.

Tue, 2008-11-25 20:10

#8

Mojoroad1

"Sweatervest Destiny."

Tue, 2008-11-25 20:30

#9

Cueball

I have changed my mind, I think no, now.

Tue, 2008-11-25 20:35

#10

Fidel

You can say that again. Hey, I think we did in a parallel thread

Wed, 2008-11-26 03:44

#11

Daniel Grice

Wow, is Sarah Palin that popular in Russia?

Wed, 2008-11-26 06:20

#12

David Young

I am 47 years old, and I predict within my lifetime there will be a movement in the state of California to have them succede from the United States to form its own country, a-la Quebec.

Once that happens, look for similar efforts in states like Texas and Florida, and then the 'United' States will be no more!

I can see some of the New England states looking to join Canada, along with Minnesota (any state that can elect Jesse Ventura as it's Governor is okay in my books!

Does anyone have the 1959 movie Ben Hur on DVD/Blu-Ray?

I'm thinking of the quote Charlton Heston's character says to his Roman friend about how his people would celebrate once the Roman Empire falls.

Wed, 2008-11-26 07:24

#13

Caissa

I'm 45 and I say you are wrong.

Wed, 2008-11-26 12:26

#14

thorin_bane

I can see a few of the the states wanting to join, but as a leftwing canadian I have had my fill of Emay and Diane Francis as they try to impose amercican ideals in their transplanted country. Because as progressive as bernie sanders is, a lot of americans would push our spectrum even farther right. regardless of what state they are from.

I VOTE NO....how about Turk and Caicos be our first priority. 33,000 people tropical paradise with our own currency. We could have a nice sea relationship with Cuba to educate the citizens with a good model Try to lift them up to our level. I think we haven't done it because we would hate to pay minimum wage to a tropical islander. Or provide hurricane aid.

______________________________________________________________________________________
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it."
Noam Chomsky

Wed, 2008-11-26 13:22

#15

500_Apples

thorin_bane wrote:

I can see a few of the the states wanting to join, but as a leftwing canadian I have had my fill of Emay and Diane Francis as they try to impose amercican ideals in their transplanted country. Because as progressive as bernie sanders is, a lot of americans would push our spectrum even farther right. regardless of what state they are from.

I VOTE NO....how about Turk and Caicos be our first priority. 33,000 people tropical paradise with our own currency. We could have a nice sea relationship with Cuba to educate the citizens with a good model Try to lift them up to our level. I think we haven't done it because we would hate to pay minimum wage to a tropical islander. Or provide hurricane aid.

______________________________________________________________________________________
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it."
Noam Chomsky

I'm simply not convinced that Canada is somehow more left-wing than places like Vermont or Minnesota.
40% of Canadians voted for Harper, which is about the same fraction or higher than the number of Americans in those states who voted McCain, and McCain is to the left of Harper.

Wed, 2008-11-26 13:24

#16

Caissa

I think the canadian political spectrum is to the left of the American political spectrum.

Wed, 2008-11-26 13:31

#17

500_Apples

Caissa wrote:
I think the canadian political spectrum is to the left of the American political spectrum.

I've never really been convinced of that one. I think it's something Canadians tell themselves ("we're so compassionate !!!") in order to feel good about themselves.

A large part of the difference is that they don't allow ex-cons to vote in a lot of places because African Americans are more likely to vote democrat. 1 or 2 points would have knocked out Bush both times.

Anyhow even if it is true, it's only because of places like Texas, and the south.

Wed, 2008-11-26 13:40

#18

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

500_Apples wrote:
40% of Canadians voted for Harper, which is about the same fraction or higher than the number of Americans in those states who voted McCain, and McCain is to the left of Harper.

Actually, no - far less than 40% of Canadians voted for Stephen Harper. Many Canadians didn't vote.

And by what measure is Stephen Harper to the right of John McCain? Don't get me wrong, I loathe Harper - but I think the Republicans and our Conservatives are (peas in a) pod-people.

Wed, 2008-11-26 13:44

#19

500_Apples

Lard Tunderin' Jeezus wrote:

500_Apples wrote:
40% of Canadians voted for Harper, which is about the same fraction or higher than the number of Americans in those states who voted McCain, and McCain is to the left of Harper.

Actually, no - far less than 40% of Canadians voted for Stephen Harper. Many Canadians didn't vote.

And by what measure is Stephen Harper to the right of John McCain? Don't get me wrong, I loathe Harper - but I think the Republicans and our Conservatives are (peas in a) pod-people.

The only difference I can think of is environmentalism, but that's a pretty big one.

People like to point out that most people don't vote, but I have never seen a shred of evidence that the people who don't vote are any different than the people that do.

I didn't vote in the last election because Elections Canada never responded to my absentee ballot request. Does that mean I'm boycotting the political system? No.

Wed, 2008-11-26 13:52

#20

genstrike

thorin_bane wrote:

I VOTE NO....how about Turk and Caicos be our first priority. 33,000 people tropical paradise with our own currency.

Oh yeah, there's nothing imperialist about trying to annex a British imperial holding for use as a vacation spot for rich Canadians...

Wed, 2008-11-26 13:59

#21

Caissa

500 apples wrote: I've never really been convinced of that one.

And when did socialized medicine become part of the mainstream political debate in the US?

When did a third party to the left of the democrats begin winning a substantial number of seats in Congress?

Wed, 2008-11-26 14:11

#22

Cueball

Caissa wrote:
I'm 45 and I say you are wrong.

I am 46, as of yesterday, and I say you are right, that David Young is wrong.

Wed, 2008-11-26 14:13

#23

500_Apples

Caissa wrote:

500 apples wrote: I've never really been convinced of that one.

And when did socialized medicine become part of the mainstream political debate in the US?

When did a third party to the left of the democrats begin winning a substantial number of seats in Congress?

Socialized medicine can be rationalized based on purely economic arguments. The USA spends twice as much on health care as we do and achieves inferior results. That trend is not helpful to American capital and that's why the rhetoric on the issue has been shifting.

I don't have a satisfactory response to the NDP consistently receiving the votes of 15-18% of Canadian voters. As I'm currently living in the USA I know there's a strong base for bourgeois liberalism here, but it has been successfully directed into safe channels like the Obama campaign.

Wed, 2008-11-26 14:13

#24

Caissa

Cueball wrote: I am 46, as of yesterday,

Happy belated birthday, Cueball.

Thu, 2008-11-27 00:07

#25

Policywonk

remind wrote:

No, absolutely not for any inclusion of US states into Canada.

If the war of 1812 had gone just a little differently, much of Maine would be part of Canada; it was invaded bloodlessly and remained in British hands until the end of the war. Vermont would be a good fit politically.

The same forces that may cause the breakup of the United States, including Peak Oil (see the Long Emergency), will likely have the same inpact on Canada, as our east-west links are not all that strong.

Thu, 2008-11-27 00:55

#26

scott

The inclusion of Wasington, Oregon, Idaho and northern California fits with the proposed boundaries of an independant Cascadia.

Of course the other part of the Cascadian indepedance project is the separation of BC, the Yukon from Canada.

Thu, 2008-11-27 00:56

#27

Cueball

Anyone who thinks that any breakup of the United States would not be an event that took place in the environment of a massive civil war, with huge consequences for Canada is crazy. It is far more likely that any breakaway union of states would try and absorb parts of Canada through military means, rather than some kind of peaceful union voted on in a referendum.

Thu, 2008-11-27 06:26

#28

thorin_bane

genstrike wrote:
thorin_bane wrote:

I VOTE NO....how about Turk and Caicos be our first priority. 33,000 people tropical paradise with our own currency.

Oh yeah, there's nothing imperialist about trying to annex a British imperial holding for use as a vacation spot for rich Canadians...

Umm they have repeatedly asked to join Canada, that isn't imperialism. I am stating some of the benefits of the islands. Just google their name and see how quickly canada comes up.

______________________________________________________________________________________
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it."
Noam Chomsky

Thu, 2008-11-27 06:29

#29

thorin_bane

Cueball wrote:
Anyone who thinks that any breakup of the United States would not be an event that took place in the environment of a massive civil war, with huge consequences for Canada is crazy. It is far more likely that any breakaway union of states would try and absorb parts of Canada through military means, rather than some kind of peaceful union voted on in a referendum.

Have to agree with you. There were a lot of people ready to roll tanks in 95 if quebec voted for it. SO I can't see how a country that is more homogenius(spell check doesn't work anymore!?!) than canada wouldn't have a civil war AGAIN!

______________________________________________________________________________________
"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really easy way: stop participating in it."
Noam Chomsky

Thu, 2008-11-27 09:55

#30

Erstwhile

thorin_bane wrote:

Umm they have repeatedly asked to join Canada, that isn't imperialism. I am stating some of the benefits of the islands. Just google their name and see how quickly canada comes up.

Heh. From Wikipedia's entry on Turk and Caicos:

Quote:

A great many of the tourists who visit the Turks and Caicos Islands are Canadian. Owing to this, the islands' status as a British colony, and historic trade links, some politicians in Canada and the Turks and Caicos have suggested some form of union between Canada (a Commonwealth realm, so they already share the British Monarch as Head of state) and the British territory.

In 1917, the Prime Minister of Canada, Robert Borden first suggested that Canada annex Turks and Caicos Islands. In 1974, Canadian New Democratic Party Member of Parliament Max Saltsman introduced a failed attempt at consolidating the islands.

The idea was brought up again in 1986 by Progressive Conservative MP Dan McKenzie, but it was rejected by his party's caucus committee on external affairs in 1987. The committee, chaired by MP David Daubney, looked at immigration, banking, health care and tourism issues in making its decision.[citation needed]

For the islands to join Canada as a full province would require amending the Canadian constitution, unlikely because it could provoke provinces to reopen debate on other aspects of Canada's constitution. On the other hand, small changes to the Constitution, such as renaming Newfoundland to Newfoundland and Labrador, have passed intact since 1949. The last new province, Newfoundland and Labrador, was brought into the country in 1949 by an act of the British Parliament. Joining as a territory would be easier, as territories can be created by an act of Parliament. In addition, its population of about 30,000 people is considered insufficient for provincial status. However, this attitude might change should the territories of Yukon or Nunavut, with about 30,000 people each, ever become provinces.

In 2004, Conservative MP Peter Goldring visited Turks and Caicos to explore the possibility once more. He drafted a motion asking the Canadian Government to look into the issue, but his party declined, citing immigration, tourism, and economic issues.[citation needed] However, the Canadian government does not dismiss the possibility of a future union.[citation needed]

The province of Nova Scotia voted to invite Turks and Caicos to join the province in 2004, should the islands ever become part of Canada. This would bypass the problems with admitting Turks and Caicos as a separate province.

Thu, 2009-08-20 01:05

#31

NorthReport

Does Canada want to merge with them - what name should we call the newly created country? We'd practically have the USA surrounded.

Quote:
The chain of small islands south of the Bahamas is a British Overseas Territory of about 36,000 people engaged in offshore banking, tourism, fishing and small-scale agriculture. Residents enjoy a modest but decent standard of living on average, and the weather is spectacular.

A recent corruption investigation led the British cabinet to revoke TCI's quasi-independence and directly administer the territory through the governor.

This is leading to charges of renewed colonialization from the accused ministers and widespread relief from many residents.

But the biggest unexpected consequence may be another round of examination of Canadian union with this small island chain.

First, a little history.

The idea of annexing Turks and Caicos goes back at least to Robert Borden, who raised the idea at Imperial Conference only to be rebuffed by the mercurial David Lloyd George, the British Prime Minister.

An NDP MP revived the idea in the early 1970s and its been brought forward as a private-members bill in every decade since.

The closest this idea came to reality was the mid-1980s.

The politics of TCI partially revolves around the relationship with Britain, with one party pressing for distance and the other less so. The independence party won office in 1978 and prepared the ground to leave the British realm. An election was held in 1982 that was a virtual referendum on independence, but the pro-independence government was defeated. The new anti-independence regime cast about for how to structure the territory in the aftermath and sent a serious offer to Canada to discuss joining.

The offer could not have come at a less convenient time for Canada, as the free-trade agreement was dominating the time of those who might have entertained such a notion. Instead, the idea was politely ignored. The same cool reaction has been Ottawa's stance since.

The corruption scandal and resulting pause provides Turks and Caicos Islanders a chance to take their history in a dramtic new direction. There is widespread public belief that the status quo is not working and a desire for radical change.

Joining Canada would certainly be a change.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/andrew-steele/