Separatism is High Treason
- Thread starter #juan
- Start date
Re: RE: Separatism is High Tr
Of course it will be! But we cannot negotiate anything until a mandate is given threw a referendum.
no1important said:
Of course it will be! But we cannot negotiate anything until a mandate is given threw a referendum.
yes, the old "chicken or egg" dilemma!
there needs to be a clearly defined mechanism for separaration prior to any vote on it and at the same time, there needs to be a vote to start talks on various issues.
Seaparation is akin to putting all your ingredients in the blender and mixing a shake, and then deciding you want to eat one of them separate.
Should current provincial boundaries be the defining new boundaries? Should various defined land-areas within a province be able to vote to remain within canada should a province try to separate? ect ,etc. Whose land is it, anyway?
there needs to be a clearly defined mechanism for separaration prior to any vote on it and at the same time, there needs to be a vote to start talks on various issues.
Seaparation is akin to putting all your ingredients in the blender and mixing a shake, and then deciding you want to eat one of them separate.
Should current provincial boundaries be the defining new boundaries? Should various defined land-areas within a province be able to vote to remain within canada should a province try to separate? ect ,etc. Whose land is it, anyway?
In truth, the british won the war and basically could have laid claim to all of Quebec. The BNA act gave Quebec back their language and their system of laws, and apon joining confederation, the land they now hold. My main point was that the rest of Canada has contributed a lot, financially to Quebec over the years and it is ludicrous to think they should now separate and give TROC the finger.
so you feel that all negotiations should be completed prior to any vote?
i agree with you if you say yes, however i see issues arising that will cause problems no matter how well planned out separation is.
and no, i am not a creationist (religous or geopolitical).
i agree with you if you say yes, however i see issues arising that will cause problems no matter how well planned out separation is.
and no, i am not a creationist (religous or geopolitical).
i think a universal framework for any succession from canada needs to be developed and voted on by all of canada. once this framework is in place, then any defined "geographical area" can vote on separation.
Gee, a 'blueprint for dissolution". An interesting concept but how would it reflect regional interest. One of the aspects that stirs separatist sentiment is resistence against the 'tyranny of the majority'.
a good question. the framework would have to consider the historical ways in which different geographic areas of canada came to be part of canada.
perhaps part of defining separation is redefining canada itself? canada seems to always be in a struggle between a strong central government and strong provincial governments. Is it time to reinvent the country? To create a strong central government wrt a few key binding issues? For one, we should have a directly elected PM (but i am getting off the topic of separation).
perhaps part of defining separation is redefining canada itself? canada seems to always be in a struggle between a strong central government and strong provincial governments. Is it time to reinvent the country? To create a strong central government wrt a few key binding issues? For one, we should have a directly elected PM (but i am getting off the topic of separation).
Re: RE: Separatism is High Treason
Answer - I think you may have stumbled on something that could prove germain to the possible future of Canada. Some of this was discussed during the Meech Lake Summit. Proportional representation may be more inclusive. A direct vote for PM and less of a Party focused governing body would lend toward a more responsible government. A Provincial Counsel as part of the Federal Government to create open discussion of regional aspirations. An elected Senate for sober review. I think you are correct, that the tensions of Provincial / Federal interaction are at least distracting.
We are a vibrant nation and should be able to redefine ourselves. Venezuela rewrote their Constitution in 1999, and I find that most of the people identify strongly with its covenants. With a focus on 'nation building' people may feel engaged and separatism relagated to the ash-heap.
the caracal kid said:
Answer - I think you may have stumbled on something that could prove germain to the possible future of Canada. Some of this was discussed during the Meech Lake Summit. Proportional representation may be more inclusive. A direct vote for PM and less of a Party focused governing body would lend toward a more responsible government. A Provincial Counsel as part of the Federal Government to create open discussion of regional aspirations. An elected Senate for sober review. I think you are correct, that the tensions of Provincial / Federal interaction are at least distracting.
We are a vibrant nation and should be able to redefine ourselves. Venezuela rewrote their Constitution in 1999, and I find that most of the people identify strongly with its covenants. With a focus on 'nation building' people may feel engaged and separatism relagated to the ash-heap.
Re: RE: Separatism is High Tr
Answer - I believe that Nation Building remains possible. I would not suggest that Meech Lake was a positive experience. I recognize the backstabbing and deceit of that summit. Call it bushwacking if you will, but it does not have to be that way.
Numure said:
Answer - I believe that Nation Building remains possible. I would not suggest that Meech Lake was a positive experience. I recognize the backstabbing and deceit of that summit. Call it bushwacking if you will, but it does not have to be that way.
i agree poisonpete2. Meech Lake was a bitter pill for canada to swallow, but lessons should have been learned from the Mulrooney years. Canada should very well be able to become better for the experience. The difficulty we face is that the real changes needed involve a changing of power for those with the power to make change. Power is like taxes with politicians; once they get it, they are not likely to relenquish it. Where are the visionaries, the real leaders, in our political system? Is it that the status quo is so damaged, only the self-serving are drawn to it? ( i really don't want to sound so cynical)
Meech Lake was a sad joke;
Mulroney and his cronies said, " Let's give Quebec veto power over almost all constitutional issues and hope nobody catches on". There were aboriginal issues as well but Clyde Wells caught on and so did Elija Harper. Thankfully that thing died on the table.
Mulroney and his cronies said, " Let's give Quebec veto power over almost all constitutional issues and hope nobody catches on". There were aboriginal issues as well but Clyde Wells caught on and so did Elija Harper. Thankfully that thing died on the table.
#juan said:
It was an attempt to make the constitution valid. As it is now, it still isnt. Québec didnt sign onto it. That means 22% of the population of this country arnt represented by the constitution.
Numure said:
Yes but why didn't Quebec sign on? There is nothing in the constitution as it is now that would hurt Quebec. What do you mean make the constitution valid? Right now it gives Quebec the same rights as any other province and more. Quebecers always site some draconian betrayal when the other provinces simply wanted a country that was not ruled by Quebec. Quebec would have had veto power over almost any constitutional change. How was that fair?
Numure said:
Did you ever notice that Quebec always claims that they never "signed on" to the constitution, BUT Quebec is always willing to invoke the "notwithstanding clause" of...THE CONSTITUTION!!!!
How can you use a provision of a constitution that you claim you aren't a part of? YOU CAN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's all just a sham. By the fact that the Quebec gov't uses provisions of the constitution, they are in fact accepting it.