A Better Country?

dwr.jpgOn Canada Day, Paula Simons wrote an article in the Edmonton Journal entitled: “My Canada includes Alberta.” Heartwarming, if it were true.

But Alberta’s hurting, and it’s clear that some of our fellow provinces, and, most egregiously, the Canadian government, are deliberately adding to the pain.

Ms. Simons trots out the usual arguments. “We are a landlocked province, with an economy largely reliant on international trade. Do we really imagine that it will be easier for us to get our oil, our wheat, our beef, our canola, our lentils, to market if we’re cut off from any coast?

Does she mean more cut off than we are now? Does she actually believe that BC will block the railways which carry hundreds of thousands of containers from BC ports to distribution centres from Alberta to Newfoundland, or that Québec and Ontario will stop trains from moving west? Or that activists will block pipelines more successfully than they do now? Seems to me that a blocked pipeline is a blocked pipeline.

Simons frets about investor confidence in a new country, so let’s look at Singapore which became an independent country in 1965. They began with massive unemployment, a lack of housing, no natural resources, and almost no land – Singapore covers 722 km²; Calgary 825 km². Together, Alberta and Saskatchewan have 1,300,000 km², and massive natural resources that the world needs.

Within 35 years of independence Singapore was one of the richest countries in the world. It’s a world class banking and tech centre, and  even, get this, the central hub for the Asian oil industry. Singapore’s population is 5.6 million; Alberta and Saskatchewan’s combined is 5.4 million, and there’s almost unlimited room to grow.

Simons points out that Alberta is home to 45 First Nations, which control 140 separate reserves. She asks: “Do separatists imagine that all those First Nations will also want to leave Canada?”

It wouldn’t surprise me. When Canada’s indigenous people were asked in a recent poll if they felt respected by the federal government, and felt like a valued part of Canada, a whopping 66% said NO. (I’d be extremely interested in feedback from Indigenous Albertans on this.) In the same poll, only 20% of indigenous people think Justin Trudeau should be re-elected this fall.

It certainly seems that Albertans, including the vast majority of indigenous people are on exactly the same page. Albertans of all backgrounds are tired of being taken advantage of, or stymied by, our nanny-state. Alberta’s indigenous communities are chockablock with entrepreneurs that are ready to go, if only the nanny-state would get out of the way. Imagine getting rid of the stifling bureaucracy, until recently called; “Indian Affairs”.

Simons enthuses: “For all its flaws, and for all its systemic injustices, this is a truly extraordinary country, a nation-state built, not on ideology or ethno-nationalism, but on ideals of tolerance, inclusion and rational compromise.” Nation State? But Justin Trudeau has already told the world that Canada is “post national”.

JT and QueensNational, or post-national, whether it’s Justin Trudeau and his government, or the law societies of British Columbia and Ontario, in today’s Canada, tolerance, inclusion, and compromise apply only if you affirm  the latest Progressivist ideology. Otherwise you are excluded from federal programs, you are not allowed to open a law school, and you can end up in jail if you don’t mouth the approved pronouns.

Simons asserts that: “Canada is a remarkable experiment”, but then admits: “It doesn’t always succeed.”  Indeed, it succeeds less and less. In a country where the Constitution is regarded as, “A Living Tree”, onto which Left-Wing activists can graft whichever Progressivist ideology happens to be trending at the moment, conservatism and common sense and the freedoms gained over 800 years are being forced to the periphery. And Canada’s constitution and amending formula guarantee that there is no way to get them back.

For her emotive clincher, Ms. Simons notes that the Latin motto on Canada’s coat of arms means “They desire a better country.”

Me too. Indeed I dream of a Best Country, but it’s clear that’s no longer possible in Canada. And that’s why I’m a separatist.

I’m Dave Reesor

Next Blog: A History of Disrespect.

Tags: , , ,

3 Comments on “A Better Country?”

  1. KEVIN ARMITAGE July 5, 2019 at 9:06 AM #

    Excellent your best article yet . Unlike Quebec I believe we should pay our portion of the national debt and leave . That simple

  2. Joe Gingrich July 5, 2019 at 9:25 AM #

    — The Constitution is regarded as, “A Living Tree”, onto which Left-Wing activists can graft whichever Progressivist ideology happens to be trending at the moment, conservatism and common sense and the freedoms gained over 800 years are being forced to the periphery. And Canada’s constitution and amending formula guarantee that there is no way to get them back.—

    I agree.

    A constitution, according to Webster’s dictionary, is: ‘a) the system of fundamental laws and principles of a government, state, society, etc. b) a document in which these are written down.’

    A constitution provides a legal direction, but if the ‘Living Tree’ folks have
    their way the Constitution can mean anything legal activists imagine it to mean. And it does. The govt. and their courts simply keep changing the standards.
    Where’s Hammurabi?

    “If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there.” (Lewis Carroll?) Much can said by comparing this statement to the “Living Tree” activists’ use of our
    country’s fundamental laws and principles.

    In addition, if the province(s) ever separate, I suggest adopting a republic form of government which tends to rest the supreme power of the state upon the state’s voting citizens and a weak central government.

    Good write up Dave.

  3. Guy Plecash July 6, 2019 at 11:09 PM #

    The free country of Canada I used to believe in is long dead and exists only in Alberta and Saskatchewan. When I landed in this province as a conceited leftist from BC in the ‘Seventies I discovered that right quickly – and discovered the genuine self-satisfaction of doing a good days’ work as opposed to a bad days’ rant about the latest ’cause du jour.’ Of course. A good days’ work is real, and has measurable value.
    I believe you’ve got it nailed, Dave. We either stop being at war with one another like a bunch of tantrum-throwing emotional two-year olds or we pack up and split. The first option means re-learning what real leaders of a free country look like and not allowing powerholic impostors to occupy chairs too big for them. As the national IQ appears to have plunged far below that possibility, bail it is!
    Fortunately, we can block the national railway through our turf at least as effectively as the so-called ‘activists’ block pipelines. In fact the ‘environmental’ lobbyists will pay us to do so. Done deal. Ottawa will all but kiss us goodbye. I’m expecting Asian interests to make us an offer of a pipeline under the Arctic to supply their enterprises anytime now!

Leave a Reply to Guy Plecash Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: