Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Analysis: Canada looking for independence
UPI ^ | June 30, 2002 | E.W. Kieckhefer

Posted on 06/30/2002 2:15:14 PM PDT by gcruse

Analysis: Canada looking for independence

By E.W. Kieckhefer
United Press International

From the

National

Desk

Published 6/30/2002 1:46 PM

Some Canadians are wondering whether their country should have joined the rebel colonies in the American Revolution as the United States approaches another Independence Day.

They were urged to join in the uprising against the British crown but declined. And over the years, Canadians have felt a sort of smug satisfaction in that decision, believing they had created a better nation. The differences between the two countries never have been great. Still, Canadians always have accepted a dependence upon their governments for what they regard as a kindlier kind of society.

But that sort of mild socialism has come with costs.

Someone has to pay for universal health care, pensions and welfare systems. And lately those costs are being realized. Federal and provincial budget deficits year after year took care of immediate needs but resulted in debts that required first heavier and heavier taxes and then finally sharp spending cuts. Ottawa pushed more and more of the burdens onto the provinces, which ultimately were responsible for carrying out the promised benefits to the people.

The education system has suffered and teachers have struggled with low pay and increasing duties. Many of the crown corporations -- that is, government-owned companies -- were privatized. But the cuts that have caused the most concern have been those in the health system.

True, Canada still has a prescription plan that is the envy of many U.S. citizens who use it, too, but hospitals have been closed and nurses in several provinces have gone on strike to demand pay increases. Many health professionals have just left. Elective surgery often requires months of waiting and patients increasingly travel across the border and pay high prices to get the care they need.

Despite such drastic measures, the Canadian government seems unable to control the cost of the health care plans. The Canadian Institute for Health Information says the cost of health care last year was $3,298 per person. Only the United States, Germany and Switzerland among the Organization for Cooperation and Economical Development nations spend more as a proportion of gross national product.

A recent poll showed slightly more than half of Canadians think they still are getting quality health care but 60 percent said they expect it to worsen in the next five years.

Three-quarters of the citizens polled said they expect any solution will cost them more and a surprising 56 percent said they are willing to pay more just to maintain current levels of health care. About half of them even favored a two-tier care system, with patients paying part of the costs out-of-pocket.

Those are the concerns of the average citizens.

Business leaders have broader concerns, like the recent attitude of Washington on the question of free trade. A steep tariff on Canadian softwood lumber is shutting down mills in several provinces, causing massive unemployment in those communities. But lumber is just one of many Canadian exports to which Washington has been objecting, claiming the Canadians unfairly subsidize production.

Anthony Wilson-Smith, editor of the weekly news magazine Maclean's, told recently of a conversation with a British Columbia food company executive who recommended rethinking Canada's growing economic ties with the United States. He said the relationship has tilted to the point that it no longer is possible to negotiate because whenever trade rules come out in Canada's favor, Washington changes the rules. The businessman said he is quitting in frustration.

But Canada is trapped in its relationship with the United States.

The lion's share of Canada's exports go to the United States. The free trade agreements were designed to lock in that relationship. Expanding exports in Europe and Asia is a long-term effort.

Canadians seem to get little sympathy from the United States now. A recent Woodrow Wilson Center study showed 30 percent of U.S. respondents think of Canada as a U.S. state and only 18 percent said they regard Canada as America's closest friend and ally.

"These things matter," Wilson-Smith wrote in another of his weekly letters to Maclean's readers, "because the issue of Canada's sovereignty, and how we deal with it, will be the defining issue of the next decade -- far more important than the old hand-wringing about Quebec sovereignty." The notion that Canada as a smaller nation can guard its culture and flourish "goes by the wayside whenever we look at the relationship between ourselves and America."

Clearly, Independence Day has a far different meaning in Canada than it does in the United States.

Copyright © 2002 United Press International
 


TOPICS: Canada; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

1 posted on 06/30/2002 2:15:14 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Clive; coteblanche
ping
2 posted on 06/30/2002 2:19:38 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Instead of a UN, I wonder if we ought to engage in apolegetics to convince other nations/states/provinces to join the US.
3 posted on 06/30/2002 2:23:15 PM PDT by polemikos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
I may be wrong, but I think the day will come that at least parts of Canada (starting with British Columbia) will opt to become part of the united States. They're wonderful people (well most of them, at least).
4 posted on 06/30/2002 2:25:18 PM PDT by holyscroller
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holyscroller
"I may be wrong, but I think the day will come that at least parts of Canada (starting with British Columbia) will opt to become part of the united States. They're wonderful people (well most of them, at least)."

What do we want a bunch of people who think like Boston's suburbs and our minority slums for?

Ontario and Quebec are truly Sweden-On-The-Saint-Lawrence - a bunch of people who want everything from the government except freedom.

5 posted on 06/30/2002 2:33:48 PM PDT by glc1173@aol.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: holyscroller; polemikos
I lived in Ontario at a time when a breakup was
being actively discussed.  The most common
scenario was that the Western Provinces, who
have more in common with the Western States
than either have with their eastern counterparts,
would join the US.

Quebec would break away as French Canada
taking the provinces east of her with her, since
they are Quebec's normal markets anyway.  The
problem will be, in absence of transfer payments,
Quebec's being able to keep the maritime provinces
from slipping into poverty.  The US wouldn't want
the maritimes for the same reason.

Ontario would remain as Canada.

6 posted on 06/30/2002 2:38:33 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
To correct a misperception - the Continental Congress requested the presence of the 14th colony (that is, Canada) in the Revolution.

The popular belief is that Canada, as a whole, refused to participate.

However, as we all later discovered in the 1820s and 1830s, there was quite a bit of Canada South of the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence - always had been too! Even though that part of Canada was lightly populated at the time, most of it joined with the Americans in the Revolution. I'd like to point to Vincinnes in particular!

The Canadians have spent over 200 years trying to deny that Canada extended South to the Ohio River (La Belle Riviere in the 1700s). Don't believe them. The American Revolution cut Canada right down the middle, with the most progressive part of the original French habitants chosing to be Americans rather than conquered colones.

7 posted on 06/30/2002 2:45:46 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: holyscroller
Well, the generall feeling until about the 1830s was that Canada was a short step away from joining the union. There was even a "Canadian Clause" in the Articles of Confederation.

Article XI
Canada acceding to this confederation, and joining in the measures of the Unites States, shall be admitted into, and entitled to all the advantages of this Union: but no other colony shall be admitted into the same, unless such admission be agreed to by nine States.

8 posted on 06/30/2002 2:47:38 PM PDT by jae471
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Wasn't Buchanan flogging that idea awhile back?
9 posted on 06/30/2002 2:51:31 PM PDT by polemikos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: polemikos; gcruse; holyscroller; jae471
It was a reasonable approach then, and it is a good idea now. With what other nation or group in the western hemisphere does America have more in common? If some part, or all, of Canada wishes to join us, and conform to our political / social / economic system I, for one, would greet them with open arms. Even Quebec.
10 posted on 06/30/2002 3:13:00 PM PDT by surely_you_jest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
I'm not certain what you are referencing from the 1820s and 1830s, but the reason the area south of the Great Lakes came to be part of the US was because of the labors of George Rogers Clark and his Virginia militia. The French mediators for the Treaty of Paris initially set the Northwestern border at the Ohio River, however the American commissioners remonstrated, citing the right of conquest by virtue of Clark's taking of Kaskaskia and (more importantly) Vincennes. The British could not effectively contest the American position, and the border was set on the Lakes.
11 posted on 06/30/2002 3:46:17 PM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
We should welcome the West, the NWT and Nunavut, and the Maritimes. Not Ontario and not Quebec. The Canadian government could give lessons to the Democrats on political correctness, and the Quebecois could give lessons to Jesse Jackson on how to be a whining minority demanding special privileges. Let them join the European Union.

The Maritime provinces are poor -- Appalachia North, formerly with fish -- but with beautiful country and charming people. They could become another Celtic Tiger.

12 posted on 06/30/2002 4:40:09 PM PDT by omega4412
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
Prior to the Ashburn Treaty in the 1830s, most folks within 25 to 50 miles of the South shore of any one of the Great Lakes called themselves Canadians.

This attitude persisted right up to the Civil War. The first American flag in the county seat of Chatauqua County NY was flown about 1863 when the townsfolk suddenly realized all the men had gone South with the Union.

During the Revolution the French throughout what is now Indiana, and in the Green River settlements in Kentucky rallied immediately to the American cause and were instrumental in turning over strong points and military posts and forts to Clark's men.

Many of Clark's men later on married the Franco-American women out on the frontier. Even Clark's sister married one of the Franco-American men!

13 posted on 06/30/2002 6:23:17 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
I was thinking about this the other day and my thoughts came down to this. Do we want them? The same thing goes for Puerto Rico. I don't want to admit another state that is going to consistently send its congressional delegation to socialist/democrats. With the delicate balance we have now when the stakes are so high why do it and allow the scales to be tipped? I guess the parallel that I am drawing is akin to the allowing of slave/free states. I don't want to become a slave....
14 posted on 06/30/2002 6:37:05 PM PDT by Liebenator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Muawiyah, I've come to really enjoy your comments. What do you think is going to happen to the Postal Service in the next few months?

Prior to the Ashburn Treaty in the 1830s, most folks within 25 to 50 miles of the South shore of any one of the Great Lakes called themselves Canadians.

Webster-Ashburton treaty. Seeing as how this includes Buffalo, Erie, Cleveland, Toledo, and Detroit, I'd be interested to know where you came up with this viewpoint. I assume that Lake Michigan is not one of the Great Lakes under this description.

Are you suggesting they were expecting to be re-integrated with Lower Canada?

As for the support provided the Virginians by the French inhabitants, I agree with your assessment, and would grant that Clark would likely not have been successful without it. However, I also would argue that the French and British could not have cared less whether the people inhabiting the area between the lakes and Ohio River wanted to be part of the US or Canada. It was ONLY Clark's driving Hamilton back to Detroit that resulted in the grant of the Northwest Territory to the US in the Treaty of Paris, IMHO.

15 posted on 06/30/2002 6:43:41 PM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
The Canadians have spent over 200 years trying to deny that Canada extended South to the Ohio River (La Belle Riviere in the 1700s). Don't believe them. The American Revolution cut Canada right down the middle, with the most progressive part of the original French habitants chosing to be Americans rather than conquered colones.

And I was worried about Toledo becoming part of Michigan. :^)

16 posted on 06/30/2002 6:53:10 PM PDT by meyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Even Clark's sister married one of the Franco-American men!

For some silly reason, I can't help but think of Spaghetti-O's.

17 posted on 06/30/2002 6:56:28 PM PDT by meyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
General Hamilton was not exactly "driven back" to Detroit. He was accompanied by my ever-so-great-Grandfather Murphy who was barely 15 years of age. Murphy and the General both carried weapons, that part of the world then being full of wolverines, bears, bobcats, mountain lions and Shawnee.

(Excuse the mispelling on the boundary line treaty). One of the most notable things in the final boundary line treaty is that the people affected were not required to move. Each country agreed to make good on the land titles and surveys of the other one.

I have several references to folks from the South of the Lakes areas that are quite interesting. Out in California folks from this area were identified by others as being Canadians!

18 posted on 06/30/2002 6:59:32 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
I would greatly welcome Canada (or any of its provinces) into the United States without hesitation. I have been to Canada and the transition would be seamless because our cultures are so similar. I believe there is something written in the original articles of confederation (don't know if it still applies) that grants Canada permission to enter the United States at any future time.

Personally, I think the merger is inevitable. Already, our borders are transparent and customs checks are cursory at best (I haven't been through one since before 9/11 so it may have changed).

19 posted on 06/30/2002 7:04:51 PM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
In Europe, they hardly differentiate between Americans and Canadians, much to the chagrin of Canadian tourists. Of course the American ones don't even notice. :)
20 posted on 06/30/2002 7:07:35 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson