If Canada breaks apart, perhaps it will be because Canadians never managed to achieve a clear understanding of what Canada should be.
Originally, Canada’s political status was fairly clear – a colony first of France, then of Britain.
Things began to get a bit fuzzy in 1867 when it became a confederation, with both federal and provincial levels of government holding a share of sovereignty. We were also a “dominion” until modern politicians decided that term was too old-fashioned, but as a dominion Canada did establish its independence.
Read Also
Late season rainfall creates concern about Prairie crop quality
Praying for rain is being replaced with the hope that rain can stop for harvest. Rainfall in July and early August has been much greater than normal.
Outsiders sometimes wondered how Canada could be independent with a foreign monarch as head of state, in theory possessing the power to dissolve governments. English parliamentary tradition, however, explained that a majesty in right of the United Kingdom is quite different than a majesty in right of Canada, even if their majesties happened to be the same person.
For a brief period, people argued whether the tradition of the Canadian monarchy was being eroded by republican tendencies (i.e. prime ministers who had makeup before television appearances, as U.S. presidents did).
That interesting debat became obsolete when national opinion leaders decided to argue about whether Canada was one nation or two. The debate seemed somewhat odd to the First Nations, but that is another story.
Now, if one learned U.S. professor is correct, the various parts of Canada are each going to become an “affiliated polity” of the United States. “Polity” is a handy word that covers any sort of government (national or municipal or the Canadian Football League).
In an article in the influential Foreign Affairs magazine, the professor said Quebec’s secession could lead to Canada (and Quebec itself) breaking into several pieces. The article called on the United States to begin planning to guide these small neighbors, provide “security for these fragments,” require payments from them for that security, enlist citizens of these affiliated polities in U.S. armed forces, etc.
This would all be quite amusing, except that one Congressional subcommittee has already taken the article seriously enough to schedule hearings on it. Not satisfied with trying to dictate which countries Canada can trade with, or how Canadian farmers market their grain, some U.S. politicians seem to want northern colonies.
Just as farmers have to work together to protect their interests, Canadians need to develop a common vision if they are to withstand such pressures. Perhaps someone could suggest that to various decentralization-keen provincial politicians who want to customize national programs like medicare.
