Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome)
Subject: Fueling the Canadian Ire
Organization: Net.Gypsy/ROM
Date: 6 Nov 92 04:47:29 GMT

Not to throw more fuel on the great American, oops, U.S. and Canadian debate
but, with the World Series ended, the U.S.'s presidential campaign having
mercifully ground to a halt, and the resounding No vote on October 26th, the
question still remains - what is going to happen to Canada and its provinces?

In the early 80's and continuing forward to the ballot on the 26th, there has
been an endless effort to find a Canadian Constitution agreeable to a vast
majority of its constituents.  As most know, the first attempt was agreeable to
all of the provinces except Quebec and subsequently concessions were made to
placate the Province and keep it part of the Nation.  What resulted was an
instrument that pleases some at the expense of others.  

Many have become or remain disaffected, disenfranchised, and perturbed by
the acquiescence for special considerations that are made constitutionally to
one provence and not to another.  Not to mention, the rising concern over the
status of Native Americans and the Inuit.
  
Perhaps the only certainty is that when stress is alleviated from one part of
the system it only increases stress on other parts; in effect,
Canada's politics, as they stand, are a closed system with no room for change.

With the lack of approval of the numerous proposals that were slated on the
26th, it seems likely that with no legislative reason to stay together Canada
may very well break apart.  It won't happen anytime soon, since inertia is a
driving force in almost all political systems.  However, Quebec is scheduled to
hold an election within the next two years and the Separatists may very well
win thereby allowing Quebec to disassociate itself from the rest of Canada.

If Quebec leaves some of the remaining provinces may well consider
incorporation into the U.S. given how closely their economies are tied
together. To quote the October 31st issue of _The_Economist_  p.18, "This is
the boring party theory of break-up:  Canada is like a dull party which the
guests are too polite to leave; but, once the first person makes a move to go,
the others each claim a pressing engagement and head for the door."

Granted, again to borrow from the same source, "nothing, except perhaps
flying the Maple Leaf upside down, is more certain to induce a fit of
patriotism in Canadians than to suggest that they may become Americans.  For
many, not being a citizen of the United States is central to being a
Canadian." What is ironic is that the things that most Canadians decry
as cornerstones of what makes them Canadian (i.e., Socialized
Healthcare, CBC, and certain social policies) are intrinsically tied
to the government, the same government that Canadians effectively gave
a no-confidence vote to on the 26th of October. 

It seems that while the later 80's and early 90's were the era of unification
and a new Global Order, the mid 90's are a time of fragmentation and disunity
- consider the former Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia; the tensions in
Hungary; the plight of the Serbs, and now, the No vote in Canada.


Allisson  (I'm not Canadian; I only post from an acount there)

Newsgroups: soc.singles,general