I completely understand that for practical purposes the government is not going to be defeated until the House actually considers a confidence motion, and the government can delay that a lot.
But within living memory, politicians still believed that a government must maintain the confidence of the House at all times, and that if this is ever in question, it is the obligation of the government itself to test confidence forthwith. The idea that a PM and cabinet could govern for months and months while lacking the actual confidence of a majority of MPs, because they have procedurally avoided a vote, is utterly inconsistent with Parliamentary government and we have somehow just drifted into accepting it.
Guess what. The undesirable behavior you are describing is entirely consistent Trudeau's mentality and "ethics" - he does not have any, and entirely consistent with the mentality and "ethics" of the Liberal Party. And I do not see the crowds having the balls to drag him/them out of the office.
Their thinking is that they need to do anything possible to "protect Canada" from being governed by someone who isn't them, don't understand Canada and aren't even real Canadians. The Liberal Party represents the "real Canada" while the Conservatives are the interlopers and outsiders. When you think that way anything can be justified.
Probably true. But there has been a longer and broader erosion of norms around confidence. Martin lost a confidence vote and gave himself a do-over in the Stronach floor crossing, and Harper prorogued to reestablish confidence (both eventually did win confidence votes, but gave themselves time when confidence appeared at least temporarily absent). The McGuinty-Wynne minority government in Ontario was absolutely horrible on this score.
If Trudeau trudges on it will be the latest and possibly the worst chapter, but he did not start this story and it probably won’t end with him.
You didn’t convince me that Canada would not be a majority of Blue voters if we were indeed the 51st state.
We will never be swallowed up by the US …
I believe Canada will in the next 2-4 years have a constitutional crisis (brought on by the wholely unbalanced senate) which Poilievre will not be able to ignore.
First ministers meeting, followed by a national referendum … (we’ve done this before, but this time it will succeed)
Net result, looser confederation, no king, triple E senate. Every region will be happy, because Ottawa will no longer be allowed to inflict themselves in provincial juristiction. Essentially we’ll become a republic.
10 years ago, I would not have fought for this, but 9 years of Trudeau/Giulbeault/Freeland and I know we need to put daylight between the provincial and federal govt powers, and limit Ottawa’s reach.
Ultimately it is control of money that is political control. As long as the feds control the money supply, print the cash and control the banking system, they if course have control over the provinces on anything they want. Look at the Canada Health Act, it doesn't have any power over provinces other than as an obey for free cash mechanism.
The only way I see the provinces working around that is by Canadians starting to use US Dollars in conjunction with Canadian Dollar's in everyday life. We'd be like Latin America or Eastern Europe using the superpower currency for bigger everyday purchases. In Argentina USD is used to buy houses, cars and even phones.
With our currency rapidly declining we might move that way.
In the last year I've noticed many more areas of business start using USD in Canada, including with government procurement.
And this is why we need daylight between provincial and federal powers … including all provinces collecting their taxes and remitting back to Ottawa their portion. (As Quebec already does.) all provinces need the same freedom Quebec has.
Interesting. The low point historically for the Canadian$ vs US$was (roughly) 62 cents back in 2002 - I don't recall many areas of business using US$ in Canada back then?
I could also be unaware that was occuring back then, and I'm raising it not to discount or dispute your point that it's beginning to happen now.
I think digital currency adoption (I don't mean crypto) is much more widespread now than it was back in 2002, so part of the reason could be it's much easier to deal in US$ than it was 22 years ago.
Most definitely. You can sign up for a Wise card in minutes and exchange CAD to USD in seconds with a great rate. In 2002 people used banks with their scandalous fees or currency brokers, many of which are shady.
All of my equity assets are in USD and have been for a few years now. Holding assets in CAD is too risky in my opinion.
The last 2 states admitted to the US were Hawaii and Alaska. At the time, Hawaii was regarded as solidly Republican and Alaska as Democratic (just goes to show how things can change over the decades…). That was a necessary condition to get bipartisan consensus for adding new states. I don’t see how you could get anything close to that split with Canada. There’s a few parts of rural Alberta, the BC interior, and perhaps rural Saskatchewan that might politically lean Republican, but the rest of Canada is well within the Democratic tent.
Instead, Canada would have to be treated like a U.S. territory like Puerto Rico - no congressional representation, no electoral votes. That seems like an intolerable state of affairs for what would represent 10% of the US population and GDP.
Economically I'd rather have Puerto Rico's territory status than the current Canadians status. I still think an EU style economic common market is necessary for Canada to survive the 21st Century. Canada is just too small, inconsequential and it's elite aren't good enough to lead Canada out of this on its own.
Thank you, George! There's a lot of people here writing from their hurt feelings and not doing any actual reasoning. The several tens of millions of Americans who aren't doing so well will not welcome 44 million "sweater backs" warmly. And they definitely won't let us keep our single-payer healthcare!
It seems to me the overarching problem is the worldwide advance of the neoliberal agenda. It's about smothering democracy in favor of oligarchy. We're seeing it in spades in the US (President Elon) and moving there is not going to change it.
This is rather long but it's an excellent explanation where we are, how we got here and where we're going.
Most people aren't bright enough to understand these concepts, which is why traditionally political change comes from the top down. Soviet Union collapsed because the nomenklatura gave up on it. The EU is a creation of the European elite, etc.
Canada is on the path to a North American common market economy with the US, not giving up sovereignty. Old stock Canadians are still wedded to the idea of Canada (even though most immigrants would jump to the US if given a chance).
Ultimately economic prosperity is what matters most. You can create a good life in a relatively awful place with prosperity.
Canada can't operate forever with resort town economics which is what we have now.
I've hated the devaluing and degrading of our national identity over the last decade. It utterly flabbergasted me seeing all the gormless weasels pitch that we were every one of us complicit in ongoing crimes against the Canadian state. Not myself, not my family, and none of my friends have contributed to this crappy mentality. I'm proud to say that I've never once thought about "decolonizing", considered Canada to be a fake country, or have ever been ashamed to be Canadian. I still remember with pride the I Am Canadian beer commercials.
"Free" and "healthcare." Neither of those terms can be taken literally in Canada. And yet, it's still pretty much so sacred that minions of Canadians are in denial that there is a problem with it.
Anyone who works in marketing in Canada will tell you, with data to back it up, that Canadians are willing to eat a lot of $hit just to get something for free. It's part of the culture.
As to a possible successor to Junior, I don't see how any current Cabinet Minister could credibly do it. Every last one of them is complicit in this regime. They have all been, as Jen described Freeland, going along with it (FOR YEARS!!) right up to today - or in Freeland's case, to the day Junior demoted her.
So it's impossible for almost any MP, much less any Cabinet Minister to distinguish themselves from Junior at this point. Joel Lightbound is arguably the ONLY one who could credibly do so (I may be overlooking someone else and will update the list as needed). As Jen pointed out in her mid-week article, even the on-the-record dissidents all seem fine with what Junior's government has actually done - they only want him gone because they see the electoral writing on the wall. And look at Oliphant's performance the last 24 hours. What a joke.
And this is where I think I part ways with Matt a little. I don't have a shred of sympathy for a single one of these people other than Lightbound. Every one of them has consciously gone a long for the ride and any opprobrium directed their way is, in the grand scheme of things, both pretty mild and something they signed up for.
And yeah, every single thing you said about Canadian identity hit the nail on the head. When the Prime Minister shits on the Country and its people the way he has it can hardly be surprising that patriotism will take a hit.
To respond to the argument that you borrowed from Jen: The Liberals do have a problem that is fundamentally *policy-related* in nature, but arguably the Trudeau Liberals are more judged by Canadians by an *absence* of policy on major societal issues than by the government having an *actively-harmful* policy agenda. To that extent, it makes sense that the Liberals who condemn Trudeau would have minimal stated opposition to his policies: what they want is a leader who would create a healthier space for deeper policy debate on areas where the party is fundamentally lacking ideas.
While the Trudeau Liberals have not exactly been eager to own up to mistakes, they have not advanced a governing agenda that looks ambitious by the standards of most governments, which is an obvious justification for my above argument. Canadians and Trudeau-critical Liberals are judging for what they are *not* seeing in policy, as much as for what they are seeing in policy.
I think you are still making the broader point I was getting at, though. Whether Canadians are more annoyed by what they are not seeing in policy or what they are seeing in policy doesn't change the fact that, as you say, the Liberals problem is fundamentally policy-related in nature (although Chris Seeley's column in today's Post nicely highlighted some of the non-policy issues that drive many of us absolutely crazy).
So, if you have been in Cabinet (and even if not, albeit to a lesser extent) walking in lock-step with these policies for many years without ever objecting, you have a credibility problem. I also don't think one gets over that problem that by suddenly expressing misgivings you allegedly had over the years but kept to yourself. That's just too easy to swat away in an election campaign ("Oh, so NOW you are putting the Country's interests first - how convenient".) "When you are explaining you are losing" is an axiom for a reason.
I also recognize that all our parties have regrettably become ossified to the point that the slightest dissent is career limiting if not career ending thereby discouraging the expression of misgivings. But that is what I was getting at when I said they signed up for this. And some do remain true to themselves - Lightbound, Morneau and JWR being three examples - so it can be done. For that reason I think any one of those three would have far more credibility leading the Liberals into the next election than any current member of Cabinet (not that there is the slightest chance of that happening, of course).
BTW, can you remind me of the name of that new federal party that you mentioned to me a few months ago? It has slipped my memory and I did not bookmark the website.
Thank you for an awesome summary of the source of the Canadian Identity malaise and the not so fanciful flight by Stockwell Day.
I see the whole attack on the Canadian Identity as a revenge war on Canada’s English culture by the Quebec French started by Trudeau senior. Multiculturalism, the growth of immigration were intended to replace the Canadian melting pot concept by a divide and conquer approach leaving Quebec French as the only strong homogeneous group in Confederation. Official bilingualism and the growth of the civil service, the use of umbrella legislation followed by innumerable regulations generated in secrecy, ensured that the country was run by the Quebec French. Another straw is the recent edict that Canadas Supreme Court justices have to be bilingual without a translator present. And Trudeau junior, wittingly or not, has been quite successful at mulching the grass of Canadian identity first mowed by his father of record.
Like Sheila wrote above four or five states would be appropriate. There was an excellent discussion of the topic a few years ago in American Nations by Colin Woodard.
I think Stockwell is on the right track although I think parity between the two dollars is fanciful. But one factor is Canada’s massive immigration of the last few years. I strongly suspect subject to correction that most of these immigrants came here because it was administratively far easier or more possible than in the US. so they accept Canada as a frozen purgatory until they get the chops to get into the paradise down south.
There is a nice symmetry to 51 stars. 9 8 9 8 9 8. Numerology anyone?
You are absolutely right, if you were to just poll immigrants to Canada, and controlled for those immigrants afraid that this was all a loyalty test, you'd find most immigrants to Canada would move to the US if their lives allowed it in a heartbeat.
If you need a more solid example of the utter failure of the Laurentian Elite, other than their economic management failure, I can't think of one. People vote with their feet.
There is absolutely no reason why Canada shouldn't be one of the wealthiest and happiest countries in the world. On paper our potential is extraordinary. The problem is ultimately us, and our economic, political and cultural leadership.
They ultimately believe in a zero sum world, unlike the American elite, and the world isn't that. I guess it can be explained by US agrarian founding culture vs Canadian resource extraction hinterland culture. They made the original sin of pushing away the Americans which makes no sense if you aren't a zero sum believer. They organized Canada east-west on a continent that is aligned north-south for instance. It's a special sort of dumb. They also played regions off each other and used some regions as a sucker to subsidize other regions to hold onto their power. It's all now starting to fall apart.
The fact is that Canadians compare our country to the US. Economically we have already failed. We have the inferior business culture, businesses, finance system and talent. The US has already failed socially compared to Canada. Their K-12 education system has the same sort of failures that our health care system has, but their crime, populist clown show and their societal Achilles heel of a broken and failed health insurance system (worst of capitalism and socialism all in one) are rapidly breaking their country.
What is the solution? Full EU style economic integration with the US. Canada will not survive without access to the US markets and culture. Canada can help the US with its social problems that are eating it from the inside out as well. A bit of hinterland common sense from the land where "everyone seems to be handy" (according to a European client visiting and wanted to see Canadian Tire, lol) would help the Americans immensely. I suspect some important people in the US see that as well.
Canadians are nothing of not problem solvers and survivors. We can ditch our Laurentian Consensus, United Empire Loyalists, old stock clowns who have failed Canada and the Americans can dump their populist grifters and the sum of the parts can be greater than the individual. We need each other to save us from ourselves.
This will start in places like Alberta and Minnesota which are "in between" places on this continent. Windsor is a given, it's obvious the place never reached its potential because it's in the wrong country. It's wild that this hasn't already happened.
Polling shows that once the weird nationalist boomers die off that objection to this will melt away, some might as.well start the discussion now.
And for Quebec and Alberta separatists, they don't have the brains or balls to actually do anything, ignore them.
A very good overview. As for the Alberta separatists, the conditions would have to become close to extreme and the prospects very dire for them to get off their behinds. As yet, the situation is nowhere near that level, but with each Liberal Laurentian UnElite government, it is coming closer.
The Alberta separatists types are more pathetic than the Trucker Convoy folks. At least the truckers had a bit of brains even if they lacked the balls to do anything substantial. The Alberta separatists even lack that
Have you talked to any ? Do you know any ? The gist I get I already described. I would not be so dismissive of them. That kind of stuff people keep tucked away and only pull it out when it really matters, something you know very well.
I live in Southern Alberta and have a large Rolodex. I've known people personally who were at Coutts and Windsor. I've also said that to them to their face.
Compared to French Canadians let alone Balkan people they are cosplay protesters.
Thank you for answering in a meaningful manner. I this case I must admit you have a more solid basis for a broader and deeper understanding of Alberta separatists than I have.
No problem, thank you for understanding. I'm not proud of it, I just live here.
Jen and my social circles have overlap, I don't doubt she knows them and their motivators and capabilities more than I do. I take them as seriously as she does.
Loved the point about the risks of a strictly transactional country.
I'll admit, even as a proud Rush-loving Canadian, the statehood idea has a certain appeal to me. Let's assume for a second that the US would admit Canada to the union as five full-fledged states (which would be roughly fair based on population) with full citizenship and green-card equivalency and efforts to maintain Canadian safety-net programs in some form. Even setting aside the potential of CAD for USD 1-1 (which seems odd and unnecessary), the transactional benefits are tempting: workers in many fields make more and are taxed less in the US, the US is much better at productivity and innovation, our oligopolies suddenly have a bunch of new competition (personally, I'll enjoy shopping at Trader Joe's and flying Delta back to my hometown), our startups can more easily sell to a market 10x the size, mobility rights gives us all more options for affordable homes and jobs as well as warmer weather to retire to, and we suddenly have a military actually capable of protecting our borders. Of course there are downsides (I quite enjoy not reading about constant school shootings for example), but as our "brain drain" shows, many people are okay with those trade-offs.
Now we are eschewing all of this for the idea of Canada. But that idea is being chipped away. Some of this is Trudeau's stupid "post-national state" thing, but the problems go deeper. How do we expect young people to have pride in a country where they can never expect to own a home (largely due to policy choices) and where politicians will ensure their wages stay low by jumping at the first self-interested cry of "labour shortage"? How can we have pride in a country where that pride is used to protect the oligopolies and promote dumb policies like the online streaming act? How can we have pride in a country where politicians seem pretty cool with foreign interference that helps their side and are more interested in diaspora politics than policies that are good for the country? How can we have pride in citizenship when leaders seem more-or-less fine with shady colleges and employers effectively selling it to the highest bidder?
If Canada is strictly transactional, then frankly the best transactional choice may be to accept a good US offer to join the union. If there's no real Canadian identity, then frankly what is the point of our country rather than the new US states/dominions of Quebec, the Maritimes, Ontario, Manitoba-Sasketchewan, and Alberta-BC?
And that is the thing. The juice of Canada in 2024 isn't worth the squeeze for anyone under say age 60. How can Gen Z love a country that doesn't love them back?
It's quite frankly asking them too much to ask them to sacrifice career, lifestyle and even family formation costs for a nebulous Laurentian idea of Canada.
Quite frankly, the Laurentian Elite aren't delivering enough to keep the idea of an independent Canada going. You're only as good as your last quarter and Canada quite frankly sucks for young urban people versus the US.
Very true: over the last decade Canada has thrown a few bones to young people here and there while consistently treating them as collateral damage for all the big picture stuff. And to be clear, on many levels we're still lucky to live in Canada: even in its current state it's better than a lot of places in the world. I don't want to be ungrateful. But the thing with a transactional system is even if your current deal is pretty good, you shouldn't feel bad about accepting a better one if it comes along.
In the Western World there are a lot of good places to live, many of them better for Gen Z.
Canada is a geritocracy, always choosing seniors over Gen Z when a choice has to be made. Everything from Old Age Security to tax policy to even COVID policy favoured boomers over Gen Z. Modern Canada is a creation of boomers for boomers and one reason modern Canada is slowly dying is because boomers are slowly dying.
Of course but really this will all sort itself out. One way or another. We’ve made it more than 150 years and we are a pretty balanced population. We’ll get through this. Probably the better for it and stronger. Not that there aren’t existential issues, but we are nowhere near falling apart.
We are closer and closer to falling apart. How long do you think will Western Canada put up with Laurentian Trudeauist and Central/Eastern Canada's effing bullshit ? It will not be forever !
You say that… but western separatism just isn’t a thing. And that was before “Laurentian Trudeauist” began a nosedive in political popularity in Ontario.
Western Separatism isn't a thing, and that is mostly because there is no culture of protest and dissent in English Canada. They just don't have the gene for that, they are too laid back and nice.
But don't forget, separatism and revolutions always start at the top, they never start from the bottom, and the elite of Western Canada are happy as long as they can live part time in the US and move their money there. If the Canadian dollar takes a dive, watch out.
Yugoslavia looked like it was going to hold together, even with their multiethnic equalization and hinterland subsidization of the centre, into the Yugo Dinar crashed into nothing in the face of hyperinflation. When the elite felt it hard they started the revolutions.
I'm with you on this one, it's a pretty alarmist take. Our government may be falling apart but it's far from the first time, our country will be fine.
Even if the Trump tariffs are not just a negotiating tactic, I don't see them lasting long term. And even if they do, it'll give us the necessary kick in the ass to finally establish interprovincial free trade, diversify our trade partners, and end our overreliance on the US. Hell maybe we'll even use some of those natural resources for domestic production.
Yes it will be difficult, painful, and scary, but there are many possible paths in which we come out a stronger and better nation on the other side.
We have PQ on the upswing now and promising another referendum on Independence for Quebec! For the last decade we have nothing from the Liberals to unite the country, rather they have exploited and exaggerated regional differences & friction! We have the US fishing for a reaction on the 51st state proposal & we are “fine” - eh?
PQ upswing is cyclical, it happens once a generation. I, as a Quebecois, am not so sure that Quebec truly wants to separate. Certainly something to pay attention to but not a reason to panic.
As for Trump's 51st state stuff - are you under the impression he's planning to annex Canada? He said the same stuff in his last term.
Yes it's shitty that he can say that with basically no consequences, but again, we are extremely overreliant on the States and we have very little leverage. It will be good for us in the long run to wean ourselves off that dependence
I'm not saying everything is fine *now*. We are definitely in some choppy waters and there's more turbulence ahead. What I'm saying is that we'll get through it, and that to say the sky is falling is premature.
Polls suggest that PQ will win a crushing victory in 2026, and they have promised a referendum on independence in their first term. The Yes won twice in the past, but both times there was a strong leader to defend the country. Who will that leader be this time? Not Francois Legault, not Pierre Poilievre.
English Canadians are sick of the "neverendums." Quite frankly they don't believe Quebec will have the garumba to separate. English Canada dares them. It's only that the Liberal Party being the Ottawa Valley/West Island Party that anyone even cares anymore
The challenge from without will unite us within as it always has. And agree, this is a wake up call. We want to be a sovereign country because we have very different priorities, a different level of emphasis on community vs individual. To do that we need to as has been said reduce interprovincial trade barriers and diversify our trade partners. We also need a real military again. An annexation attempt would always succeed no matter how big our military, but right now it would be cost free for the US in both blood and money. They need to know we could make it painful so that instead they would prefer a deal. For that reason as well as the disgrace of free riding on them and NATO this needs to become a priority.
This reminds me of my teenagers. At the end of term, realizing they have left a group project and a 2500 word essay just as they write finals. It’s horrendous to watch but also, “Buddy, you knew this was coming…, you could have nailed this and win. But here we are.” US inauguration, liberal leadership, and an election…. We knew 2025 was gonna be full, but yet, here we are.
We save your podcast from Friday for Saturday morning. We make our coffee, open the curtains, settle into our big chairs with our dogs and hit the go button. Yes, sometimes we get depressed but also we cannot make change unless we recognize the current mess in all its glory. We appreciate (tongue in cheek) our Saturday morning dose of despair because there is always a glimmer of hope there too. Merry Christmas to you both and thank you
I completely understand that for practical purposes the government is not going to be defeated until the House actually considers a confidence motion, and the government can delay that a lot.
But within living memory, politicians still believed that a government must maintain the confidence of the House at all times, and that if this is ever in question, it is the obligation of the government itself to test confidence forthwith. The idea that a PM and cabinet could govern for months and months while lacking the actual confidence of a majority of MPs, because they have procedurally avoided a vote, is utterly inconsistent with Parliamentary government and we have somehow just drifted into accepting it.
Guess what. The undesirable behavior you are describing is entirely consistent Trudeau's mentality and "ethics" - he does not have any, and entirely consistent with the mentality and "ethics" of the Liberal Party. And I do not see the crowds having the balls to drag him/them out of the office.
Their thinking is that they need to do anything possible to "protect Canada" from being governed by someone who isn't them, don't understand Canada and aren't even real Canadians. The Liberal Party represents the "real Canada" while the Conservatives are the interlopers and outsiders. When you think that way anything can be justified.
Probably true. But there has been a longer and broader erosion of norms around confidence. Martin lost a confidence vote and gave himself a do-over in the Stronach floor crossing, and Harper prorogued to reestablish confidence (both eventually did win confidence votes, but gave themselves time when confidence appeared at least temporarily absent). The McGuinty-Wynne minority government in Ontario was absolutely horrible on this score.
If Trudeau trudges on it will be the latest and possibly the worst chapter, but he did not start this story and it probably won’t end with him.
Friend, if we want Canada to have a reasonably functioning federal gov, that story better end with Trudeau.
You didn’t convince me that Canada would not be a majority of Blue voters if we were indeed the 51st state.
We will never be swallowed up by the US …
I believe Canada will in the next 2-4 years have a constitutional crisis (brought on by the wholely unbalanced senate) which Poilievre will not be able to ignore.
First ministers meeting, followed by a national referendum … (we’ve done this before, but this time it will succeed)
Net result, looser confederation, no king, triple E senate. Every region will be happy, because Ottawa will no longer be allowed to inflict themselves in provincial juristiction. Essentially we’ll become a republic.
10 years ago, I would not have fought for this, but 9 years of Trudeau/Giulbeault/Freeland and I know we need to put daylight between the provincial and federal govt powers, and limit Ottawa’s reach.
Ultimately it is control of money that is political control. As long as the feds control the money supply, print the cash and control the banking system, they if course have control over the provinces on anything they want. Look at the Canada Health Act, it doesn't have any power over provinces other than as an obey for free cash mechanism.
The only way I see the provinces working around that is by Canadians starting to use US Dollars in conjunction with Canadian Dollar's in everyday life. We'd be like Latin America or Eastern Europe using the superpower currency for bigger everyday purchases. In Argentina USD is used to buy houses, cars and even phones.
With our currency rapidly declining we might move that way.
In the last year I've noticed many more areas of business start using USD in Canada, including with government procurement.
And this is why we need daylight between provincial and federal powers … including all provinces collecting their taxes and remitting back to Ottawa their portion. (As Quebec already does.) all provinces need the same freedom Quebec has.
We should control our destiny, NOT Ottawa.
Interesting. The low point historically for the Canadian$ vs US$was (roughly) 62 cents back in 2002 - I don't recall many areas of business using US$ in Canada back then?
I could also be unaware that was occuring back then, and I'm raising it not to discount or dispute your point that it's beginning to happen now.
I think digital currency adoption (I don't mean crypto) is much more widespread now than it was back in 2002, so part of the reason could be it's much easier to deal in US$ than it was 22 years ago.
Most definitely. You can sign up for a Wise card in minutes and exchange CAD to USD in seconds with a great rate. In 2002 people used banks with their scandalous fees or currency brokers, many of which are shady.
All of my equity assets are in USD and have been for a few years now. Holding assets in CAD is too risky in my opinion.
Investing in USD is not new.
That's not what this discussion is about...we are talking about increasingly using the US$ as the Canadian currency of choice for transactions.
It's bad, but not a snow peso just yet.
Good !
The last 2 states admitted to the US were Hawaii and Alaska. At the time, Hawaii was regarded as solidly Republican and Alaska as Democratic (just goes to show how things can change over the decades…). That was a necessary condition to get bipartisan consensus for adding new states. I don’t see how you could get anything close to that split with Canada. There’s a few parts of rural Alberta, the BC interior, and perhaps rural Saskatchewan that might politically lean Republican, but the rest of Canada is well within the Democratic tent.
Instead, Canada would have to be treated like a U.S. territory like Puerto Rico - no congressional representation, no electoral votes. That seems like an intolerable state of affairs for what would represent 10% of the US population and GDP.
Economically I'd rather have Puerto Rico's territory status than the current Canadians status. I still think an EU style economic common market is necessary for Canada to survive the 21st Century. Canada is just too small, inconsequential and it's elite aren't good enough to lead Canada out of this on its own.
Thank you, George! There's a lot of people here writing from their hurt feelings and not doing any actual reasoning. The several tens of millions of Americans who aren't doing so well will not welcome 44 million "sweater backs" warmly. And they definitely won't let us keep our single-payer healthcare!
It seems to me the overarching problem is the worldwide advance of the neoliberal agenda. It's about smothering democracy in favor of oligarchy. We're seeing it in spades in the US (President Elon) and moving there is not going to change it.
This is rather long but it's an excellent explanation where we are, how we got here and where we're going.
https://open.substack.com/pub/jaredyatessexton/p/what-the-hell-is-going-on-an-explainer?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1i91o
Most people aren't bright enough to understand these concepts, which is why traditionally political change comes from the top down. Soviet Union collapsed because the nomenklatura gave up on it. The EU is a creation of the European elite, etc.
Canada is on the path to a North American common market economy with the US, not giving up sovereignty. Old stock Canadians are still wedded to the idea of Canada (even though most immigrants would jump to the US if given a chance).
Ultimately economic prosperity is what matters most. You can create a good life in a relatively awful place with prosperity.
Canada can't operate forever with resort town economics which is what we have now.
"Let's see if we can salvage something from the wreck."
"The country?"
"What? No, idiot; the Party, of course! Who gives two puffs of atomic emanation for the country?"
I've hated the devaluing and degrading of our national identity over the last decade. It utterly flabbergasted me seeing all the gormless weasels pitch that we were every one of us complicit in ongoing crimes against the Canadian state. Not myself, not my family, and none of my friends have contributed to this crappy mentality. I'm proud to say that I've never once thought about "decolonizing", considered Canada to be a fake country, or have ever been ashamed to be Canadian. I still remember with pride the I Am Canadian beer commercials.
Maybe that was one of the problems, Canadian nationalism was so shallow that a weird beer commercial was seen as an emblem of Canadian culture.
Being "nice" meaning being passive aggressive and mediocre but free health care isn't something you can build a country on.
"Free" and "healthcare." Neither of those terms can be taken literally in Canada. And yet, it's still pretty much so sacred that minions of Canadians are in denial that there is a problem with it.
Anyone who works in marketing in Canada will tell you, with data to back it up, that Canadians are willing to eat a lot of $hit just to get something for free. It's part of the culture.
You guys are on fire these days - great stuff.
As to a possible successor to Junior, I don't see how any current Cabinet Minister could credibly do it. Every last one of them is complicit in this regime. They have all been, as Jen described Freeland, going along with it (FOR YEARS!!) right up to today - or in Freeland's case, to the day Junior demoted her.
So it's impossible for almost any MP, much less any Cabinet Minister to distinguish themselves from Junior at this point. Joel Lightbound is arguably the ONLY one who could credibly do so (I may be overlooking someone else and will update the list as needed). As Jen pointed out in her mid-week article, even the on-the-record dissidents all seem fine with what Junior's government has actually done - they only want him gone because they see the electoral writing on the wall. And look at Oliphant's performance the last 24 hours. What a joke.
And this is where I think I part ways with Matt a little. I don't have a shred of sympathy for a single one of these people other than Lightbound. Every one of them has consciously gone a long for the ride and any opprobrium directed their way is, in the grand scheme of things, both pretty mild and something they signed up for.
And yeah, every single thing you said about Canadian identity hit the nail on the head. When the Prime Minister shits on the Country and its people the way he has it can hardly be surprising that patriotism will take a hit.
To respond to the argument that you borrowed from Jen: The Liberals do have a problem that is fundamentally *policy-related* in nature, but arguably the Trudeau Liberals are more judged by Canadians by an *absence* of policy on major societal issues than by the government having an *actively-harmful* policy agenda. To that extent, it makes sense that the Liberals who condemn Trudeau would have minimal stated opposition to his policies: what they want is a leader who would create a healthier space for deeper policy debate on areas where the party is fundamentally lacking ideas.
While the Trudeau Liberals have not exactly been eager to own up to mistakes, they have not advanced a governing agenda that looks ambitious by the standards of most governments, which is an obvious justification for my above argument. Canadians and Trudeau-critical Liberals are judging for what they are *not* seeing in policy, as much as for what they are seeing in policy.
I think you are still making the broader point I was getting at, though. Whether Canadians are more annoyed by what they are not seeing in policy or what they are seeing in policy doesn't change the fact that, as you say, the Liberals problem is fundamentally policy-related in nature (although Chris Seeley's column in today's Post nicely highlighted some of the non-policy issues that drive many of us absolutely crazy).
So, if you have been in Cabinet (and even if not, albeit to a lesser extent) walking in lock-step with these policies for many years without ever objecting, you have a credibility problem. I also don't think one gets over that problem that by suddenly expressing misgivings you allegedly had over the years but kept to yourself. That's just too easy to swat away in an election campaign ("Oh, so NOW you are putting the Country's interests first - how convenient".) "When you are explaining you are losing" is an axiom for a reason.
I also recognize that all our parties have regrettably become ossified to the point that the slightest dissent is career limiting if not career ending thereby discouraging the expression of misgivings. But that is what I was getting at when I said they signed up for this. And some do remain true to themselves - Lightbound, Morneau and JWR being three examples - so it can be done. For that reason I think any one of those three would have far more credibility leading the Liberals into the next election than any current member of Cabinet (not that there is the slightest chance of that happening, of course).
BTW, can you remind me of the name of that new federal party that you mentioned to me a few months ago? It has slipped my memory and I did not bookmark the website.
The Canadian Future Party: https://thecanadianfutureparty.ca/
Thanks!
Jen
Thank you for an awesome summary of the source of the Canadian Identity malaise and the not so fanciful flight by Stockwell Day.
I see the whole attack on the Canadian Identity as a revenge war on Canada’s English culture by the Quebec French started by Trudeau senior. Multiculturalism, the growth of immigration were intended to replace the Canadian melting pot concept by a divide and conquer approach leaving Quebec French as the only strong homogeneous group in Confederation. Official bilingualism and the growth of the civil service, the use of umbrella legislation followed by innumerable regulations generated in secrecy, ensured that the country was run by the Quebec French. Another straw is the recent edict that Canadas Supreme Court justices have to be bilingual without a translator present. And Trudeau junior, wittingly or not, has been quite successful at mulching the grass of Canadian identity first mowed by his father of record.
Like Sheila wrote above four or five states would be appropriate. There was an excellent discussion of the topic a few years ago in American Nations by Colin Woodard.
I think Stockwell is on the right track although I think parity between the two dollars is fanciful. But one factor is Canada’s massive immigration of the last few years. I strongly suspect subject to correction that most of these immigrants came here because it was administratively far easier or more possible than in the US. so they accept Canada as a frozen purgatory until they get the chops to get into the paradise down south.
There is a nice symmetry to 51 stars. 9 8 9 8 9 8. Numerology anyone?
You are absolutely right, if you were to just poll immigrants to Canada, and controlled for those immigrants afraid that this was all a loyalty test, you'd find most immigrants to Canada would move to the US if their lives allowed it in a heartbeat.
If you need a more solid example of the utter failure of the Laurentian Elite, other than their economic management failure, I can't think of one. People vote with their feet.
In your discussion of Machiavellian succession planning you missed a golden opportunity to use the expression "the second mouse gets the cheese".
There is absolutely no reason why Canada shouldn't be one of the wealthiest and happiest countries in the world. On paper our potential is extraordinary. The problem is ultimately us, and our economic, political and cultural leadership.
They ultimately believe in a zero sum world, unlike the American elite, and the world isn't that. I guess it can be explained by US agrarian founding culture vs Canadian resource extraction hinterland culture. They made the original sin of pushing away the Americans which makes no sense if you aren't a zero sum believer. They organized Canada east-west on a continent that is aligned north-south for instance. It's a special sort of dumb. They also played regions off each other and used some regions as a sucker to subsidize other regions to hold onto their power. It's all now starting to fall apart.
The fact is that Canadians compare our country to the US. Economically we have already failed. We have the inferior business culture, businesses, finance system and talent. The US has already failed socially compared to Canada. Their K-12 education system has the same sort of failures that our health care system has, but their crime, populist clown show and their societal Achilles heel of a broken and failed health insurance system (worst of capitalism and socialism all in one) are rapidly breaking their country.
What is the solution? Full EU style economic integration with the US. Canada will not survive without access to the US markets and culture. Canada can help the US with its social problems that are eating it from the inside out as well. A bit of hinterland common sense from the land where "everyone seems to be handy" (according to a European client visiting and wanted to see Canadian Tire, lol) would help the Americans immensely. I suspect some important people in the US see that as well.
Canadians are nothing of not problem solvers and survivors. We can ditch our Laurentian Consensus, United Empire Loyalists, old stock clowns who have failed Canada and the Americans can dump their populist grifters and the sum of the parts can be greater than the individual. We need each other to save us from ourselves.
This will start in places like Alberta and Minnesota which are "in between" places on this continent. Windsor is a given, it's obvious the place never reached its potential because it's in the wrong country. It's wild that this hasn't already happened.
Polling shows that once the weird nationalist boomers die off that objection to this will melt away, some might as.well start the discussion now.
And for Quebec and Alberta separatists, they don't have the brains or balls to actually do anything, ignore them.
A very good overview. As for the Alberta separatists, the conditions would have to become close to extreme and the prospects very dire for them to get off their behinds. As yet, the situation is nowhere near that level, but with each Liberal Laurentian UnElite government, it is coming closer.
The Alberta separatists types are more pathetic than the Trucker Convoy folks. At least the truckers had a bit of brains even if they lacked the balls to do anything substantial. The Alberta separatists even lack that
Have you talked to any ? Do you know any ? The gist I get I already described. I would not be so dismissive of them. That kind of stuff people keep tucked away and only pull it out when it really matters, something you know very well.
I live in Southern Alberta and have a large Rolodex. I've known people personally who were at Coutts and Windsor. I've also said that to them to their face.
Compared to French Canadians let alone Balkan people they are cosplay protesters.
Thank you for answering in a meaningful manner. I this case I must admit you have a more solid basis for a broader and deeper understanding of Alberta separatists than I have.
No problem, thank you for understanding. I'm not proud of it, I just live here.
Jen and my social circles have overlap, I don't doubt she knows them and their motivators and capabilities more than I do. I take them as seriously as she does.
Loved the point about the risks of a strictly transactional country.
I'll admit, even as a proud Rush-loving Canadian, the statehood idea has a certain appeal to me. Let's assume for a second that the US would admit Canada to the union as five full-fledged states (which would be roughly fair based on population) with full citizenship and green-card equivalency and efforts to maintain Canadian safety-net programs in some form. Even setting aside the potential of CAD for USD 1-1 (which seems odd and unnecessary), the transactional benefits are tempting: workers in many fields make more and are taxed less in the US, the US is much better at productivity and innovation, our oligopolies suddenly have a bunch of new competition (personally, I'll enjoy shopping at Trader Joe's and flying Delta back to my hometown), our startups can more easily sell to a market 10x the size, mobility rights gives us all more options for affordable homes and jobs as well as warmer weather to retire to, and we suddenly have a military actually capable of protecting our borders. Of course there are downsides (I quite enjoy not reading about constant school shootings for example), but as our "brain drain" shows, many people are okay with those trade-offs.
Now we are eschewing all of this for the idea of Canada. But that idea is being chipped away. Some of this is Trudeau's stupid "post-national state" thing, but the problems go deeper. How do we expect young people to have pride in a country where they can never expect to own a home (largely due to policy choices) and where politicians will ensure their wages stay low by jumping at the first self-interested cry of "labour shortage"? How can we have pride in a country where that pride is used to protect the oligopolies and promote dumb policies like the online streaming act? How can we have pride in a country where politicians seem pretty cool with foreign interference that helps their side and are more interested in diaspora politics than policies that are good for the country? How can we have pride in citizenship when leaders seem more-or-less fine with shady colleges and employers effectively selling it to the highest bidder?
If Canada is strictly transactional, then frankly the best transactional choice may be to accept a good US offer to join the union. If there's no real Canadian identity, then frankly what is the point of our country rather than the new US states/dominions of Quebec, the Maritimes, Ontario, Manitoba-Sasketchewan, and Alberta-BC?
And that is the thing. The juice of Canada in 2024 isn't worth the squeeze for anyone under say age 60. How can Gen Z love a country that doesn't love them back?
It's quite frankly asking them too much to ask them to sacrifice career, lifestyle and even family formation costs for a nebulous Laurentian idea of Canada.
Quite frankly, the Laurentian Elite aren't delivering enough to keep the idea of an independent Canada going. You're only as good as your last quarter and Canada quite frankly sucks for young urban people versus the US.
Very true: over the last decade Canada has thrown a few bones to young people here and there while consistently treating them as collateral damage for all the big picture stuff. And to be clear, on many levels we're still lucky to live in Canada: even in its current state it's better than a lot of places in the world. I don't want to be ungrateful. But the thing with a transactional system is even if your current deal is pretty good, you shouldn't feel bad about accepting a better one if it comes along.
In the Western World there are a lot of good places to live, many of them better for Gen Z.
Canada is a geritocracy, always choosing seniors over Gen Z when a choice has to be made. Everything from Old Age Security to tax policy to even COVID policy favoured boomers over Gen Z. Modern Canada is a creation of boomers for boomers and one reason modern Canada is slowly dying is because boomers are slowly dying.
Merry Christmas you young'uns! I await your return.
"President's Choice: Memories of Dignity"
That was such a good chuckle!
Of course but really this will all sort itself out. One way or another. We’ve made it more than 150 years and we are a pretty balanced population. We’ll get through this. Probably the better for it and stronger. Not that there aren’t existential issues, but we are nowhere near falling apart.
We are closer and closer to falling apart. How long do you think will Western Canada put up with Laurentian Trudeauist and Central/Eastern Canada's effing bullshit ? It will not be forever !
You say that… but western separatism just isn’t a thing. And that was before “Laurentian Trudeauist” began a nosedive in political popularity in Ontario.
Western Separatism isn't a thing, and that is mostly because there is no culture of protest and dissent in English Canada. They just don't have the gene for that, they are too laid back and nice.
But don't forget, separatism and revolutions always start at the top, they never start from the bottom, and the elite of Western Canada are happy as long as they can live part time in the US and move their money there. If the Canadian dollar takes a dive, watch out.
Yugoslavia looked like it was going to hold together, even with their multiethnic equalization and hinterland subsidization of the centre, into the Yugo Dinar crashed into nothing in the face of hyperinflation. When the elite felt it hard they started the revolutions.
> there is no culture of protest and dissent in English Canada
The frequent blockading of roads in BC by extreme environmentalists suggests that that is absolutely not true.
That is small beer by most other standards. Only an English Canadian would think that as being substantial.
I'm with you on this one, it's a pretty alarmist take. Our government may be falling apart but it's far from the first time, our country will be fine.
Even if the Trump tariffs are not just a negotiating tactic, I don't see them lasting long term. And even if they do, it'll give us the necessary kick in the ass to finally establish interprovincial free trade, diversify our trade partners, and end our overreliance on the US. Hell maybe we'll even use some of those natural resources for domestic production.
Yes it will be difficult, painful, and scary, but there are many possible paths in which we come out a stronger and better nation on the other side.
We have PQ on the upswing now and promising another referendum on Independence for Quebec! For the last decade we have nothing from the Liberals to unite the country, rather they have exploited and exaggerated regional differences & friction! We have the US fishing for a reaction on the 51st state proposal & we are “fine” - eh?
PQ upswing is cyclical, it happens once a generation. I, as a Quebecois, am not so sure that Quebec truly wants to separate. Certainly something to pay attention to but not a reason to panic.
As for Trump's 51st state stuff - are you under the impression he's planning to annex Canada? He said the same stuff in his last term.
Yes it's shitty that he can say that with basically no consequences, but again, we are extremely overreliant on the States and we have very little leverage. It will be good for us in the long run to wean ourselves off that dependence
I'm not saying everything is fine *now*. We are definitely in some choppy waters and there's more turbulence ahead. What I'm saying is that we'll get through it, and that to say the sky is falling is premature.
Polls suggest that PQ will win a crushing victory in 2026, and they have promised a referendum on independence in their first term. The Yes won twice in the past, but both times there was a strong leader to defend the country. Who will that leader be this time? Not Francois Legault, not Pierre Poilievre.
English Canadians are sick of the "neverendums." Quite frankly they don't believe Quebec will have the garumba to separate. English Canada dares them. It's only that the Liberal Party being the Ottawa Valley/West Island Party that anyone even cares anymore
The challenge from without will unite us within as it always has. And agree, this is a wake up call. We want to be a sovereign country because we have very different priorities, a different level of emphasis on community vs individual. To do that we need to as has been said reduce interprovincial trade barriers and diversify our trade partners. We also need a real military again. An annexation attempt would always succeed no matter how big our military, but right now it would be cost free for the US in both blood and money. They need to know we could make it painful so that instead they would prefer a deal. For that reason as well as the disgrace of free riding on them and NATO this needs to become a priority.
This reminds me of my teenagers. At the end of term, realizing they have left a group project and a 2500 word essay just as they write finals. It’s horrendous to watch but also, “Buddy, you knew this was coming…, you could have nailed this and win. But here we are.” US inauguration, liberal leadership, and an election…. We knew 2025 was gonna be full, but yet, here we are.
We save your podcast from Friday for Saturday morning. We make our coffee, open the curtains, settle into our big chairs with our dogs and hit the go button. Yes, sometimes we get depressed but also we cannot make change unless we recognize the current mess in all its glory. We appreciate (tongue in cheek) our Saturday morning dose of despair because there is always a glimmer of hope there too. Merry Christmas to you both and thank you
I will note that Ken Boessenkool pointed out that there was no federal budget in 2002. Still gives late Wynne vibes lol
Falling apart seems hyperbolic, but I agree Trudeau should have resigned long ago.