I don’t get what this is supposed to be. Are you just listing off random subdivisions of current provinces/territories? Why would we do any of that?
I don’t get what this is supposed to be. Are you just listing off random subdivisions of current provinces/territories? Why would we do any of that?
it's common for the poster in question to pop into a thread and do the imaging if shtick. Seen it other threads on the board such NCIS thread in Gen tv & media and For All Mankind in the SF&F and seldom do they make any sense.
Other than the creation of Nunavut by splitting the NWT, what else, and for what reason?
I'd be happy to create a tiny, minuscule little miniprovince for Danielle Smith to rule. It would be the size of an average maximum-security prison cell, and there would be no way out. Stick it in the middle of nowhere up north, where the permafrost is in danger of melting (because the United Corruption Party is allergic to climate science). Drop stale bread and expired water through once every day, as that's how often some people get to eat if they're homeless. And then forget about her.
Try this again, with spacing and punctuation. Right now it's a word salad I have no intention to try to parse.
Well those are…words. Devoid of ascertainable meaning, but words nonetheless.
I see. OK then, I guess.
As long as we're talking hypotheticals, I could theoretically see, in a not-near future, that if we continued on with our reconciliation journey, that we could potentially create new subnational units that were based on or inspired by Indigenous nations. I honestly have no idea how that would work legally or constitutionally, but I could see it as something our nation undertook, someday.
I don't think we're anywhere even remotely close to that today, especially when you look at how many Canadians get angry any time anything related to the topic of Indigenous rights or land claims comes up.
I don't, however, think we're going to be, for example, splitting Saskatchewan into "Upper Saskatchewan" and "Lower Saskatchewan" "just because".
Not to mention that I think it would only amplify representational issues. Like, it's already hard enough for northern communities to get representation as is. Northern Ontario, for example, has many resources not available in the south, yet our money towards projects still end up going mostly to Toronto. They get new trains while we still wait for Highways 11 and 17 to get four-laned, projects that were announced more than 25 years ago, meanwhile over 100 deaths and road closures have occurred this year alone on these highways, with repeated pleas by MPs falling on deaf ears. I cannot ever see us as a separate territory because we don't have the weight or support or fInancial stability to do what needs doing. That's not resignation, it's just facing the economic reality, because thoughts would then turn to how we would support ourselves. We have the mines, sure, including the Ring of Fire that has been talked about for more than a decade, and access to it would require improvements to Highways 11 and 17, if you count the increased traffic these roads would bring.
Several years ago there was some ballyhoo when some indigenous wanted it to be illegal for any city or town not on indigenous lands to have any part of their names related to indigenous words. Since my city, Red Deer, is a mistranslation of a word meaning Red Elk, we'd have to change our name. The subdivision I used to live in, Waskasoo, would have to change its name.
Then there was the opposite point of view in which every city and town that doesn't have an indigenous name, would have to acquire one, and they promptly began arguing about what to rename Calgary.
I see the point about European cartographers just renaming indigenous landmarks without regard to what their indigenous names are. But honestly, some of those names are either impossible to pronounce, impossible to spell (letters not in any European language), and I doubt this is ever going to happen.
As for the land claims and anger... I've told some of them on social media that I'll gladly vote for indigenous claims-friendly politicians and write letters and sign petitions in support of those UNLESS they come at me with hostility and ranting that I'm a "colonizer" or "settler".
I personally colonized nothing. I personally settled nothing. I was born here, and nobody asked my permission for that. Ditto with my parents. We can't help that our parents/grandparents/great-grandparents chose to come here and homestead.
I personally did not put the residential school system into place, and I've made it very clear to anyone who yaps on about what a "wonderful" MLA we have here in Red Deer North that she's a residential school denier who hired another residential school denier to oversee the social studies portion of the first curriculum she tried to shove in everyone's faces. She's like that senator who was finally kicked out of the Senate for posting pro-residential school content on her government-paid social media site.
Unfortunately, that's not enough to get a UCP MLA kicked out here in Alberta - nor is the fact that she approved a "field trip" to bus high school students to Edmonton to participate in an anti-abortion rally.
So getting back to the indigenous question: Lump me in with the people who are the real enemy, and then you'll find that my level of willingness to engage drops to very low levels. Depending on the school system, some of this wasn't on the curriculum when I was in school in the '60s and '70s. I didn't hear of the Sixties Scoop until decades later, one night on the news (have read up about it since).
So when they say, "Why didn't you do anything about it?" my answer is you can't do anything about something you were never taught. And afterward, I use my constitutionally-guaranteed right of voting and freedom of expression the best way I can. I can't wave a magic wand and make it all not have happened.
That's the beauty of it, if you are your own province, none of your provincial taxes would end up going to Toronto, just like right now Queen's Park doesn't send its tax revenue to Edmonton or Halifax.
But seriously, I totally get your point about the economic issues that would cause. Balkanizing our country into all the different subnational units mentioned upthread I think is pretty unrealistic, and doesn't seem to provide much benefit. Although at least you get a cool name out of it. "Northe[r]n Republic of Ontario" does sound pretty impressive, even though it sounds more like country name than a province name. Seems unlikely that a province could be considered a republic within our constitutional framework. But what'd we get in the south? "The Southern Sections of Ontario". Sounds like the PMO sent the forms to fill out, and we accidentally entered the "geographic location" in the "name" field. If we ever did do something like that (again, totally unrealistic, I know, but just as a thought exercise), I would hope we could come up with original names. It's like if we had named Nunavut "Eastern Northwest Territories" or something.
I don't remember covering anything regarding Indigenous issues in school either, although I was there later than you, and in a different province. I think it's great that they are teaching these things in school now. We should be aware of our country's history, even the shameful parts.
At best they sound like Geographic Mad Libs!
As far as indigenous issues go, what we've taken to doing in Northern Ontario within the last decade or so in any presentations is to first acknowledge the land that we're on as being indigenous land. And any official signage is done in three languages; English, French, and Indigenous. For example, our local university entrance greets you in not only English and French, but Anishnabek as well. Those are steps towards reconciliation, and the indigenous people are more willing to discourse if you try to learn from them, from their culture.
As for city names, I see no reason why a compromise can't be reached where they name them as they wish while letting us keep the English names for them. Afterall, look at all the different global names cities have in different languages. I think it can be frustrating for them to not feel like they are being heard. They want to be acknowledged and to be learned from.
So Smith decided to go ahead with a referendum anyway. I hope the "remain" side pulls off a decisive victory, so we can maybe, possibly, put this to bed once and for all? (Yes, I know I'm a little naïve )
I know that polls only put support for separation around 30% or so, but TBH, that's still a lot higher than I would prefer to see. And you just know the disinformation is going to be coming fast and furious, with a lot of it coming from south of the border. I sense it's going to be a painful five months.
)I know that polls only put support for separation around 30% or so, but TBH, that's still a lot higher than I would prefer to see. And you just know the disinformation is going to be coming fast and furious, with a lot of it coming from south of the border. I sense it's going to be a painful five months.
True. But why should Quebec get all the fun?So Smith decided to go ahead with a referendum anyway. I hope the "remain" side pulls off a decisive victory, so we can maybe, possibly, put this to bed once and for all? (Yes, I know I'm a little naïve
I know that polls only put support for separation around 30% or so, but TBH, that's still a lot higher than I would prefer to see. And you just know the disinformation is going to be coming fast and furious, with a lot of it coming from south of the border. I sense it's going to be a painful five months.
So Smith decided to go ahead with a referendum anyway. I hope the "remain" side pulls off a decisive victory, so we can maybe, possibly, put this to bed once and for all? (Yes, I know I'm a little naïve
I know that polls only put support for separation around 30% or so, but TBH, that's still a lot higher than I would prefer to see. And you just know the disinformation is going to be coming fast and furious, with a lot of it coming from south of the border. I sense it's going to be a painful five months.
Smitler shuffled the cabinet a tiny bit. It won't make any difference, unless it gets worse.
I signed the first one - the legitimate one. Nice to know my signature means nothing to that pack of criminals.
Smitler doesn't seem to realize how despised she is now - not only in Alberta, not only in Canada. This made international news
So Smith decided to go ahead with a referendum anyway. I hope the "remain" side pulls off a decisive victory, so we can maybe, possibly, put this to bed once and for all? (Yes, I know I'm a little naïve
I know that polls only put support for separation around 30% or so, but TBH, that's still a lot higher than I would prefer to see. And you just know the disinformation is going to be coming fast and furious, with a lot of it coming from south of the border. I sense it's going to be a painful five months.
Yes, we must not underestimate the interference south of the border. I just read that one of the key differences between the Quebec Separatists and the Alberta Separatists is in Quebec, the issue was a homegrown cultural issue, whereas the Alberta Separatist movement has been gaining steam only due to the outside interference taking advantage of a perilous situation.
I hope the government takes a long hard look at the intereference going on. It's baffling that the orange cheeto thinks airing a commercial of Reagan constitutes foreign intereference while the U.S government has done far far worse against us. In an ordinary world, this would never be OK.
Last edited:
So Smith decided to go ahead with a referendum anyway. I hope the "remain" side pulls off a decisive victory, so we can maybe, possibly, put this to bed once and for all? (Yes, I know I'm a little naïve
Suprised that she's in favour of Alberta staying as part of Canada,
Thought she'd be all gung-ho a the idea of being president of the new nation of Albert.
... just before it was swallowed up by the U.S.
She's been flip-flopping on the issue. I think that's her wanting to have her cake and eat it too. She's all-in until the heat gets to her, then it's back to saying she's in favour of staying as part of Canada. There's even that infamous picture of her with T and O'Leary at Mar-A-Lago, which doesn't at all scream backdoor dealings, no sir. I think she's stuck in a reality where should the Separatists win, she would likely lose her power.
Or just doesn't care. Poilievre is widely reviled too, yet he still clings to leadership.
American exceptionalism is a hell of a drug.
This administration pulls this kind of thing with us all the time.
US: Puts a bunch of tariffs on us under some flimsy national security excuse to circumvent CUSMA
Canada: In retaliation to those unjustified tariffs, several provinces remove US alcohol from their shelves
US: "How f***ing DARE you do this to us!!
"She's certainly given enough assists to the separatists. Her words may say one thing, but her actions say another.
I mean, the separatists are already bleating about how they're going to work to depose her as UCP leader because her referendum question about having a referendum wasn't sufficiently pro-separatist enough.
Personally, I'd like this to be the rift that ends up tearing the UCP apart, and they can split back into two separate parties again, one for the PCs, and another for the crazies. Of course, I'd like to see the same thing happen federally, too. Still waiting.
would love it that lead to a big ndp win at the next provincial election.
and from Global National tonight, while the little pissant is out campaigning to keep Alberta as part of Canada he'll be attacking Carney and accusing him of failing to keep the country united.
Carney has pretty much bent over backwards for Alberta and it's been the conservatives stoking the fires of separation.
the leader of the opposition could have spoken out long before now in support of Alberta staying in the confederation.
American exceptionalism is a hell of a drug.
This administration pulls this kind of thing with us all the time.
US: Puts a bunch of tariffs on us under some flimsy national security excuse to circumvent CUSMA
Canada: In retaliation to those unjustified tariffs, several provinces remove US alcohol from their shelves
US: "How f***ing DARE you do this to us!!
It sure is. And it's astonishing the level of hubris and gaslighting going on. Nothing is ever their fault even when they're the ones that started it all. And yet they go and accuse us of rethoric? Excuse me? Victim blaming, much? As far as I feel, we've been fairly level-headed throughout all this, even while we get called mean and nasty. And even then, we've been more on the defensive rather than the offensive. If a bully breaks your nose, they don't get to act like they're the aggrieved.
I mean, you would think at some point someone would learn that there are there are consequences to every action. Nothing ever happens in a vacuum.
It'd be kind of funny if it weren't so sad, because she's obviously playing off both sides and trying to stay relevant.
Of course they do. How else would you know they were bullies?
(Naturally that provides an opportunity to break the bully’s nose—but that’s another game altogether)
Of course they do. How else would you know they were bullies?
(Naturally that provides an opportunity to break the bully’s nose—but that’s another game altogether)
Well, naturally, but normally even bullies tend to know their limits and know when they've been outfoxed. Here though, we see someone constantly use the same tactics over and over again like they've learned nothing. It's kind of comical. I mean, if you poke a bear to see what would happen, and you keep poking at it until it tears your arm off, that's completely on you, because congratulations you've managed to anger a bear. And if that happens, you don't turn around and do it again with another bear, unless you haven't learned from your first mistake, which might lead you to lose both of your arms. Well, I should say, you can bully a bear, just don't expect a warm embrace.
Similar threads
