Alberta Separatism is starting to go mainstream

[suntan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Reminds me of Gestalt.. oh wait

Shh...

[tirebob]

Truthfully, it isn't even that we have to actually separate... We just have to show them we are truly willing to do so to get any meaningful form of concessions from the east coast. As long as they know we will roll over without any kind of fight they will keep pushing us as far as they can knowing they have not reached the limit of our patience. If they realize that we are at the limit and are wiling to go to extreme's to keep from being abused any further, only then can we get our fair share.

I have been saying this forever... We need to take a page out of Quebec's playbook. They threw the country for a loop when they started down this road, formed their own political block that they know very well will never run the country, but they are strong enough to force governments to give them the concessions they want, especially in a minority situation. If we could get everyone in the west to vote in a western block then it would mean we would force the Libs and NDP into a minority situation the vast majority of the time and then we could effectively bend them to our collective will rather than constantly getting beat down.

[ZenOps]

So you are saying 10 different parties each catering to a province. Sounds like a plan, I will watch while China takes over all of it while we are bickering amongst ourselves trying to get a single thing done.

[tirebob]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So you are saying 10 different parties each catering to a province. Sounds like a plan, I will watch while China takes over all of it while we are bickering amongst ourselves trying to get a single thing done.

No not that at all... I am talking about the entire west forming a western oriented party. Province to province it could never happen because the seats are so loaded to Quebec and Ontario that they would just rule. In fact, it is that I am suggesting we counter. If we legitimately could suggest that separation of the western provinces is possible, and I am not saying it is the way to go, it would also reason that as a possibility we could avoid separation if we could convince the western provinces to vote for a block of our own.

Again, what I am suggesting is not a simple thing, but as an alternative to separating, it would give us much more control.

You are absolutely right though. It would not work if we all just bicker among ourselves, which is the reality of our country. It would require us all coming together and working from the same page, just as separation would. This is all just jibber jabber though of course as we are a country full of big talkers who eventually let our lazy comfortable lives decide the fight isn't worth it, but it is still interesting to consider.

[Antonito]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Truthfully, it isn't even that we have to actually separate... We just have to show them we are truly willing to do so to get any meaningful form of concessions from the east coast. As long as they know we will roll over without any kind of fight they will keep pushing us as far as they can knowing they have not reached the limit of our patience. If they realize that we are at the limit and are wiling to go to extreme's to keep from being abused any further, only then can we get our fair share.

I have been saying this forever... We need to take a page out of Quebec's playbook. They threw the country for a loop when they started down this road, formed their own political block that they know very well will never run the country, but they are strong enough to force governments to give them the concessions they want, especially in a minority situation. If we could get everyone in the west to vote in a western block then it would mean we would force the Libs and NDP into a minority situation the vast majority of the time and then we could effectively bend them to our collective will rather than constantly getting beat down.

I think this is a very good idea, although I would say just scrap the idea of even giving lip service to separation as it's too divisive an issue. Instead of wasting a bunch of time arguing about fantasies of becoming the next Saudi Arabia, which westerners are split on, go with what matters to 90% of westerners, which is pushing for meaningful action in the government

[Buster]

The west did vote in a bloc.

[tirebob]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The west did vote in a bloc.

Essentially yes, but the block they voted in is one that still wants to cater to the east to try and buy votes. I am suggesting a western specific party who basically says "Fuck You" to the east first and then sticks out their hand asking "what's in it for us?" and if you comply with what we want, we will consider what you want.

The issue with the federal parties we can vote for is that they want to be the ruling party so they will always be stuck pandering to the east, but imagine what we could do if we don't care about being the ruling party, but instead be the block that can push around the ruling party. Don't be the head, but instead be the whip.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Essentially yes, but the block they voted in is one that still wants to cater to the east to try and buy votes. I am suggesting a western specific party who basically says "Fuck You" to the east first and then sticks out their hand asking "what's in it for us?" and if you comply with what we want, we will consider what you want.

Like Quebec it would need to be a federal party with a separatist goal

[tirebob]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Like Quebec it would need to be a federal party with a separatist goal

It would absolutely require the threat of separation, but not necessarily the need to seperate. We just need to be serious enough about the threat that the east must take action to help us or lose out. This is exactly how Quebec got its power. I don't think they truly expect to separate as much as they are just squeezing our collective balls to get the lions share of the benefits. That is exactly what we should be doing.

[Ca_Silvia13]

It's rough looking at the seat allocation by population. I feel a lot of the separatism talk could go away if the west could get more seats but we need more people out here plain and simple.

Seat allocations - https://www.elections.ca/content.asp...t=index&lang=e

Q3 Population per Prov. - https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=1710000901


Rough math on a few Provinces:

Ont - 120,384 per seat
Que - 108,781
AB - 128,568
Sask - 83,890
MB - 97,818

Doesn't quite make sense to me at this time those number are all over the place

[dirtsniffer]

don't look at atlantic canada. less than 70,000 people per riding

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It would absolutely require the threat of separation, but not necessarily the need to seperate. We just need to be serious enough about the threat that the east must take action to help us or lose out. This is exactly how Quebec got its power. I don't think they truly expect to separate as much as they are just squeezing our collective balls to get the lions share of the benefits. That is exactly what we should be doing.

Quebec has entirely different separation motivations - I don't think you can easily compare the two.

The big difference between the west and Quebec is that Quebec has a far smaller worry about its democratic representation within confederation. The best that the west can do is piggyback on Ontario voters' whims - if they choose to vote Conservative. Westerners will only be properly represented by a re-format of Confederation in some way, or by an exit.

Also: It would absolutely not be in Quebec's best interest to leave. They might, but if they did so, it would be something of an irrational decision.

The West is different: there is a much better argument to be made that the rational decision is to leave, rather than stay. You can make an economic argument for it, a social argument for it, and a democratic representation argument for it.

In other words, the West can't really get what it wants/needs by staying, while Quebec can. It's really just the negotiation concept of BATNA.

[pheoxs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's rough looking at the seat allocation by population. I feel a lot of the separatism talk could go away if the west could get more seats but we need more people out here plain and simple.

Seat allocations - https://www.elections.ca/content.asp...t=index&lang=e

Q3 Population per Prov. - https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=1710000901


Rough math on a few Provinces:

Ont - 120,384 per seat
Que - 108,781
AB - 128,568
Sask - 83,890
MB - 97,818

Doesn't quite make sense to me at this time those number are all over the place

Well AB grew a lot in population since the last shuffle of seats. Tbh we are overdo and it should be done.

[dirtsniffer]

The problem is that atlantic canada is constitutionally guaranteed more seats than they need. To make it a more uniform distribution, AB needs to gain 5 seats, and atlantic canada needs to lose 9.

[tirebob]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Quebec has entirely different separation motivations - I don't think you can easily compare the two.

The big difference between the west and Quebec is that Quebec has a far smaller worry about its democratic representation within confederation. The best that the west can do is piggyback on Ontario voters' whims - if they choose to vote Conservative. Westerners will only be properly represented by a re-format of Confederation in some way, or by an exit.

Also: It would absolutely not be in Quebec's best interest to leave. They might, but if they did so, it would be something of an irrational decision.

The West is different: there is a much better argument to be made that the rational decision is to leave, rather than stay. You can make an economic argument for it, a social argument for it, and a democratic representation argument for it.

In other words, the West can't really get what it wants/needs by staying, while Quebec can. It's really just the negotiation concept of BATNA.

I hear you... I am not for or against either of these plans as it sits, but they definitely need to be explored and determine the best way to move forward. We are all keyboard warriors a bt on this subject with valid concerns and points, but I think it is safe to assume we also all don't necessarily have the full experience and knowledge to say with 100% certainty that there is only one way to proceed. I want to be treated fairly, plain and simple, and I truly hope we can do that without having to break apart our country, but there is no arguing that things need to change. We have moved past how things used to work in the old days and it is time for a new plan.

[Ca_Silvia13]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The problem is that atlantic canada is constitutionally guaranteed more seats than they need. To make it a more uniform distribution, AB needs to gain 5 seats, and atlantic canada needs to lose 9.

I don't see it like that. Nova Scotia is 100k away from Sask's population and Sask has 14 seats vs 11. Arguably Nova Scotia actually deserves more.

Does anyone know how often they update the seats based on population? Is it every 4 years? It doesn't appear to happen often i couldn't find it.

[Buster]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I hear you... I am not for or against either of these plans as it sits, but they definitely need to be explored and determine the best way to move forward. We are all keyboard warriors a bt on this subject with valid concerns and points, but I think it is safe to assume we also all don't necessarily have the full experience and knowledge to say with 100% certainty that there is only one way to proceed. I want to be treated fairly, plain and simple, and I truly hope we can do that without having to break apart our country, but there is no arguing that things need to change. We have moved past how things used to work in the old days and it is time for a new plan.

My enthusiasm for separatism isn't because a solution within confederation isn't possible - because it is. The problem with a solution within confederation is that it is so improbable - and getting less probable by the minute. Are Ontario and Quebec going to give up significant voter representation? No. Is Canada likely to elect governments that treat the west favorably/fairly? No. Is climate hysteria going to start to become reasonable and return to good science? No. Are people in the RoC going to reverse course on their opinion of oil extraction? No. Is the Gov't of Canada going to start to grant additional powers to the provinces which would allow Alberta to mitigate any of the above problems? No.

so your suggestion that we use "leverage to leave" in order to gain concessions is a suggestion that we have enough unkind words to flip one or more of those questions to "yes."

In other words a threat has to actually be credible in order to be a threat.

And the ONLY way to make it credible is to have a serious populist (and policy response). Separation has to be our Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement . To date, we have considered continuation of the status quo as our Best Alternative. The irony here is that once you actually convince people that separation is the best alternative, and those people hit a critical mass, then you might see some capitulation by RoC. But I also know that Canadians in other parts of the country are too stupid to recognize a credible threat if it exists. Also, once people are convinced that separation is actually superior to a negotiated settlement within canada, then that train might not be able to get back in the station.

The real question that I am curious about is - where the populism manifest itself over the next while? Will it be a provincial push that Kenney needs to defend against? Will Kenney jump on a populist separatist bandwagon? Will it be a federal party that springs up and guts the Conservative home base?

I don't know.

[dirtsniffer]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't see it like that. Nova Scotia is 100k away from Sask's population and Sask has 14 seats vs 11. Arguably Nova Scotia actually deserves more.

Does anyone know how often they update the seats based on population? Is it every 4 years? It doesn't appear to happen often i couldn't find it.

How could a province deserve a larger say than another? This is exactly what fuels western alienation.

Seats were last added for the 2015 election.

Atlantic Canada has 32 seats for a population of 2.4 million. Alberta has 34 seats for a population that is 80% larger.



If every province had the same representation as Atlantic Canada we would need to add 154 seats to the house of commons.



If we kept 335 ridings and every riding had the same population we would have roughly 110,000 people per riding. In that instance, Ontario would gain 9 seats, Alberta would gain 5, and Atlantic Canada would lose 9. The problem is we would need to open the constituoin to make this work as Atlantic Canada is already at their constitutional minimum number of seats.

[Ca_Silvia13]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How could a province deserve a larger say than another? This is exactly what fuels western alienation.

Well it's based on population so that's hard to get around. I don't think having 13 seats in parliament is the answer either.

[jabjab]

Alberta should just become part of the states and make a deal with Trump to build pipelines.