All Things AB Separatism (split fm Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???)

[Halifax Tar]

At this point, I'm apt to agree with you so as to simply quite the noise and get on with thngs.

That said, in Quebec, the separatist group formed a party and won elections on a mandate to run a referendum, so they cleared a far higher bar that I highly doubt the Alberta groups could.

They, Quebec Separatists, also blew up bombs, killed and kidnapped people and caused the implantation of the war measures act.

It boggles my mind that people seen to accept the FLQ/BQ Que Separatists, but when its Alberta its all pearl clutching.

And I continue to believe that we cannot call ourselves a free and democratic society if we do not have a mechanism for individuals or groups to leave. Free choice also means we may not be everyone's first choice.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I think you have it right. Subverting the process serves to a) strengthen the belief of most outliers that the system is rigged against them, b) strengthen the resolve of the movement, perhaps even to the point of generating many more followers, and c) is patently undemocratic.

Absolutely spot on. Want to beat this ? Run the race.

 

[MilEME09]

I found this piece fascinating. Less so about the direct connection to the Alberta Separatist movement, and more so the revelation that what appears to be political interference is just as likely to be a scheme to generate monetized youtube content, often using actors.

Before anyone jumps in with "anything on CBC is lamestream government funded propaganda", the journalistic methods appear sound.

Equally, it seems highly probable that this kind of scheme is used across the political spectrum, banking on viewer confirmation bias in a quest for clicks, views, and followers.

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.7187429

You just described 80% of X, heck even liberal and CPC MPs do it. Alter headlines or bend the truth just to get more traction

 

[MilEME09]

They, Quebec Separatists, also blew up bombs, killed and kidnapped people and caused the implantation of the war measures act.

It boggles my mind that people seen to accept the FLQ/BQ Que Separatists, but when its Alberta its all pearl clutching.

And I continue to believe that we cannot call ourselves a free and democratic society if we do not have a mechanism for individuals or groups to leave. Free choice also means we may not be everyone's first choice.

We di have mechanisms though, it's just complicated. This isnt a kosovo scenario, where we just hold a vote and its done. Thanks to FN it is much more complicated

 

[Eaglelord17]

They, Quebec Separatists, also blew up bombs, killed and kidnapped people and caused the implantation of the war measures act.

It boggles my mind that people seen to accept the FLQ/BQ Que Separatists, but when its Alberta its all pearl clutching.

And I continue to believe that we cannot call ourselves a free and democratic society if we do not have a mechanism for individuals or groups to leave. Free choice also means we may not be everyone's first choice.

Individuals and groups can leave easily, they just can’t take the land with them.

Name any country in the world where it is easy to separate land from the state. There isn’t.

Considering the vast majority of Alberta doesn’t want to be part of this temper tantrum, what about their rights? Right now they are spending a lot of time and money appeasing a small group who ultimately will not win and is acting in bad faith to try and get a result they can’t win fairly.

And for the record I don’t agree with Quebec separating either.

 

[brihard]

They, Quebec Separatists, also blew up bombs, killed and kidnapped people and caused the implantation of the war measures act.

It boggles my mind that people seen to accept the FLQ/BQ Que Separatists, but when its Alberta its all pearl clutching.

And I continue to believe that we cannot call ourselves a free and democratic society if we do not have a mechanism for individuals or groups to leave. Free choice also means we may not be everyone's first choice.

Who here is accepting or condoningacts of terrorism by the FLQ? I’ve never seen anyone here defend them.

As to the Bloq, they’re fed and not allowed ver going to form the provincial government.
I suspect you mean the Parti Québécois, who are white separatism resides provincially, and who, if they formed government, would like have both the lawful position and the democratic mandate to pursue secession.

I suspect most of us would be generally accepting (as much as we are of the BQ/PW) of an explicitly regionally self-interested federal party, and/or of an explicitly secessionist provincial party. Voters would go to the polls knowing the deal. A democratic mandate to pursue secession would be earned or rejected in the most proper way.

If tomorrow there were to be a federal election in which we see spring into existence and win seats a Bloc Albertois who leverage their parliamentary position to pursue policies and legislation in Alberta’s benefit, totally fair game. If we saw a Parti Albertois run provincially on a secession platform and for provincial government, OK, also fair game. But if we saw a People’s Front of Alberta and/or Alberta People’s Front spring up and begin committing bombings and kidnappings in an effort to advance Alberta secession, I expect they would be universally condemned here and in most of society. I think all of us would be quite happy to see police tactical teams taking their doos in the wee hours of the morning, arresting them, and handing them off for prosecution for terrorism.

Falsely conflating lawful separatist politics with belligerent terrorism doesn’t move anything forward here.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Considering the vast majority of Alberta doesn’t want to be part of this temper tantrum, what about their rights? Right now they are spending a lot of time and money appeasing a small group who ultimately will not win and is acting in bad faith to try and get a result they can’t win fairly.

Then the vote should be a formality and it will help to quell anything as alluded too by @PPCLI Guy.

 

[MilEME09]

One thing to remember too, the FLQ was a fringe of the Qc separatist movement, and while it hasn't happened yet, and I hope it doesn't. There are plenty of people in the online sphere captured calling for violent action. All it would take is someone willing to put their money where their mouth is and organize them to start a violent movement.

 

[brihard]

Then the vote should be a formality and it will help to quell anything as alluded too by @PPCLI Guy.

Yes, but…

Even simply holding the vote brings major legal and political issues with First Nations who literally existed and had a treaty relationship with the crown before the province. In a nutshell it boils down to what right do others in the province have to attempt to impose a change on that treaty relationship and the way the First Nations are currently legally situated in Canada? If the First Nations acquiesce to a vote even being held, then they’re tacitly surrendering that very, very legally huge point.

I think there’s years of court challenges in any path here on the “should Alberta separate?” question.

I maintain that the easiest ‘good enough for now’ answer is to run a referendum in the Forever Canadian petition which simply asks if people want to stay in Canada. A loss would not compel a secession effort; it’s basically a referendum opinion poll on the sentiment of the population. However, a succesful “yes we should stay Canadian” result would offer comfort to people and to business that however the legalities around the secession petition and referendum eventually play out, they will not ultimately win or be leaving Canada, and things can carry on as normal.

Suck all the wind out of their sails without having to fully adjudicate the building of the boat.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Yes, but…

Even simply holding the vote brings major legal and political issues with First Nations who literally existed and had a treaty relationship with the crown before the province. In a nutshell it boils down to what right do others in the province have to attempt to impose a change on that treaty relationship and the way the First Nations are currently legally situated in Canada? If the First Nations acquiesce to a vote even being held, then they’re tacitly surrendering that very, very legally huge point.

I think there’s years of court challenges in any path here on the “should Alberta separate?” question.

I maintain that the easiest ‘good enough for now’ answer is to run a referendum in the Forever Canadian petition which simply asks if people want to stay in Canada. A loss would not compel a secession effort; it’s basically a referendum opinion poll on the sentiment of the population. However, a succesful “yes we should stay Canadian” result would offer comfort to people and to business that however the legalities around the secession petition and referendum eventually play out, they will not ultimately win or be leaving Canada, and things can carry on as normal.

Suck all the wind out of their sails without having to fully adjudicate the building of the boat.

Hold the vote.

 

[brihard]

Hold the vote.

Square that with indigenous treaty rights for me, please. We don’t get to just hand-wave that away.

 

[MilEME09]

Hold the vote.

yes, however given the entire voter registry was made public, I would suggest additional safe guards need to be put in place of some kind for any vote. including assigning new elector # to every voter.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Square that with indigenous treaty rights for me, please. We don’t get to just hand-wave that away.

I dont have to.

Hold the vote.

 

[brihard]

I dont have to.

Hold the vote.

Ignoring the law and foreseeable legal challenges makes problems fester, not go away.

I already offered a viable path forward to work around to the same likely outcome, faster. ‘Hold the vote’ works, legally, as a referendum on question posed in the succesful Forever Canadian petition. It doesn’t work on the secession petition until many other things are done.

 

[GR66]

Ignoring the law and foreseeable legal challenges makes problems fester, not go away.

I already offered a viable path forward to work around to the same likely outcome, faster. ‘Hold the vote’ works, legally, as a referendum on question posed in the succesful Forever Canadian petition. It doesn’t work on the secession petition until many other things are done.

Well you could amend the Clarity Act to make specific notice that under section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867, the federal government has exclusive legislative authority for "Indians, and Lands reserved for the Indians." and therefore any vote by a province or territory to separate from Canada would not include any treaty lands as those are constitutionally Federal jurisdiction.

 

[QV]

Square that with indigenous treaty rights for me, please. We don’t get to just hand-wave that away.

How was it squared for Quebec twice?

 

[Halifax Tar]

How was it squared for Quebec twice?

Wait for it...

 

[QV]

Wait for it...

I know right? This is where the special priveleges of one province over all others only fuels the movement.

 

[QV]

Also, the Forever Canada is a moot vote. Either result in that vote triggers nothing. And its purpose was to nullify the separatists path, to set them back years or stymie their intentions.

The whole point of this referendum is that if it goes one way, a series of future actions are then triggered. Forever Canada is designed to cease or delay that regardless of vote outcome.

 

[brihard]

How was it squared for Quebec twice?

This is not a ‘gotcha’. It was not squared for Quebec, and that would have become a problem for them too, one where I would have the same concerns and objections. That’s why, after the referenda, the Supreme Court’s 1998 Reference re Quebec Secession, and the 1999 Clarity Act both highlight the concerns around aboriginal rights. Any secession movement anywhere in Canada will have to contend with the crown’s legal obligations to indigenous peoples.

As a point of historical interest, Quebec is also not covered by any of the historical numbered treaties. Alberta has territory covered by treaties 4, 6, 7, 8, and 10. The first four of those were signed between the crown and First Nations before Alberta even existed as a province.

So, good on you for recognizing a giving voice to the concerns of Canada’s indigenous peoples in questions of secession. Just as it would be a major problem for Quebec, it would be a major problem for Alberta.