It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


A Nation Within A Nation?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 10:22 AM
If Alberta becomes a Nation within Canada, I was thinking health care.

1. They could fully do their own pay for health care system and ignore fully what's in place now.

2. If Canada the country voted on gay marriage and they don't like it, they could do their own thing.

3. Abortion. They as a nation within Canada could say we don't like this and go back to whatever they do like.

4. How they act towards others. Eg. We could have one set of values, they could choose another towards certain groups of people.

5. First Nations issues. If we decide one thing, they can do their own thing.

6. Any laws they don't like, they can do their own thing.

7. Next time Canada does not want to go to war, they could as a Nation go to war.

8. Language laws. They could decide to forgo the whole french thing and do their English only thing, as a nation it's their right.

I don't know how the whole nation within a country would work, but those are some of the issues, that would concern many Canadians.

The one I think about the most is health care. What harper and any Albertans want to do on other issues is up to them, and anyone who wants to live in that wealthy Nation within Canada.

That's why I think Harper is doing this, it's nothing to do with Quebec. (Well it is, but I think it's just a way to pave the way for Alberta.) I think they are a greater threat for seperation than Quebec. Just an opinion.

[edit on 30-12-2006 by Harassment101]

posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 01:20 PM
What about currency? Defense?

Are the riggers going to defend the borders when they are on break? You mention Harper's name, but you do realize he is the Prime Minister of Canada. Not Alberta. What of all the politicians in Alberta who are involved in the Canadian government. Do they either jump ship or sit up with the captain? Who the hell is the Captain?

How are you going to deal with the massive amount of job loss? Alberta houses a good majority of government related jobs. Our government is not going to bankroll the funds to pay the wages for all of these employees.

You base your separation movement on issues like, the War in Iraq, First Nations, etc. It's like the small child who moves out of his home so he can have his own bedroom. Yeah, your going to have your own bed alright. But who's going to pay the bills? Who's going to fill the fridge?

So I am interested in a follow up to this. Does Alberta have the coin to bankroll their own government? Military? Border Control?

You realize what the R.C.M.P. stands for right?

Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

A lot of questions remain unanswered. And it is probably the biggest reason why Quebec is still a part of Canada. Nobody wants to answer them.

posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 04:48 PM
Just by making them a nation within a nation, they can still choose to be covered by our military, (remeber it's nation within a nation), but when it comes to social issues, language laws, etc. They will be able to do their own thing.

If we give them that designation, then we are giving up a lot of control.

Also I like and value Quebec, but I think this nation within a nation is a bad idea. Canada is one sovereign country, not many small little nations within a country, however it would be nice to see the issue settle once and for all, I just think it gives other provices an opening to do their own things, when they say where is our designation, and I believe others like Alberta will.

government? Military? Border Control?
See if they were looking to become an independent nation then the following things would apply, but to be a nation within a nation, the following things are not a factor. It's the social, moral, political issues that come into play, that's where they will do their own independent thing and there will be very little the rest of Canada can do about it.

Right now if Alberta decides to stop being bilingual we can say, no you have to be, however as a nation within a nation, they can choose not to be.

Alberta is not big on some social issues, so they can then choose to do there own thing as far as some social issues are concerned, and how the sick and poor get treated, without all the fuss about military, border control. Those issues won't apply.

[edit on 30-12-2006 by Harassment101]

posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 10:00 AM
My apologies H. I was under the impression we were discussing the outright separation of Alberta from Canada. This issue has been discussed a few times as of late, and I have been growing tired of it. Considering this thread is discussion the nation within a nation, I should of thought twice before assuming anything.

My post was typed on the assumption that we were discussion Alberta standing alone as a sovereign nation.

I appreciate your patience with my thickheaded approach.

[edit on 31-12-2006 by chissler]

posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 03:43 AM
I guess we were both on different wave lengths, I was not thinking of them standing on their own. That will be harder for them to do, they might want to, but that would be harder.

This nation within a nation will make all those little things that they want to do differently possible without all that concern.

posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 08:32 AM
My biggest concern is that is we begin to see a nation within a nation in the news on a regular basis, Canada is going to become some mythical term. When I hear of Quebec wanting to separate from our country, or Albertans saying they would be better off on their own, i take it personal. I am very proud of my nationality, I don't respond well when others speak ill of it.

The only reason I ever condoned this Nation within a Nation for Quebec, is basically to finally silence them. Let's throw our signatures on a piece of paper that gives them a little bit of recognition, but keeps our country as one. With only one province receiving this recognition, we can remain strong as a unified country. If we begin to give this same status to Alberta, Newfoundland, etc., we are going to implode and be picked apart by surrounding nations.

posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 03:57 PM
I can totally understand what Harassment101 is trying to say. I'm not sure if that will happen, however. I honestly don't think this whole 'Nation in a Nation' has any real application. Time will tell, but I don't think that just by being given the recognition of a nation in a nation, that Quebec has been given any special allowances beyond what they had to begin with.

It's just a pacifier.

[edit on 6-1-2007 by Duzey]

posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 03:22 AM
Thats kind of stuff starts wars. The PM's an idiot if...No all Canadians are idiots if they let this go. Why not let every province start their own country. Then you could have 27 different countries like the EU

posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 07:08 AM

Originally posted by Royal76
No all Canadians are idiots if they let this go. Why not let every province start their own country. Then you could have 27 different countries like the EU

Clearly you have done your research on this matter and are in a position to determine the idiocy of the Canadian population. Those of us that accept this legislation are blatantly idiotic, right? Try reading a few paragraphs and understanding exactly what is at play before you start pointing fingers and saying who is an idiot.

[edit on 16-2-2007 by chissler]

posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 08:44 PM

Originally posted by Royal76
Thats kind of stuff starts wars. The PM's an idiot if...No all Canadians are idiots if they let this go. Why not let every province start their own country. Then you could have 27 different countries like the EU

Wow - not sure what to say. Each US state has far more legislative power than each Canadian Province, yet a move by a Canadian province to be more independant (wether Quebec or Alberta...) is idiotic?

Perhaps a bit of introspection is due...

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in