Saturday, December 28, 2024

A New Years love letter to my nation (not my government)

 


A love letter to my nation (not my government) from an avowed Anglophile and an old stock Canadian

 

As 2024 draws to its close I would like to share my thoughts on our present socioeconomic crisis under a Trudeau led coalition government which destined to fall and take the nation down with it. We face significant challenges in the next several weeks and months. The current government in Canada is in utter, complete, and perfect chaos.  Trump has declared that he wants Canada to become the 51st State. He even had his son post a meme of the Donald purchasing us on Amazon. Canada, one of the most resource richest nations on the planet, on Amazon like we are whore to be prostituted as though America was her “John”. You may think that this is merely clever or funny, or even a good idea given the fact that America’s economy is infinitely stronger than ours and will become even greater under an administration dedicated to reducing waste, cost, and variation. DOGE led by Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk will implement a modern version of what General Douglas MacArthur did in Japan when he unleashed Drs. Deming and Juran on them to help fix their postwar economy. Both are now lauded as heroes of industry by the Japanese for their unmitigated successes in transforming their industries.

But back to Canada and the US. Why not join the Union? After all taxation is much lower in the US than it is in Canada. Canadians under the Trudeau government have become poorer than even the citizens of Mississippi which is the poorest state in America. But you are likely forgetting two things, that the US is still being informed by the Monroe Doctrine and the American belief in Manifest Destiny. Moreover, if you do not know what either are and how they relate to how Canada came into being as an autonomous nation and an independent member of the British Commonwealth you know literally nothing of the history of your own nation. Today I heard, “That was then, this is now”, to which I answer the oldest adage regarding history ever written, namely that those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, each repetition will have its own peculiar variation.

But first let us examine the Monroe Doctrine and its coefficient of Manifest Destiny. The Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny are two significant concepts in American history that are closely related in their impact on U.S. foreign policy and territorial expansion. So, the Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny therefore had significant impacts on Canada, shaping its history and development in various ways right up until today.

The Monroe Doctrine:

The Monroe Doctrine, declared in 1823, primarily aimed to prevent European interference in the Americas. While it was focused on Latin America, it indirectly affected Canada by reinforcing the idea that the Western Hemisphere was under the influence of the United States. This doctrine contributed to a sense of American dominance in the region, which influenced Canadian policies and attitudes towards its southern neighbor.

Manifest Destiny:

Manifest Destiny was the belief that the United States was destined to expand across North America, and it had a more direct impact on Canada. This ideology fueled American expansionist ambitions, leading to tensions and conflicts with British North America (now Canada). Some key effects include:

1. Territorial Expansion: The idea of Manifest Destiny led to American interest in annexing Canadian territories. This was particularly evident during the mid-19th century when there were calls for the U.S. to expand into British-held territories in Canada.

2. Canadian Confederation: The threat of American expansionism was a significant factor in the push for Canadian Confederation. The provinces of British North America united in 1867 to form the Dominion of Canada, partly to strengthen their defense against potential American aggression.

3. Border Disputes: Manifest Destiny contributed to several border disputes between the U.S. and Canada, including the Oregon boundary dispute, which was resolved in 1846 with the Oregon Treaty.

4. Cultural and Political Influence: The expansionist ideology also influenced Canadian culture and politics, as Canadians sought to distinguish themselves from their American neighbours and assert their own national identity.

Overall, the Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny played crucial roles in shaping the geopolitical landscape of North America, influencing Canada's development and its relationship with the United States.

But first we must go back to the political beginnings of Canada as a nation distinct and separate in identity from that of the USA:

Our start as a parliamentary system under English Common Law and British constitutionalism after initial settlement by Loyalists setters from America in Upper Canada (now Ontario) and their insistence on having English Common Law as opposed to French Civil law of Lower Canada (Quebec).

John Graves Simcoe, the first Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada (now Ontario), had several reasons for establishing a new province under English Common Law:

Political Stability: Simcoe aimed to create a stable and orderly society in Upper Canada, distinct from the revolutionary fervor of the United States. By implementing English Common Law, he sought to ensure a legal system that was familiar to British settlers and loyalists who had fled the American Revolution.

Economic Development: Simcoe believed that a well-ordered society based on English Common Law would attract settlers and promote economic growth. He introduced freehold land tenure, which allowed settlers to own land outright, encouraging investment and development.

Social Order: Simcoe wanted to establish a society based on aristocratic and conservative principles, with a strong Church of England presence. He believed that English Common Law would support these values and help create a loyal and cohesive community.

Abolition of Slavery: Simcoe was instrumental in passing legislation to gradually abolish slavery in Upper Canada, making it the first British colony to take such steps. This move was part of his broader vision of creating a just and equitable society.

Simcoe's efforts laid the foundation for the development of Upper Canada as a distinct entity with its own legal and social structures, separate from both the United States and other British colonies.

The War of 1812: This was indeed a significant challenge to Canadian autonomy and played a crucial role in shaping Canada's national identity.

Key Impacts on Canadian Autonomy

1. Defense Against Invasion: The War of 1812 saw multiple American invasions into Canadian territory. The successful defense against these invasions by British forces, Canadian militia, and Indigenous allies helped solidify a sense of Canadian identity and unity.

2. National Identity: The war fostered a sense of national pride and identity among Canadians. The collective effort to defend their land against American forces brought together people from diverse backgrounds, including English and French Canadians, Indigenous peoples, and Loyalists.

3. Military and Civilian Cooperation: The war highlighted the importance of civilian soldiers in defending the territory. This cooperation between military and civilian forces became a defining characteristic of Canadian defense efforts.

4. Indigenous Alliances: Indigenous peoples played a crucial role in the war, forming alliances with both British and Canadian forces. Their contributions were vital in several key battles, although their sacrifices were often overlooked in the aftermath.

5. Political and Social Impact: The war's outcome reinforced the need for a strong defense and contributed to the eventual push for Canadian Confederation in 1867. It also influenced Canadian policies and attitudes towards its southern neighbour.

Overall, the War of 1812 was a pivotal moment in Canadian history, marking the first significant challenge to Canadian autonomy and laying the groundwork for the development of a distinct Canadian identity.

William Hamilton Merritt was a significant figure in Canadian history, particularly known for his role in the development of the Welland Canal. His contributions had a profound impact on both defense and trade in Canada. Merritt was a businessman, politician, and soldier born on July 3, 1793, in Bedford, New York. He moved to Upper Canada (now Ontario) with his family and became involved in various business ventures in my hometown of St. Catharines, Ontario. Merritt had fought in the War of 1812 and was captured by American forces, which influenced his later endeavors.

Merritt’s great legacy, The Welland Canal

The Welland Canal was Merritt's most notable achievement. He first proposed the idea in 1818 to create a canal that would connect Lake Ontario and Lake Erie, bypassing the Niagara Falls. The canal was crucial for several reasons:

1. Trade: The Welland Canal facilitated the movement of goods between the Great Lakes and the Atlantic Ocean, significantly boosting trade in the region. It allowed ships to bypass the Niagara Falls, making transportation more efficient and less costly.

2. Defense: The canal also had strategic military importance. During times of conflict, such as the War of 1812, controlling the waterways was crucial for defense. The Welland Canal provided a secure route for moving troops and supplies, enhancing the region's defensive capabilities.

3. Economic Development: The construction and operation of the canal spurred economic growth in the surrounding areas. It created jobs, attracted settlers, and led to the development of towns and industries along its route. Merritt's vision and determination were instrumental in the canal's construction. He organized local meetings, raised funds, and enlisted government support to bring the project to fruition. The Welland Canal remains a vital part of Canada's transportation infrastructure and is a enduring testament to Merritt's legacy.

Funding the Welland Canal:

Merritt faced numerous challenges in securing funding for the Welland Canal. Initially, he hoped for government support, but when that proved insufficient, he turned to private investors, including those from the United States. American investors were interested in the canal because it promised to enhance trade routes and economic opportunities between the Great Lakes and the Atlantic Ocean.

How this impacted Canada’s Factories and Mills:

Investment and Control: By accepting American investment, Merritt inadvertently allowed American businessmen to gain a controlling interest in some Canadian mills. These investors were keen on ensuring their investments were profitable, which often meant taking an active role in the management and operations of the mills.

Economic Influence: The influx of American capital brought with it a degree of economic influence. American investors sought to maximize their returns, which sometimes led to decisions that prioritized their interests over those of local Canadian stakeholders.

Technological Advancements: On the positive side, American investment also brought technological advancements and expertise to Canadian mills. This helped improve efficiency and productivity, contributing to the growth of the Canadian economy.

Trade and Commerce: The Welland Canal itself facilitated increased trade and commerce between Canada and the United States. This interconnectedness meant that American businessmen had a vested interest in the success of Canadian industries, including the mills.

Overall, while American investment in the Welland Canal and Canadian mills brought economic benefits, it also led to a degree of foreign control and influence over Canadian industries, so much so that most of our factories and mills became wholly owned subsidiaries of American parent corporations. This dynamic played a significant role in shaping the economic landscape of the region during that period.

Why the building of the Rideau Canal coincided with that of the Welland Canal:

The Rideau Canal and the Welland Canal were both constructed in the early 19th century, and their development coincided due to several strategic, economic, and political reasons.

Their Strategic Importance

Defense: After the War of 1812, there was a heightened sense of vulnerability in British North America (now Canada). The Rideau Canal was built between 1826 and 1832 to provide a secure supply route between Montreal and the naval base in Kingston, bypassing the potentially vulnerable St. Lawrence River. This was crucial in case of another conflict with the United States.

Military Transport: Both canals were designed to facilitate the movement of troops and supplies. The Welland Canal, completed in 1829, allowed ships to bypass Niagara Falls, providing a safer and more efficient route for military and commercial vessels.

Economic Development

Trade Routes: While the Welland Canal facilitated the movement of goods between the Great Lakes and the Atlantic Ocean, the Rideau Canal, which was initially built for military purposes, also became an important commercial route. It connected Ottawa to Kingston, enhancing trade and transportation in the region.

Political Factors:

The influence of Great Britain: Both canals were part of British efforts to strengthen their influence in North America. By improving infrastructure and transportation, the British aimed to secure their colonial territories and promote economic growth.

Settlement and Development: The construction of these canals encouraged settlement and development in the surrounding areas. Towns and industries grew along the canal routes, contributing to the economic prosperity of the region. In summary, the Rideau and Welland Canals were built around the same time due to their strategic importance for defense, their role in facilitating trade and transportation, and the political objectives of strengthening our British ties in North America.

The 1837-38 Mackenzie-Papineau Rebellion as a reaction to American expansionism and British Colonialism:

The Mackenzie-Papineau Rebellion, also known as the Rebellions of 1837-1838, was a significant event in Canadian history. It was driven by frustrations with British colonial rule and the influence of American expansionism.

Background:

The rebellions took place in both Upper Canada (now Ontario) and Lower Canada (now Quebec). Key figures included William Lyon Mackenzie in Upper Canada and Louis-Joseph Papineau in Lower Canada. Both leaders sought political reform and greater autonomy from British control.

Reaction to British Colonialism:

Political Reform: The rebels were frustrated with the lack of political reform and the dominance of the British-appointed elite. They demanded responsible government, where the executive council would be accountable to the elected legislative assembly.

Economic Grievances: Economic hardships and land issues also fueled discontent. Many settlers felt that the colonial government favoured the interests of the elite over those of ordinary citizens.

Influence of American Expansionism

Republican Ideals: The American Revolution and the subsequent expansion of the United States influenced the rebels. They were inspired by republican ideals and sought to establish a more democratic system of government.

Support from the U.S.: Some rebels received support from American sympathizers. For example, Mackenzie established a short-lived "Republic of Canada" on Navy Island in the Niagara River with the help of American volunteers.

Outcomes:

The rebellions were ultimately unsuccessful, and the British military crushed the uprisings. However, they led to significant changes:

Lord Durham's Report: The British government sent Lord Durham to investigate the causes of the rebellions. His report recommended the unification of Upper and Lower Canada and the establishment of responsible government.

Act of Union 1840: The Act of Union merged Upper and Lower Canada into a single province, laying the groundwork for the eventual creation of the Canadian Confederation in 1867.

The Mackenzie-Papineau Rebellion was a pivotal moment in the struggle for Canadian self-governance and highlighted the tensions between colonial rule and the desire for democratic reform.

How the liberal party was birthed in part by Mackenzie and Papineau

The Liberal Party of Canada has its roots in the reformist movements led by figures like William Lyon Mackenzie and Louis-Joseph Papineau. These leaders were instrumental in advocating for political reform and responsible government in the early 19th century.

William Lyon Mackenzie was a prominent figure in Upper Canada (now Ontario). He led the Reform movement, which sought to challenge the power of the Family Compact, a small group of elites who controlled the government. Mackenzie’s efforts culminated in the Upper Canada Rebellion of 1837, which, although unsuccessful, highlighted the need for political reform and greater democratic representation.

Louis-Joseph Papineau was from Lower Canada (now Quebec). Papineau led the Parti Patriote, which similarly sought to challenge the dominance of the British-appointed elite and advocate for the rights of French Canadians. The Lower Canada Rebellion of 1837-1838, led by Papineau, also ended in defeat but underscored the demand for responsible government and political change.

Influence on the Liberal Party

The efforts of Mackenzie and Papineau laid the groundwork for the development of the Liberal Party. Their push for responsible government and democratic reforms resonated with many Canadians and set the stage for the emergence of a political party that would champion these ideals. The Liberal Party, officially founded in 1867, drew on the legacy of these reformist movements and leaders, advocating for a more inclusive and democratic political system.

The American Civil War and the Fenian Raids influences on Canadian independence from Great Britain

The American Civil War (1861-1865) and the Fenian Raids (1866-1871) both played significant roles in shaping Canadian independence from Great Britain.

American Civil War:

Military and Political Tensions: The Civil War heightened tensions between Britain and the United States. Britain's neutrality and its support for the Confederacy due to the cotton trade angered the Union, leading to incidents like the Trent Affair, where a British ship was seized by the Union Navy.

Canadian Sympathy for the Union: Many Canadians sympathized with the Union cause, partly due to their opposition to slavery and their close economic ties with the northern states.

Increased Military Presence: The threat of American invasion led Britain to station troops in Canada, which underscored the need for a more unified and self-reliant defense.

Fenian Raids:

Irish-American Veterans: The Fenian Brotherhood, composed of Irish-American Civil War veterans, launched several raids into Canada to pressure Britain to withdraw from Ireland. My own great-grandfather was a veteran of the conflict and received a grant of land in some god forsaken part of Ontario on the Canadian Shield in case he had the sudden urge to go farm rock. My cousin Roy Rymer still pays the taxes on that property. Great granddad once told my father that the only thing he shot during the Fenians Raids was a farmer’s cow to feed the boys from the Lincoln and Welland Regiment in which he had served. It was a two-day march from St. Catharines to Ridgeway where the engagement took place.

Canadian Unity: The raids exposed weaknesses in Canada's defense and highlighted the need for a unified military and political structure.

Path to Confederation: The threat of Fenian attacks and the desire for a stronger defense were key factors that led to the Confederation of Canada in 1867.

Both events underscored the vulnerabilities of British North America and accelerated the movement towards a more independent and unified Canadian nation.

The Charlottetown Conference and the need of Confederation to establish Canada as a nation capable of self-government

The Charlottetown Conference, held from September 1st to 9th, 1864, in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, was a pivotal moment in the journey towards Canadian Confederation. Originally planned as a meeting of representatives from the Maritime colonies (Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island) to discuss a possible union, the conference took a significant turn when delegates from the Province of Canada (present-day Ontario and Quebec) were invited to join.

Key Outcomes of the Charlottetown Conference:

Discussion of Union: The conference shifted focus from a Maritime Union to a broader union of all British North American colonies. The delegates discussed the benefits of uniting the colonies to create a stronger, more self-sufficient entity.

Agreement on Principles: While no formal decisions were made, there was a general agreement on the principles of union, including the need for a federal system that would allow for both regional autonomy and a strong central government. This is distinctly different from the American system which emphasises State’s right and their autonomy.

Social Interactions: The conference included social events, such as dinners and banquets, which helped build relationships and trust among the delegates.

Path to Confederation:

The Charlottetown Conference was followed by the Quebec Conference in October 1864, where a more detailed plan for Confederation was drafted. This plan, known as the 72 Resolutions, laid the groundwork for the British North America Act, which was passed by the British Parliament and came into effect on July 1st, 1867, creating the Dominion of Canada.

Significance:

The Charlottetown Conference marked the beginning of a series of negotiations that ultimately led to the formation of Canada as a self-governing nation. It was a crucial step in the process of Confederation, demonstrating the willingness of the colonies to work together towards a common goal.

"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as the counterpoint to "Peace, Order, and Good Government"

"Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" and "Peace, Order, and Good Government" are two foundational principles that reflect differing philosophies and priorities in the founding documents of the United States and Canada, respectively.

"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"

This phrase is from the United States Declaration of Independence, drafted by Thomas Jefferson in 1776. It encapsulates the core values of American political philosophy:

Individual Rights: Emphasizes the importance of individual freedoms and personal rights.

Self-Governance: Reflects the belief in the right of people to govern themselves and seek their own paths to fulfillment.

Rejection of Tyranny: Stresses the need to break away from oppressive governments that do not respect these fundamental rights.

"Peace, Order, and Good Government"

This phrase is from the British North America Act (now the Constitution Act, 1867) and highlights the priorities of the Canadian Confederation:

Collective Well-Being: Focuses on the overall stability and welfare of society.

Rule of Law: Emphasizes the importance of legal order and governance structures that maintain peace and prevent chaos.

Public Interest: Prioritizes decisions that benefit the collective, often through a strong and proactive government role.

Contrasting these Philosophies

Individualism vs. Collectivism: The American principal underscores individual rights and personal freedoms, while the Canadian principal emphasizes collective well-being and social order.

Liberty vs. Stability: The U.S. approach values personal liberty as the highest good, whereas the Canadian approach values peace and stability, often requiring a balance between individual freedoms and societal needs. It is the stability of our system of government that has allowed Canada to avoid some of the more violent extremes of civil discord so common in America. The belief in stable, calm, responsible government is an unreconcilable difference between how our two nations are governed, that is until the erosion of Canadian values which have occurred largely but not entirely under the Liberal Party of Canada since the mid 1960’s due to parliament pursuing a “progressive agenda”

Government Role: The American ideal tends to advocate for limited government intervention in personal lives, while the Canadian ideal supports a more active government role in ensuring public welfare. Again, I must point out that this intervention in individual freedom largely began with Pearson’s vision of more state intervention in our lives. It was also Pearson who was instrumental in bringing Pierre Trudeau to the fore. A moment in our political history which began our downhill slide toward the tyranny of his son.

Nevertheless, these differing principles reflect the unique historical contexts and cultural values of each nation. The American focus on individual liberty arose from a desire to escape British colonial rule, while the Canadian emphasis on peace and order emerged from a need to unify diverse provinces and maintain stability under the British crown.

My conclusions:

We face the possibility of prorogation in the coming weeks to delay the fall of the current corrupt government. This will only serve to further abuse Canadians who are already suffering. All of this is due to our rejection of Christianity as the underpinning principle upon which any functional government’s value, principles, legislation and laws must rely. For without Christ Canada cannot exist as a nation that exists to fulfill our most fundamental constitutional principle of “peace, order, and good government”.

So here we are, once again being bullied from the south in a two-century old fulfillment of America’s quest for Manifest Destiny. Trump is being lauded as our saviour by many Canadians on my social media feed who claim some affiliation with conservativism. I often wonder whether real conservatives and true liberals exist at all. I am being given constant proof of the failure of our education system due to our progressive school boards. This failure has virtually erased the knowledge required to understand what either of these political philosophies mean.

For Trump to suggest that Wayne Gretzky could simply “become” the next Prime Minister with out first becoming the leader of a political party capable of winning an election showed his massive ignorance as to how the Canadian system of governance functions.  Trump referred to Gretzky as a good candidate to become the “Governor of Canada”, an offer which the “Great One” promptly turned down due to its insulting impossibility. I was forced to study American history as a lad, something which at the time I found boring. Today I am grateful that I was offered perspective as to why the USA still operates on principles that threaten our autonomy. It is not a Godly move to interfere in the sovereign government of another nation. It is not for America to tell us how to fix our own problems brought on by Neo-Marxist “progressives” (a term which I despise due to its meaninglessness) who have weakened us once again to the point where we are made vulnerable to American expansionism and threats to our sovereignty.

For those of you who may think based upon what I have stated here that I am not pleased Trump won would also be missing the point since I am pleased. Frankly the reason you are missing the point is due to the fact you lack a proper historical perspective of how and why our situation is so dire. Due to ungodly hubris, we often think that we know more than we do. Donald Trump is not Canada’s saviour, Jesus Christ is! If you claim to be a Christian, then you need to stop worshipping at the false god of political messiahs. We must pray that Trump’s new administration will serve God’s will in America and that the parliamentary system we have inherited from our ancestors will right itself since its traditions have served us so well until the “progressives” corrupted it with their godless agenda.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Can there be a political solution to a spiritual crisis?

  The state of the nation as we face the collapse of the Trudeau led LPC government: #JustinTrudeau along with his minions and supporters ...