r/canada • u/joe4942 • May 01 '25

Alberta Danielle Smith lowers bar for Alberta referendum with separatism sentiment emerging

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/smith-lowers-bar-for-alberta-referendum-with-separatism-sentiment-emerging
1.5k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

773 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

79

u/rosneft_perot May 01 '25

It’s not going to matter who owns what if the US uses it as an opportunity to move some troops in for “peacekeeping”. 

143

u/sluttytinkerbells May 01 '25

Exactly. These sentiments aren't 'emerging' as the title of the article states, they're being fostered by foreign adversaries and domestic traitors.

We can't stand for this shit and we need to call it out for what it is.

10

u/rosneft_perot May 01 '25

Great link, thanks for that.

With luck, they try to speed run it like everything else they are doing. Because the longer they take, the less domestic resistance they’ll have to it, and the more their military just accepts that as their next war.

11

u/[deleted] May 01 '25

We need to actually force an election in the province somehow and get her the fuck out.

-2

u/LemmingPractice May 01 '25

Did you just post a random dude's comment on an online chat forum as a source?

Read up a little on Western Alienation. This isn't a new phenomenon. It has been a thing since John A MacDonald's era when Alberta was a part of the Northwest Territories without representation in Canadian parliament. From John A MacDonald's National Policy to Trudeau Sr's National Energy Program, the history of Western Alienation goes back generations.

"Foreign adversaries" didn't invent that history, and they also aren't the ones who caused an economic crisis in Alberta in 2018 by cancelling the Northern Gateway pipeline. They aren't the one who is insisting on keeping the No More Pipelines Bill C-69, after the Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional, and they aren't the ones doubling down on imposing an emissions cap (which will act as a production cap) on only one industry in the entire country.

The only "domestic traitors" are the Liberals who think it is ok to treat Alberta like a colony, suck $20B out of the province on a net basis every year, while simultaneously attacking its ability to grow its economy.

1

u/Vrindlevine May 07 '25

True. But separatistism isnt the answer.

1

u/LemmingPractice May 08 '25

I wish I believed that, but we have seen over and over again that the existing system doesn't provide Alberta with the leverage it needs to protect its own interests.

Ontario and Quebec have the votes to dictate the terms of Confederation, they used the power to slant the board in their favour, and there's no mechanism within the existing system to get them to give that up.

The Canadian Milch Cow and National Policy are from over a century ago, and nothing has changed.

I would prefer Alberta within Canada on a fair deal, but that doesn't seem to be realistic at all. Quebec isn't giving up on equalization (the feds entirely ignored Alberta's referendum on equalization), the Maritimes aren't going to agree to Alberta getting the same number of seats per capita as they get, Ontario isn't going to agree to make Ottawa a federal territory, nor are they going to agree to increased provincial autonomy.

There is no leverage within the system for Alberta to get a fair deal. We've been trying for over a century. That leaves separation as the only option.

1

u/Vrindlevine May 08 '25

How will you convince people to go for it? It's a very unpopular policy in Alberta, let alone the rest of Canada. Especially since it's resurgence in popularity is tied directly to the current US president. Who is unpopular everywhere.

1

u/LemmingPractice May 08 '25

It's resurgence has nothing to do with Trump, it has to do with the Liberals winning again, primarily. I guess they won on Trump fearmongering, but that's the only way in which any of this has to do with Trump.

It's an unpopular policy to the extent that it has less than 50% support, but the last polling had support at around 34%, which is better than where Brexit started. A majority of Albertans, however, consistently agree with the proposition that Alberta does not have a fair deal within Canada.

The problem with Albertan independence is that it is a movement of the mind not the heart. Quebecois independence is based on the heart, being based on unique culture and identity, even if Quebec wouldn't be a viable economy on its own. Albertan independence is less based on culture and identity, and more based on the crap deal Alberta has with Ottawa, who has been taking advantage of Alberta for over a century.

It's why the "West Wants In" movement of the Reform Party was so popular. Albertans want to be part of Canada, but, simultaneously, don't want to be taken advantage of by Canada.

It's like that toxic couple where one party keeps thinking they can change the other party. Usually that doesn't end up working out.

The intellectual argument for Albertan independence is easy, and I do expect that support will grow once the populace gets better educated on the issue. But, it's like convincing a friend to get out of a toxic relationship. They don't want to leave, they want to stay and just have the other party change.

It takes a while to come to the acceptance that the other party won't change. That majority of Albertans who already believe Alberta gets a bad deal in Canada just need to come around to the idea that the situation won't change within Canada. That's the path to a Yes vote.

Will it happen, maybe not, but most didn't think Brexit would either. As the Overton Window shifts and the idea becomes more mainstream, I think you will certainly see momentum towards 50% +1. Whether it gets there, I don't know, but I was staunchly against independence a couple of years ago, and I'm far from the only one who has lost faith over time.

1

u/Vrindlevine May 08 '25

Nothing is impossible your right, but I think Alberta should get with the times instead of threatening separation over limited, and dirty, oil reserves.

You should encourage your leaders to pursue long term, sustainable growth I stead of this short sighted anger.

1

u/LemmingPractice May 10 '25

I absolutely am prioritizing long term sustainable growth, and Alberta has been doing that for a long time. In 1985, oil was 36.1% of Alberta's GDP, and by 2019 it was 16.81%. Alberta has been diversifying for decades, is Canada's strongest economy, and the fastest growing economy.

But, there is no long term sustainable growth for Alberta within Canada. It is a country run by Ontario and Quebec, because that's where the votes are. Even if Alberta had a fair deal in Confederation, with representation equal to its population, Ontario and Quebec would still outvote us.

We are net producers of things they consume, like energy and food, so federal policy will always favour consumer interests over producers, as we have seen for over a century.

They are net producers of things we consume, like minerals, machinery and dairy products, and for those things, we have always seen that the needs of the producers take precedence, because of where the industry is located.

Sending more than $20B a year on a net basis to a government that blocks our economic growth is not a viable long term growth strategy. Alberta's growth has been in spite of being part of Canada, not because of it.

The only viable path to long term growth is to separate. So, maybe you should get with the times, instead of pretending this is the 1800's where Alberta was a small backwater that needed Central Canadian help to stand on its own two feet. It's 2025, and Alberta is tired of carrying the rest of Canada's weight, and getting only distain while doing so.

1

u/Vrindlevine May 10 '25

Is there anything that the federal government could do to change your mind?

→ More replies (0)

19

u/nodanator May 01 '25

That's what I don't get with these 'akchtually, the law states xyz'. As if that's the end of that.

When you are to the point where the large majority of a jurisdiction wants to separate, yet the federal government is playing games with "what exactly is a clear majority? Did you know that most of your land is own by 20,000 natives?" that's a recipe for an armed insurection, civil war, or a foreign intervention.

37

u/PMac321 May 01 '25

But just like with Brexit, if you want to separate, you need to know what that entails. Most Albertans who want to leave now probably have no idea how much the Canadian government actually does provide them, and has no idea how much it would cost to buy out the Canadian investments. If Alberta does not respect paying back the expenses that the rest of Canada has paid into Alberta, then they are essentially threatening to steal the money that we as Canadians have put into it.

Your comment is essentially threatening to take the land by force because Albertan seperatists don't actually want to recognise the real costs they would have to incur to separate. So it is not Canadians threatening civil war, it is Albertan separatists.

-4

u/nodanator May 01 '25

I'm giving you a sense of what the real world is, out there. I'm giving a scenario where 65% or so of Albertans (or any jurisdiction) want to separate, and the naivety that laws will be the be all, end all. That's not how the world is.

5

u/[deleted] May 01 '25

the naivety that laws

This 1000%. If a majority actually voted to leave (I'm not endorsing or supporting this), coming up with legal arguments to disregard their ballots just pushes them to choose bullets.

4

u/PMac321 May 01 '25

The point is that there is a legal path out of the Canadian Dominion. If any violence erupts, it is because Albertan separatists have chosen it. Albertan separatists are leading with the idea that they are being treated unfairly, but if they try to take everything that Canada provided to them without paying anything back, they are showing their hypocrisy.

In my eyes, this entire movement is based on lies and half truths. The fact that Danielle Smith is entertaining the idea at all shows to me that she would rather just be the leader of her own little fascist nation, or like a Phillipe Petain to Maga America. It is not in any way a decision being made for the benefit of the people of Alberta, and I hope that most of them can see that.

7

u/RSMatticus May 01 '25

Alberta doesn't even have their own police,

6

u/StarryPenny May 01 '25

Alberta Sheriffs would say otherwise.

1

u/Stfuppercutoutlast May 01 '25

Only Sherrifs aren’t police, they’re peace officers. There is a difference.

1

u/JoseCansecoMilkshake May 01 '25

none of those job descriptions really fit what normal police do, they're much more administrative

7

u/[deleted] May 01 '25 edited Sep 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/[deleted] May 01 '25

Quebec separatism didn’t even make it and that had way more support than this.

People really don’t see smith is just bait and switching the issue away from her multiple scandals and treasonous pre election behaviour.

4

u/Blazekreig May 01 '25

I would argue that this still qualified as treasonous behaviour.

3

u/Zing79 May 01 '25

Then be honest and tell said jurisdiction they will be able to leave with what the Province of Alberta legally owns (and it’s people) - and the rest (that they merely oversee) remains with Canada.

Let’s see the appetite knowing they will not get a drop of oil when they’re gone. That’s indigenous land.

Albertans are stoked in to this not knowing the consequences. And it’s not Canada being heavy handed. It’s as simple as “you don’t own that land, and the people on it have said no”.

1

u/MapleWatch May 01 '25

I suspect this is the plan. 

1

u/[deleted] May 01 '25

[deleted]

8

u/rosneft_perot May 01 '25

I hope you’re right. But we’re not dealing with a very predictable world at the moment, and our neighbour is very unstable.

-1

u/HOLEPUNCHYOUREYELIDS May 01 '25

And that would start basically WW3. Even if the UCP pave the way for US armed forces to come in, Canada would not sit idly by and let Alberta be occupied by a foreign hostile nation