Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 382 posts

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#351

Post by scrubs »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #268
ryandrake wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The huge problem is that geographical borders don't nicely line up with cultural/ethnic/attitude borders. Let's say you let a province (or US state) secede over political/cultural issues. What happens to all of the people who don't want to go along for the ride? They're now at a huge risk. Those dissenters might even be persecuted or, at worst, cleansed, depending on the laws of the new seceded country. So then you s…

> Let's say you let a province (or US state) secede over political/cultural issues. What happens to all of the people who don't want to go along for the ride? Well, thats politics? The people proposing this are supposed to be considering that. And the people in that position are supposed to be considering that. Every day there are votes with outcomes people dont want to go along with the ride for. But they do, or the…

Politics? Is it? Or is politics a grand word for whining and adults in a perpetual small world? Law, history are at least more grounded as a basis to argue for or against.

Let's not let politics' meaning become so diffuse it's just free speech by another name. Herein "politics" seems to be too inconsequential for a far more consequential result than cycling out party A for B for a few years would have.

I've half joked before that brexit was the only solution Cameron et al saw left because they didnt have a way to hold Brussel's paper pushers to account. Taking your ball and going home is not bold leadership: it's an admission one's argument and solution is weak.

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#352

Post by scrubs »

slopinthebag wrote: post #257
pfortuny wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the right of not being determined by others? Say, the 10% who vote no.

Isn't that the problem with democracy? The tyranny of the majority and all that?

No, not tyranny necessarily. If it's malign morphing into hate speech, racial or genetic seregation, imposing religion, esp. backed up by state power that's a problem. For example, the US has a senate to balance out the house while at the same time California's take on something cannot be rejected out of hand reflexively as tyranny

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#353

Post by dorgo »

05 wrote: post #346
foepys wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia is currently placing Russian citizens in the occupied parts of Ukraine exactly for this reason. If there will ever be a vote whether the Donbas Oblast or the Luhansk Oblast want to rejoin Ukraine, you can bet the vote will be pro Russia.

That vote happened in 2022.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_annexation_referendums_in...

They probably mean a vote which doesn't violate international law.

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#354

Post by chaostheory »

52-6F-62 wrote: post #295
chaostheory wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada is a confederation/confederacy. Ie your central government is weak and your provinces are strong. They can leave just like Quebec. Quebec has to be bribed to stay.

It's more complex than that. I know tech workers are fond of reductionism, but it is not workable here. In order to draw the statement and comparison you just have, you have to throw out ALL legal and historical fact. And also decide that the rights of the Aboriginal land owners in Alberta mean absolutely nothing. I don't know what it's like to be American, but I presume that not even they would be on board with whol…

Sure it’s more complicated, but we can’t deny that just like the EU, it’s way easier for a Canadian province to leave vs a state or province of federal governments. Otherwise, secessionist movements wouldn’t be so serious. You can’t pretend that Canadian provinces are weak. Otherwise, why bribe Quebec instead of forcing them to stay? Canada doesn’t even have a unified healcare system for the same reason

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#355

Post by HDThoreaun »

jpadkins wrote: post #126
vkou wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

95% of Alberta is unceded First Nations land. It is not a valid country without it - without the consent of the relevant First Nations, a separated Alberta would be a few municipalities enveloped by... Canada. This is not a concern in Quebec, because the overwhelming majority of it is ceded land. If ducks had two wheels, they'd be bicycles, and if there was anything in common between the two provinces, you might have…

So because Quebec ancestors killed all the people who opposed the conquest of that land, it's okay for Quebec to secede? But because another set of Canadians didn't kill off all the natives that still claimed Alberta's land, they can't secede legally? Is that the logic?

Whats wrong with that? You want to consult some graves and see what they think?

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#356

Post by [deleted] »

madcaptenor wrote: post #141
cf100clunk wrote: post #113

A related issue is whether, or to what extent, a seceded entity can itself be subject to secession. This concern came up in Quebec when Cree and other groups suggested they'd drop out of post-separation Quebec and ''rejoin'' Canada. Quebec separatists were outraged at the thought of First Nations and pro-Federalist geographical areas turning their new entity into ''Swiss cheese''. It is highly likely that Alberta sep…

Another case: when Brexit happened, IIRC some people in Scotland were suggesting secession from the UK post-Brexit so they could rejoin the EU.

[deleted]

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#357

Post by happymellon »

gambiting wrote: post #269
ryandrake wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The huge problem is that geographical borders don't nicely line up with cultural/ethnic/attitude borders. Let's say you let a province (or US state) secede over political/cultural issues. What happens to all of the people who don't want to go along for the ride? They're now at a huge risk. Those dissenters might even be persecuted or, at worst, cleansed, depending on the laws of the new seceded country. So then you s…

>>What happens to all of the people who don't want to go along for the ride? All of Scotland voted against leaving the EU. Every single county has voted no. And yet it still got dragged out. So I guess the answer is - people get told to shut up and deal with it.

The area of England that I'm in voted remain, as well as all the other districts around us. It might fracture England (which may not be a bad thing) but I would be fine with southern England joining Scotland.

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#358

Post by xboxnolifes »

triceratops wrote: post #314
xboxnolifes wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if there arent? Why are existing nation lines static?

If literally no one else on earth thinks like you, how will you win a referendum?

The people who think like me (in this example) are the people voting on the referendum!

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#359

Post by xboxnolifes »

yibg wrote: post #345
xboxnolifes wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's say you let a province (or US state) secede over political/cultural issues. What happens to all of the people who don't want to go along for the ride? Well, thats politics? The people proposing this are supposed to be considering that. And the people in that position are supposed to be considering that. Every day there are votes with outcomes people dont want to go along with the ride for. But they do, or the…

In this case though it's a conflicting view. Let's say 40% of the province don't want to be separated, so they vote to rejoin canada (or form their own thing). Does the now independent Alberta allow it? If not, then why are they allowed to split from Canada? If they do, now this opens up the door for a infinite amount of splits.

Well, it would depend on how the new Alberta is structured. It would be its own country with its own rules. Practically speaking, it would highly depend on whether those 40% are geographically separated from the rest enough to geographically split the new Alberta.

Re: Alberta to hold referendum on whether to remain in Canada

#360

Post by close04 »

Supermancho wrote: post #289
close04 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A foreign adversary only has to convince or “add” the difference needed to reach 50%. It never starts at 0. I can’t blanket agree that “it’s their opinion after all” because fraud works the same way. The victim willingly triggers their own loss but after being deceived. Brexit shows the works, almost half the supporters feel like they got the bait and switch, being promised one thing and then getting another. But thi…

> The victim willingly triggers their own loss but after being deceived So wrapping up the process in another layer of "informed individuals" is another form of government that is even easier to manipulate, because there are fewer of them. There is no self-protection or those who are incidentally manipulated by forgoing their own responsibility. ie Manufactured Consent. This sentiment (albeit articulated differently)…

There will always be undue influence but you have to draw the line somewhere. Foreign influence is generally inarguably worse, the foreign party has absolutely no duty whatsoever to your country or your people, maybe benefits if everyone is worse off. And when it’s a major power it’s also fully shielded from real consequences.

If you are going to draw that line, foreign vs. domestic is a good place to do it.

Post reply on HN