3 ms·
>Their "conservatives" are about as worthless as California Republicans. It's worth remembering that this problem is structural. Canada is what the US would l
by qball 4y ago
>Their "conservatives" are about as worthless as California Republicans.
It's worth remembering that this problem is structural. Canada is what the US would look like if it had no Constitution, all votes were party line, and the House was supreme: the only votes that would ever matter are the ones in NYC (Toronto/Montreal), DC (Ottawa), and San Francisco (Vancouver), and because they vote as a bloc the vast majority of the time their governance would be entirely unaccountable to the rest of the nation.
The fact that this would rip the US apart is due to its unique kind of citizen; Canadians tend to be more passive-aggressive and as such would need a lot more to go wrong before they consider it. Quebec is a special case since their language and culture really do need the kind of protection they say it does or it's going to die out- which is why they're more separatist than the rest of the nation (and it's very revealing that the only region of Quebec to vote against separation was Montreal, their largest city, and most Anglicized part of the province: had they the foresight to exclude Montreal, the nation would look very different today).
As such, the only time any opposition can gain a foothold is if the voting bloc these cities comprise is destabilized. Out of control healthcare spending (of which the massive spike in living costs and inflation is a direct result) may be enough to do this, but only time will tell.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> It's worth remembering that this problem is structural. Canada is what the US would look like if it had no Constitution, Canada has a (written) Constitution. You are probably confusing Canada with the UK, which does not. Same ceremonial monarch (and more purely ceremonial in Canada than the UK), different (though broadly similar, both are Westminster-style systems) system of government. > and the House was supreme: Canada has a Senate that can reject and initiate legislation. You are probably confusing Canada with the UK, where the Lords can only delay legislation that has been passed by the Commons.
- qball 4y ago>Canada has a (written) Constitution. It is functionally useless in a way that the US one isn't. >Canada has a Senate that can reject and initiate legislation. The operative word being "can"; but in practice the overwhelming majority of legislation makes it through with no change. It's functionally a ceremonial role.
- danbolt 4y agoCould you clarify on the “useless” bit? Or, I feel like the constitution is doing what it sets out to (provincial/federal powers, seat allocation, Charter rights, etc.), but it’s not necessarily easy to modify. What would make it useful in your eyes?