Yes, if you read the rest of my comment I explained why. Canada has had a very big (relatively speaking) influx of deeply loyal british-american refugees that o

Yes, if you read the rest of my comment I explained why. Canada has had a very big (relatively speaking) influx of deeply loyal british-american refugees that often directly fought the revolutionaries down south. That meant that the early history of english canada was very deeply influenced by an almost identity defining loyalism to britain, because those refugees often left everything behind in the US to stay loyal the crown. In a way, being british was the entire point of early anglocanadian identity. I think that makes it pretty different from Australia, a penal colony and South Africa which was conquered more than colonized (and was very hard to hold on for the british). I was more trying to explain why Canada was an outlier in the Americas, and how Britain managed to hold it very easily for so long, even with a free population and little direct military occupation.