Are We Better Off?

I found this old article and found it worth placement in my blog. I hope, dear reader, that you consider how little has changed in the 34 years since it was written and what it says about Canada.

 Following is an excerpt from an article written by Ted Byfield, and published in the Edmonton Sun on September 2, 1984:

rsz_1ar_ted_byfield

 “Like Alberta, B.C. is a resource producing province. The source of its wealth and prosperity is obvious to a school child. As the pulp, paper and lumber markets go, as the coal markets go, as the fishing season and market go, as Prairie grain goes, so goes B.C. Just as grain, gas and oil will decide the present and future of Calgary and Edmonton.

Now the point is that the federal government intrudes itself into the economics of these fields more decisively than any other factor. The feds negotiate the tariffs, the feds (since Trudeau any way) set the gas and oil prices; the feds sell the grain; the feds regulate the fishery; the feds control transport on both railways and harbors. In other words, whether the resource regions live, breathe and eat depends largely on the feds. But and here is the point the federal politicians in no sense whatever depend upon the resource regions. They are elected by, and they therefore understandably serve, the populous consumer region of central Canada, the region that elects them.

 And the people in this region neither know nor care about the production and marketing of natural resources. Can the Toronto factory worker be expected to concern himself intimately with the fishing limits on the B.C. coast? Can an insurance actuary in London, Ont., be expected to worry about the Crow Rate? Is a Windsor automobile worker likely to vote on the basis of natural gas or newsprint exports? Hardly.

 However, his concern can be aroused detrimentally. Promise him Alberta oil at half price and he’ll go for it. Tell him you’ll restrict the importation of Japanese cars and the only cost maybe a cut back in Japanese imports of Saskatchewan grain or B.C. coal, but what does he care about that? And it is his vote, not that of the Kelowna fruit grower, with which Misters Turner, Mulroney and Broadbent must concern themselves because there are so many more of him than there are of us.

 The fact is increasingly known and appreciated in British Columbia as it is in Alberta. And unless the foreseeable Mulroney government somehow contends with it, other than by talk, the division of East from West is merely a matter of time.”

 So ask yourself and others in your midst, what has changed? Are we better off than we were 34 years ago? The mainstream media and the Liberal Party apparatchik that is the CBC and Toronto Star declared Western separatism dead with the election of another Trudeau. Were they right? And if they were right, what does it say about how the West is regarded?

8 thoughts on “Are We Better Off?

  1. 1 question would you elect mulroney i am not party orientated not brainwashed by one ideology so far as i can tell politicians serve themselves best if you are a fan of nature you will know that a bird need 2 wings to fly and tail feathers no one party has all the answers

    Liked by 1 person

    • You are absolutely correct in your assumptions. Regardless of what they say, politics have more to do with power than substance. And all federal politicians aspiring to become Prime Minister must kowtow to Ontario and Quebec, to the detriment of anywhere else. Yet another factor in wanting independence.

      Like

  2. I’ve followed western secession for many years. The current crop is a c9nservative movement facing off against the Trudeau liberals. As many times as I’ve posted partisanship kills we secession they continue to asert only conservatives are welcome. Even with full conservative support the vote wouldn’t hit more than 25% support simply because the whole of the West aren’t conservatives. Secession needs multi lateral support from liberals as well. Until a party steps up that will represent all the people of the West secession is dead.

    Liked by 1 person

    • You are very much correct in your assessment. Western Separatists are, by and large conservative, which is perhaps quite representative of the West as a whole as seen in the last election results. However, until Western Separatism moves to include all views in a meaningful way and sticks to the objective, independence, it will continue to be an easily brushed off thing.

      That said, we must avoid falling into the conventional thinking that has arguably caused a decline in western civilization that being organizations succumbing to group think and trying to appease all by promising everything. We want, or should want, a fair system that treats all with universal fairplay. Notice I say “fair”, because it is impossible to please all and worse it would be foolhardy to please one group over another. That would merely extend the current status quo of Canadian politics.

      I have spoken much about social media in the past and continue to do so. Social media is just that, social. As such it attracts like minded people and is more clique-like than social. This is a double edged sword. First it makes for a myopic membership, group leaders want high numbers so they tend to become mirrors of their membership. Second, because it is essentially birds of one feather the exclusion of other viewpoints makes the climate of the group only one way. Add to this people who belong to more than one group and it’s hard, perhaps impossible to estimate true support. This is why my FaceBook group, Real Western Separatism has small numbers due to vetting of every post. We accept all views as long as it is on topic, no axe grinding allowed.

      My goodness! I have turned an answer into another post!

      Thanks for your contribution, I hope we can chat again!

      Peter

      Like

      • Perhaps I was too polite. A little more to the point.. as long a conservative separatists bash what that call lefty libtards etc it’ll never get more than a fraction of the support needs to secede. The so called separatist movement would be better defined as an arm of the conservative party which has little hope of a provincial government let alone something as ground shaking as secession.

        Like

      • i ecco your view! why change the horses if they pull the same load.as long as we keep electing people that are not qualified with limited experience to be our leaders nothing will change i may be repeating myself but a bird needs two wings and a tail to be able to fly we need to be open to new ways of doing things

        Like

    • dear sir if separating only means changing the people that are in power separating would be futile all we would need are minsters to oversee the different departments ex forestry fishing and have a civil service to staff different departments criteria for choosing the civil service and ministers would have to be established no need for hundreds of back benchers or senators would be needed ministers would apply for the jobs and if they could not do the job the minister would be replaced without compensation no golden handshake only the same compensation as any other working person. i know this is simplistic but a flat tax for workers and all companies could be applied and could be variable no right to give themselves raises and bonuses or creat empires

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s