Volume XVI, Numbers 7 & 8, July/August 1998
The Western Separatist Papers are published
monthly by W.S.P. Ltd.
Address all correspondence to WSP, Box 143, 255 Menzies Street,
Victoria, B.C. Western Canada V8V 2G6.
A one-year subscription is $15.00. Our e-mail address is:
wcc@islandnet.com.
Phone us at: 250-727-3438 or fax us at: 250-479-3294
Our Cover: This cartoon from 1864 by Quebec cartoonist Jean-Baptiste Côté depicts Confederation as a many-headed monster and Quebec as a lamb. The figures include Upper Canada Reform leader George Brown and Lower Canada Conservative leader George Cartier, both of whom supported a coalition government formed to advance the idea of Confederation. This cartoon was published in La Scie, Quebec, December 1864
To the Editor:
I am originally from Ontario, but in having married a Victoria lady I have become a transplanted Westerner. Given that I come from a rural/small city family who always voted Tory blue, I have always sympathized with the west's cause. Back in the early 1980s, when anti-Trudeauism was at its height, I would have purchased a one-way ticket to either Calgary or Vancouver if Western Canada declared itself separate. When Mulroney betrayed western concerns, among other things, I gave up on the Tories.
While I still do sympathize with western concerns, and even the prospects of independence, I do wish to convey some words of caution. While there are many fine real conservatives out here, there are many on the other side of the spectrum. In my first years in Victoria in the early 1990s I noticed that the bad policies (i.e. multiculturalism, hate laws) were not merely coming from Ottawa, but were being helped by a very powerful western-grown left-wing cheering section, or an "amen corner" (to use Pat Buchanan's expression). One can see this amen corner in the media, academia, the churches and even in the provincial governments.
B.C. has had an NDP government since 1991! I need not elaborate too much on where the NDP stands on many issues; it is pro-multicult, pro-abortion, pro-gay rights, pro-tax-and-spend big government and anti-free speech. It was not Ottawa who told BC voters to put Mike Harcourt and his crew into power. Nor was it Ottawa who ordered the B.C. voters in 1996 to then re-elect the Glen Clark mob! Ontario had the "common sense (pardon the expression) to give the Bob Rae NDPers the boot. The B.C. NDP has given us a number of bad policies without being told by Ottawa. Of course Ottawa does not need to tell Glen Clark, Elizabeth Cull, Joy McPhail(ure), and company to follow their bankrupt policies. They passed Bill 33, and gave us a "Human Rights Code" which tramples on free speech. We have commissar Ujjal Dosanjh (B.C.’s A-G) chiding Ottawa for not doing enough to fight the "hatemongers."
One major concern of western separatists is that of the west’s natureal resources. The Harcourt/Clark mob has listened to the earth-worshipping environmentalist lobby and closed down development on the lucrative Cassiar copper mine. Many B.C. mining companies are moving their operations either to the USA or to Chile. According to my prospector brother-in-law, the B.C. NDP have done to B.C.'s mining industry what the feds did to Alberta's oil and gas industry in the early 1980s. Why worry about the feds when the Belleville St. mob would have all of our resrouce development halted to save some "endangered species"?
The NDP is also the government in Saskatchewan, and it is the official opposition in Manitoba. It is so well entrenched in Regina that the Tories and the Liberals have joined forces and have created the new Saskatchewan Party. In fact, the NDP started in Saskatchewan as the old CCF, and it was in Saskatchewan that the CCF/NDP formed its first government. Many of the CCF/NDP social programs became a model for that of Canada. When Tommy Douglas' crew were replaced by Ross Thatcher's Liberals many NDP-linked civil servants (i.e. Thomas Shoyama, Al Johnston) found positions in Ottawa. Alberta is the only western province where the NDP does not have too firm a foothold. If Western Canada did separate only to have a firmly entrenched NDP regime then Alberta may want to separate from Western Canada.
Apparently Western Canada has many home-grown politicians of the same stripe as those coming from big city Ontario. People in small-town and rural Ontario share many of the same core values that westerners have. This is especially true in northern Ontario, where there is a small but growing call to split the province into its northern and southern parts. In the last election Reform came close to winning seats in about 40 ridings. Often the Liberals won because of the split vote. (Remember that back in 1988 Reform only succeeded in biting into the Tory vote in B.C., and as a result the NDP gained a large B.C. bloc.)
Should Quebec separate does the west have to separate? In the event of Quebec separation the credibility of the Liberals and Tories in Ontario will be nil, and Reform (or any other western-based party) would be more in a position to make its breakthrough. In a Canada without Quebec, the West would have greater clout. The West will have a greater proportion of seats in the House of Commons. Nor could the just call for the Triple-E Senate be denied. The West is already gaining clout as more economic power is shifting westwards. Calgary, with its more diverse economy, is growing. Finally, Canadian Pacific has located its headquarters there. Why should the West settle for separation when it can conquer!
Perhaps conquer is a pipe dream, but an independent Western Canada run by the NDP is not. Having been from one end of Canada to the other I find that the rot is deep, and it involves more than just Ottawa. An independent Western Canada is not necessarily going to give us the results we look for, but it only represents an opportunity to get things right. Western Canada, and even Central and Eastern Canada, need more than just structural political changes. They need a real revolution in the conceptual thinking which governs us. An independent Western Canada without changes in the concepts will only be the liberal multi-cult Canada with a different name and reduced borders. Most of all, Western Canada, along with Eastern and Central Canada, and the whole of our civilization, need a real moral and spiritual revival.
Alex Greer
Victoria, B.C.
(Editor's Note: The NDP became the government last election without a majority because of a right wing split.)
The Western Separatist Papers welcomes your letters. Please send them to the Editor, WSP, Box 143, 255 Menzies Street, Victoria, B.C. V8V 2G6, by e-mail to wcc@islandnet.com or by fax to 250-479-3294.
by Fred Williamson
(We continue our series of articles by Mr. Williamson, a history graduate of the University of Alberta, which analyzes the position of the West in Canada, and gives intellectual ammunition for the arguments for Western separation.)
Honest economic studies have again and again come to the conclusion that, not only would Western Canada be financially better off outside the Canadian "federation," but it would prosper as never before. One of the most striking studies confirming this is in the book <M>Regional Aspects of Confederation by John Whalley and Irene Trela (University of Toronto Press, 1986). The financial cost to the West for being in Confederation is astonishing. The most telling aspects of this are summed up in a chart given in the book on page 198, using 1981 data. (The results would be even more favorable for the West since that period, as the West has continued to shell out cash to Eastern Canada.)
In discussing the date, the authors wrote:
"We consider cases where each of the regions identified in the model in turn is considered to withdraw from Confederation. In implementing these experiments, on withdrawal federal taxes are not collected in the region, federal expenditures are not made, and intergovernmental transfers to persons are no longer made to the region. Labour is treated as immobile between the withdrawing region, and those remaining; capital remains fully mobile. Any gain or loss to the federal government is reallocated proportionally to the five regions that remain, using population in each region as weights . . . Using data for 1981, these model results support that Ontario, British Columbia, Manitoba/Saskatchewan, and Alberta would all gain by leaving Confederation. Thus, Confederation appears to be substantially unbalanced both against resource-rich and higher income provinces. In addition, these results suggest that, if anything, rather than accounting for a surplus to be distributed between regions, Confederation seems to account for a deficit, and this seems to be due in large part to the distorting policies pursued by the federal government." (pp. 197, 199)
The table cited by the authors is reproduced below. The figures are so amazing that the chart is reproduced in full. The numbers given are in millions of dollars. They show what so many other studies have shown, namely that Alberta would benefit the most by leaving Confederation, followed by British Columbia. But this study shows that Manitoba and Saskatchewan would also benefit by leaving Confederation. The province that gains the most from Confederation is Quebec, the province that is always threatening to secede. Ontario would benefit by leaving Confederation, but not as much as any of the Western provinces. Alberta would gain 20 billion dollars if it left Confederation, B.C. would gain 2.3 billion dollars if it left Confederation, and Manitoba/Saskatchewan would gain 1.3 billion dollars by leaving Confederation. The big losers would be Atlantic Canada and Quebec, the very provinces whose politicians have a disproportionately large influence in "national" politics.
Table 6-3 General Equilibrium Impacts of Withdrawal from Confederation by Individual Regions, Using 1981 data. (Hicksian EV's in $ millions)
The entire West would clearly benefit by leaving Confederation, especially Alberta and British Columbia. Atlantic Canada and Quebec would be the biggest losers. Every one else would benefit if Atlantic Canada left Confederation, and every one except Quebec would benefit if Quebec left Confederation. On the other hand, the financial loss to Confederation would be severe if Alberta left Confederation, and even greater if Alberta was joined by her three sister western provinces to form a new nation.
One of the only media persons brave enough to confront the issues within the Nisga'a treaty, talk show host and columnist Rafe Mair summed up the dangers and possible repercussions of it. Mr. Mair writes in his column, Voice from B.C., in the Financial Post of Friday, August 7, 1998, entitled "It's unfair to brand opponents `racists' -- Democratic principles lost in dust of Nisga'a treaty":
"The contra-arguments are, essentially, two.
"First, this agreement will add a new, government that will diminish the powers of both Ottawa and Victoria. This, according to constitutional expert Melvin Smith, means it is an amendment to the Constitution (perhaps in a subtle way, but if it looks like a duck, etc.) and therefore under British Columbia law requires a referendum before the legislature can approve it.
"Secondly, the racism of the Indian Act is simply relocated to the treaty. This breaks down into two subheadings, the lack of rights for non-natives in Nisga'a lands and a special salmon fishery on the Nass River for Nisga'a only. (The Nisga'a will be double dipping, since they will have their own quota of up to 26% of the Nass fish, yet still be entitled to participate in the general fishery in the province. Non-natives will not, however, be entitled to fish on Nisga'a land.)
"The question of the rights of non-natives is vexing since in some treaty areas non-natives outnumber natives. Surely, the fundamental principle is this -- a society where people's rights are determined by their race is, by definition, racist, however lofty the stated motives for it.
"How can B.C. claim to be democratic when one sort of citizen can live, work and vote wherever he pleases, yet another cannot?
"How can Canadians tolerate a society where qualification for fundamental rights not only depends upon the color of skin, but officially certified racial and clan purity? (Non-Nisga'a aboriginals are "foreigners" too.)
"How is it possible to say a society isn't based upon race when two large commercial salmon fisheries are denied to non-natives?
"Another concern to many is the precedent. Premier Glen Clark calls the Nisga'a treaty a "template," a description eagerly picked up by Opposition Leader Gordon Campbell. There are 50 to 60 more agreements to be reached, the most critical of which involve overlapping Musqueam/Squamish claims to all of Vancouver. Since Nisga'a establishes that land claims forgone will bring cash in their place, native leaders will logically and forcefully argue for immense, unimaginable sums for densely populated urban areas.
"It's easy for people in other parts of Canada to be philosophical about this problem -- there is no claim for downtown Toronto or Montreal, for one thing. Just as Samuel Johnson's hanging in a fortnight concentrated the mind wonderfully, so does the prospect of paying for Vancouver, Stanley Park included.
"The negotiations leading to this agreement were not founded on any agreed principles except that the rest of us were guilty as hell and ought to pay whatever it takes to ease our consciences. Skilled Nisga'a negotiators played this card shamelessly. The NDP government ignored trivial considerations like democracy and equality of all citizens in order to buy forgiveness, however limited. There was no meaningful consultation with the people -- those who raised troubling questions were ignored, branded racists, or both.
(end of excerpt)
To commence proceedings, a summons went to the "heretic" - a term of grace was allowed in which a confession could "reconcile the heretic to God". Reformed behavior and penance were essential for a "heretic".
A respondent to a complaint about "hate mongering" can come before the Commission and make an apology and offer compensation, without the cost of a hearing - and hence be reconciled to the complainant. Reformed behavior is essential for a "discriminator".
Heretics who failed to come forward were to be denounced by good Catholics in secret to the Inquisitor.
Discriminators who fail to come forward and be reconciled to the complainant will be denounced in the media. Complaints can be made in secret to the Commission.
Only witnesses of "good character" could testify, although "heretics" could testify against "heretics" but never for them.
Only witnesses "free of racism" or "bias" or "discrimination" can be expert witnesses, although a "racist" can testify against a "racist" but never for him and be received.
A defendant had no witnesses, since such persons would themselves be "accomplices" or "heretics". Defendants could prove "truth" in their defense if they could prove their innocence.
The defendant cannot call any witnesses to prove the truth of what he said because "truth is not a defense." There is no defense of truth if the effect is "hate"
Counsel, though not explicitly denied at first , was later denied by Papal Authority, at least for acknowledged "heretics". This was known to the Inquisitor.
Lawyers who represent defendants are labelled and libelled in the media as lawyers for "hate mongers." This is repeated until lawyer and client are seen as one. Truth not being a defense, intent not being required, legal aid being denied, lawyers are pointless and scarce.
Witness and accusers' names were secret. Witnesses were often malicious.
Accusers need not testify. Their malice is considered irrelevant and may not be proven.
After being convicted of "heresy" or "sin," the heretic could accept penance and confess. If he did not, the Inquisition never punished. It turned the heretic over to the civil arm for punishment for treason - usually death by burning. A confession after conviction permitted the heretic to be strangled before burning. Property was forfeit.
After being convicted of "discrimination", the defendant or discriminator can admit the breach, reform and pay money. If not, the Tribunal registers its judgment with the civil court who punishes with contempt, usually jail. Property is forfeit. One who admits "fault" before the civil court may simply be gagged by order.
by Douglas Christie
When a nation of approximately 30 million people is spread over 4,000 miles, and speaks two different languages officially, and many more unofficially, it is not surprising that communication at the level where people live is very slow. Of course, with modern technology, the government can communicate and propagandise.
The government can tell the people what to think and does so through the government-funded news agency, the CBC. The rest of the media they regulate through the CRTC or censor through the Human Rights Tribunal, the modern inquisition.
Even then, it is remarkable when a major importing nation like Canada experiences a drastic decline in its currency such as the loss in value of their dollar by 46% against the U.S. dollar, the U.S. being our major trading partner, inside of two years. You may remember that in September 1994 I advised in this paper that we should all buy U.S. dollars with our savings.
What is the reaction of the Canadian government to this crisis of confidence in the world? Very simply: just do what we have always done. Throw taxpayers' money into the line of fire. Sacrifice their hard-earned money in a futile attempt to pretend the loonie is worth something.
Why is the loon diving? Well, it's not for fish. It's because everything Canada has done and is doing to protect the privileged position of its left-wing elite is wrong. Their Human Rights Tribunals, Indian land claims, regulation of growth and development, control of communication, massive third world immigration, huge socialist bureaucracy, a totally confused military, laws on abortion and homosexuality, while its government-funded and controlled media feed an image of tranquillity to the befuddled multitude.
Take for instance the Nisga'a/Clark/Chretien land deal. It is clear now that a group of people who are fortunate enough to belong to a particular race will have land, logging rights, fishing rights, taxing rights, law-making rights and linguistic and cultural rights to create a tribal homeland where I and my descendants will not have the same rights. This is clearly racism on the part of the government of B.C. and Canada. The only racism which is allowed, of course, is anti-European racism. This is officially-sanctioned. Any European response will be dealt with by "Human Rights Tribunals" and prohibited on pain of jail. Strangely enough, Quebec natives will never be given similar rights unless of course it is useful to check Quebec separatism.
At the bottom of the Nisga'a land grab will be a big reservation. Oh, it won't be called a reservation. But that's what it will be. The individual Nisga'a person will be no better off. The tribal councillors and chief will do as well as the boss on a collective farm. They will spend much of their time in Vancouver "negociating" with fast cash developers.
When we travel around Victoria and see the difference between reserve lands and non-reserve lands the contrast is striking. In the absence of individual ownership, there is no pride in the property of the individual. The individual is not a real factor in the tribal culture unless they can scramble up the hierarchy so to speak and become a chief. There is no value in spiritual or moral terms to communism. In the end it becomes the equal distribution of poverty. The Nisga'a land grab is really just a large collective farm whose inhabitants are entitled to some ill-defined part of it by racial ancestry.
The media are almost universal in their praise. Ironically, if they don't applaud a racist deal, they are afraid of being racist. Orwellian doublespeak at work. The essential elements of the Nisga'a deal are to be applied throughout B.C. with minor variations. Indians around Victoria are claiming from Mount Douglas to the Gulf Islands. No registry of their deeds is necessary. Tribal legends and oral history will do. They all cite the Supreme Court of Canada, though exactly how and where I don't know.
A recent condescending editorial in the Times-Colonist told Victorians to take a valium, that no one was going to take their private property. But by giving money such as $500 million to 4,000 Indians in Nisga'a and with 51 other "First Nations" waiting for their share, where do the editorialists think the money will come from for these deals? It will come from taxpayers. Many of the dollars will come from property tax. This already drives people off their land. This already gives people who are non-Indian the heavier burden of tax, which is exhausting their efforts to own, to build, or to save. No wonder the country is bankrupt. No wonder the currency is in decline. We are headed for third world status.
Even the language is being corrupted to perpetrate this fraud. Take the concept "First Nations," the euphemism used to distract from the racial nature of these tribal units. They are not nations and never were. Tribal cultures were essentially clans. They had no known written language. They had no structures of government or law as we know it or as the existing nation states of the world knew it 500 years ago. The wheel had not been invented in North America 500 years ago. This was a primitive tribal culture in which war and famine must have been nasty and brutal and life was short.
But to soften the awareness of systemic racism undertaken by the Canadian and B.C. governments and to avoid charges of racism and discrimination, they create the illusion of nation to nation talks out of lawyers haggling. We are not supposed to object that this was done in secret by government hacks behind closed doors and presented as a finished job.
It is time to make this solemn declaration: Western Canada after independence will never recognize the treaties entered into by Canada or the present provincial regime, unless the so-called treaties are ratified by a referendum of <W0>all the people of British Columbia. The Independent nation of Western Canada will not be a successor government to either the province of British Columbia or the government of Canada, but a new and independent nation where everyone has equal rights and responsibilities, regardless of race, and freedom and justice for all will exist. This now appears clearly the only alternative to the chaos of socialistic government ownership of property which will have the added dimension of race-based membership.
But Canada is more than land claims and B.C. problems. Yes, much more. It is the Premiers meeting in the night to "cook deals" on how to extract the most from the federal government as if it was some unrelated foreign government. Actually, this elitist charade has been going on for years.
They announce they are now going to save health care and take back transfer payments. Face facts: every time 100 tax dollars pass through the hands of a bureaucrat, 10 or 20 of them stick to his or her fingers, and this is so whether it is federal or provincial. Canadians are drastically over-governed and over-taxed. The result is a defeated, depressed, declining population. We live under an oppressive regime. To sell the socialist concept they need a mind-boggling and appealing term like "first nations" hence "social union," the socialist agenda marches on to its sad conclusion.
The end of socialist decadence is not a revolution but rather quiet and systematic decline. The Soviet Union did not end in revolution, but in disintegration. That is still going on in Russia as the same disintegration is gathering momentum here.
The only solution to stop this disintegration and depression is a nation in Western Canada, bigger than a province, smaller than Canada, but with a common vision and purpose. The forces who work against this goal are rapidly running out of alternatives.
Social engineering is the study of creating social change by conditioning rather than by voluntary choice. This study must surely have been designed to describe the way Canadians can be led to accept what they would never choose.
Recently a federally-appointed panel of three, appointed by the patronage of Jean Chretien, gave a decision which if implemented will cost the taxpayers about five billion dollars. This is the result of the decision of a three-person panel of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. This body has the powers and practices of the modern inquisition. This body is the one used to harass someone in Canada because of a website dedicated to him, originating in California. But that is another story of waste and abuse of power.
The case that will cost about five billion dollars involves thousands of federal government employees and the concept of pay equity. This concept as I understand it, involves equal pay for work of equal value. The secretary can claim to be worth as much as the truck driver and hence should be paid the same. This is what the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) decided and without a vote of Parliament or a ruling of the court, the whole budget surplus of five billion dollars could thereby be wiped out. This decision unless successfully appealed, renders the taxpayer hostage to a big union and three appointed social engineers, which brings me back to my earlier description of social engineers. They are what the Canadian establishment has become. The social experiment by the mad scientists has just about reached its conclusion.
This insanity is greeted by the vast majority with quiet indifference. They cannot put cause and effect together enough to allow them to protest while they could and motivate an uproar that the courts would hear. Instead, the media tries to sell the idea as usual. The dropping dollar and the general realization that Canada is a ship of fools has become widely known in the world economy. Could it be, that the insanity of this particular decision of CHRT might be the reason?
The people are about to realize indifference has a high price. Corruption cannot be ignored forever because it takes and robs as much from those who ignore it as from those who protest. I am totally convinced that the CHRT and its decision will be the tip of their ice berg which sinks the Canadian Titanic. The deck chairs have been frequently rearranged by various politicians, but Ontario and Quebec still rule and define. But the West will not put up with this forever. We who stand for a new nation will not allow Human Rights Tribunals to take away our rights and feed us to the lions of political correctitude.
Human Rights Tribunals in Canada have prosecuted mayors of cities for not proclaiming "gay pride days"; they have prosecuted Ernst Zundel because of the content of a foreign website, and now have decided that one form of work is worth as much as another in spite of the fact that the people themselves chose to work for that money all along. CHRTs are a third level of government which from three unelected officials, none of them judges, have given the biggest judgment in Canadian history. Oh, how power corrupts.
The thing that has to be realized about these tyrannical special courts is their permanence and their growth. A multicultural society can only be inflicted by an iron fist albeit in a velvet glove. The power of these tribunals can only increase in the Canadian system. Career "human rights" lawyers benefit by the growth of these tribunals. Who is going to stop them in Canada? The tribunals themselves have to justify their existence and can only do so by finding the problem they are sent to cure. They aren't going to stop themselves. The politicians and judges are generally scared of them and don't want to be called racists. Who will stop them? Nobody in Canada. They march on to the socialist utopia where our culture, nation and tradition are well and truly dead. God save us from the likes of these. Independence is the only solution.
Calgary, Friday, August 28th, 1998 at the Port O'Call Inn at 7:00 p.m. Public information meeting. Please come and bring a friend.