I would say no, and I would expect any sensible country to bar this within its borders. To the extent that a state should have a nonviolent means of secession, this above all should not be subject to foreign interference.

You can find a more detailed view of my opinion on specific independence movements elsewhere in this thread.

Regarding California or indeed any other state breaking away from the US, it’s none of our business. And, before you ask, in the highly unlikely event that they wished to join Canada, I would expect them to gain independence and then, separately, start any process of joining another country.

I can’t speak for all Canadians, I truly have no idea.

From my own personal opinion, I’m aware that every independence movement is a unique case, and I won’t pretend I understand any of them outside of my own country, nor would I blindly support any of them just because they were ostensibly independence movements.

I will say this, again from my perspective, it seems to me that Alberta isn’t and never was an independent country like Scotland may have been, and the history of Alberta - including the indigenous peoples who currently live there and have agreements with the federal government (notably NOT the province) - as well as recent Canadian law on the topics (eg Clarity Act), puts Alberta in a rather more clear position on the topic of independence. That is to say, even if they could reconcile all treaty matters and carve out any land for themselves, and even if they could reimburse the federal government for all the pension plan balances and the proportion of debt, and even if they had a sustainable economic foundation, they probably would never get through the legal and constitutional blockers.

I know all of this about Alberta, and none of this about Scotland. So, no opinion of value, and no comment.

But if it looked like Brexit, I would instinctively advise against it.

There’s no unilateral separation from Canada without reconciling all of the constitutionality protected indigenous land claims, and they’ve all indicated they have no interest. Also the Constitution would need to be renegotiated, and this would require all provinces. This will stretch any practical timeline for secession out indefinitely.

The US interests have no bearing on this, unless they plan on invading.

I actually wasn’t aware that there would be pushback from Washington on this. The separatists and the Premier constantly go on about how they’ll go to the Americans if Canada won’t let them build a pipeline through BC (even though the Trudeau government literally bought them a pipeline a few years ago).

I imagine their plan is to ship oil to the Gulf States for refining, and that’s it. They probably also assume they’ll get all of the benefits of being American, which I presume mostly involves second amendment rights.

Wexit would be Brexit… but with a landlocked country with an economy a tiny fraction of the size based entirely on oil, who unlike the UK (who is going it alone) are subsumed into a larger country that wants nothing to do with the people and wouldn’t even give them a vote. Oh and good luck with all the indigenous peoples, they are famously even-tempered about having their land occupied and will surely not interrupt any economic infrastructure, and that’s assuming the Supreme Court doesn’t stand on rulings that bar Alberta from leaving and taking unceded land with them.

In a great twist of irony, the indigenous peoples may save Canada, and I hope it ultimately brings all Canadians closer together, and they get the respect they deserve.

My alternate most schadenfreude-y timeline involves Alberta managing to Wexit somehow, and consequently Washington and Oregon joining Canada.

Alberta separatists never shut up about running a pipeline through Washington to the west coast.

If the west coast of the US went to Canada after Alberta separated, that would be the ultimate poetic justice. Alberta would be back negotiating a pipeline again, through Washington, but again with Canada, and now as a foreign state with all the animosity of a recent separation.

This would be: “How to shoot yourselves in the dick on an international stage, in one easy step”.

Resistors need to answer question 2A, learn to build and fly drones, and join an improv group.

You’re overthinking it buddy. It’s a fart, it’s funny.

If you feel like you need to understand me to make it funny, then fill yer boots.

Edit honestly if you don’t find farts funny then you’re a loser because you’re choosing to have less joy in your life but the exact same amount of farts.

You have to admit it was pretty funny.

It would properly express the respect I have for this conversation. Oh well, use your imagination.

Ok sedition.

But I prefer to call them traitors because that’s what they are.

Does that work for you?

Alberta separatists never shut up about running a pipeline through Washington to the west coast.

If the West Coast went to Canada after Alberta separated, that would be the ultimate poetic justice. Alberta would be back negotiating with Canada but now as a foreign state with all the animosity of a recent separation. I’d almost like to see it if it didn’t mean massive political upheaval.

Wow you’ve dropped a real steaming hot pile of take right here.

See my response to him.

Our country is propagandized by the US, and within Canada we aren’t fed the same exceptionalist bullshit that they are in the US.

I know and I’m close with a lot of American friends, family and colleagues. I know they aren’t all assholes, but unfortunately about half are, and about 1 in 6 actually want to annex my country.

No one I’ve ever met claims it’s a utopia. Unlike Americans brainwashed from birth we don’t believe our country is perfect, nor do we believe that other countries have no value. We don’t believe our country is perfect and entitled to greatness.

Consider that you believe that we think this way, precisely because you can’t imagine it differently.

I wish I could upload my fart in response.

We could start by enforcing our laws. Foreign interference is everywhere, and we’ve just ignored it for decades. Eg, the US funds the Frasier Institute and no one makes any comment about this. Half of our media is owned by them. The convoy was subsidized by US funding. I don’t believe for a moment that the UCP and/or its members aren’t awash in US corporate bribes and cash promises.

Our country is under threat and no one seems to do a damn thing about it. Why doesn’t any politician discuss this? Poilievre talks about Chinese interference, where is the concern for this interference by the US, very clearly our enemy??!

Who do you put your trust in when it comes to making economic and political decisions in the face of a generational existential threat to our sovereignty, as well as a massive, rapid and necessary restructuring of our economy?

I’m sure you’ll forgive me, but I rather think that given what he has accomplished in his first year, his overall skillset and deep knowledge in relevant fields, and his preeminent experience at the highest levels of economic and strategic discourse, he is much more trustworthy on the topics of trade and economic diversification, defense and sovereignty and affordability - and far better suited to protect and progress our country away from US dependence - than you are, random internet stranger who has none of the equivalent skills, experience or access to critical information from expert advisors.

But that’s just me. I prefer to pragmatically consider my options with some humility and respect for expertise, rather than pooling together all the insight of a high school bong session.

Yeah Canada and the US are really the same. Sure buddy. Steaming hot pile of take right there.

The guy you responded to is on the far left economically. Think the polar opposite of libertarian, who thinks there are no redeeming qualities of our current economic systems, and rather than fixing things incrementally, if we instead massively overhaul the system, we will surely have a much better economic picture.

Not sure what he believes about democracy, but I’m guessing he also objects to that as well. In other words, hardly with the time of day.