Western Separatism, The Last Chance to Save Canadian Heritage, Culture & Values

   I've never blogged before, so bear with me if this seems disjointed, confused or randomly changes direction.

   Basically, I wish to discuss the pros & cons of western separation, what changes would be needed to ensure this horrific situation never happens again, and how to achieve separation, other than via political methods as there isn't a single politician in Canada that wants to actually do anything for Canada, but merely to guarantee their pay-cheques & pensions.

  I hope that anyone that peruses this, will leave me their ideas & opinions, and are willing to engage in discussion about this topic. And of course, to suggest points I may well miss.

  Currently, I only see use of force as the only viable option to separate at this point, preferably with support from the U.S., as we need armour & air-power to bring it about swiftly, with a minimum risk for loss of life. If there was a core group of troops from the U.S., supplanted and eventually replaced, with Canadian militias & volunteers, it could conceivably be brought about within 6 months.

  By moving swiftly to seize Gov't buildings, Police Stations, hospitals, etc., the general populace would likely offer minimal , or token resistance. Especially as the stated goal is separation, and improvement of the western society's way of life, without interference & theft of funds,(equalization payments) by the eastern traitors.

  Upon gaining control, education of the populace of the intended goals of separation must be broadcast and followed thru with as quickly as possible.

  As a working proposal, I suggest that the Canadian Constitution be rolled back to the 1964 version, to avoid the anti-Canadian sentiments & changes made by the Dis-Honourable P.E. Trudeau. 

  Second, that as Canada was founded on predominantly Christian ideals, that the Lord's prayer is brought back to our gov't institutions, such as schools.

  Third, we need to amend the Constitution to include legislation limiting taxation to a maximum over-all rate of 30%, or 10% Federal, 10% provincial, and 10% to Federal Social Services, namely, pension, medical, etc. The only allowable exemption is an income tax, (max. a further 10%), that is temporary to cover any financial emergency needs, ie war, that must be cancelled after 5 years, or until the need is met, whichever happens first.

  Fourth, we need to revisit how politicians are paid. I would suggest that their recompense is based on the median income of their constituants, and no increase may be made unless the median goes up, therefore inducing them to actively seek to improve their constituants situations. Also, no-one in political office may be unionized, as this gives the impression they need not work, the union will protect them. No political figure may have a pension or insurance other than the same C.P.P., etc. as the general populace, unless they pay out of their own pocket for it. And must put in the same amount of time at work to collect it as the general population. As a guide, roughly 250 days per year, no less than 10 years service. Also, any politician, if suspected of ethical or criminal violations, is suspended, without pay or recompense, until cleared, or is summarily dismissed, if guilty, without any recourse for any financial compensation, pay, or pensions.

  Fifth, our banking system needs to be nationalized, so as to control our rate of inflation, which is currently controlled by foreign banks. I would say that each province has it's own Provincial Treasury, which would report to a Federal Treasury. All Gov'ts, at each level, would be budgeted from the respective treasury, and would be forced to stay within the budgetary limits, plus or minus, say, 10%. No Gov't may borrow from any other institution, or nation, other than their respective treasury. The horrific debts created from outside borrowing by Ontario & Quebec are a stern lesson in outside borrowing & debt, and the damage it causes to the economy.

  Sixth, No governmental policy, or legislation, may be passed, without first being examined to show a need for it by the majority of Canadians. To wit, I would propose that we have the senate examine any legislation to see if it    A). Meets a need in the current legislation, B). Isn't promoting any single group or institution. C). There is an actual need to better the majority of society.

  Seventh, we need to ensconce our rights into the Constitution, as well as revise the Charter of Rights, to ensure that such things as Freedom of Speech, the right to defend one's person, family, and home, are never endangered.

Eighth, The gov't must issue a monthly statement of affairs, so that the voting public will know all that the gov't is considering, prior to any legislation introductions or changes. The populace may redact or cancel, any legislation, by petition, if there is a sufficient majority, I would suggest 60% of registered voters at the governmental level of the legislation.

Ninth, any politician may be summarily removed from office, without pay or financial recompense, by petition to initiate the removal, and then referendum.

There is more to add, but for now, this should give sufficient food for thought, and I will add more for your perusal after I see how much, if any, discussion there is for these first points.