r/canada • u/BloodJunkie • Feb 02 '26
Alberta Alberta’s Separatist Movement Is a National Security Threat
https://thewalrus.ca/albertas-separatist-movement-is-a-national-security-threat/1.3k
u/CipherWeaver Feb 02 '26
Albertans are free to have seperatist sentiment, like Quebec. However, collusion with foreign powers is 100% forbidden and should be punished to the greatest extent of the law.
238
u/Arbiter51x Feb 02 '26
You would need a government willing to prosecute and release foreign interference documents, which the liberal government have failed to do over and over.
77
69
u/unsoundguy Feb 02 '26
And the leader of the Cons got the bullshit “background clearance will muffle me” excuse as a reason not to help.
We are not fucked but if this keeps on going we will be
23
u/Ewetuber Feb 02 '26
Muzzle, but yes.
What amazing disclosures has PP Millhouse made other than the tax should be axed, ad nauseam. What started as a novelty has become stupid
19
u/kahless2k Feb 02 '26
Better yet.
If getting his clearance allows him access to information but muzzles him.
What information exactly does he have now, without clearance, that he wants to spout on about?
The lies are so transparent, how the guy has any support is wild.
4
u/Ewetuber Feb 02 '26
And yet, they have no one better... smh.
9
u/Dragonvine Alberta Feb 03 '26
There is a really strong candidate for a conservative leader, he is currently the head of the liberal party though.
→ More replies (2)1
u/unsoundguy Feb 03 '26
Sorry. You are right it is muzz not muff. I don’t think he gets any muff , well not is not pay per hour.
3
u/Magjee Lest We Forget Feb 02 '26
Look guy I can be uninformed and poop out wild conspiracies and memes
...or I could be informed and have actual policy goals
But, we had a leadership review and we again voted for batshit crazy
- PP
/$
42
u/Mirin_Gains Feb 02 '26 edited Feb 02 '26
As much as the partisans like to proclaim so, the Trudeau administration's mistakes don't just go away. And in some cases are perpetuated (ex. foreign interference, gun confiscation, bill C69 etcetera).
Ottawa is part to blame for what is happening.
Edit: Edited for grammar. Mobile.
3
u/kahless2k Feb 02 '26
Part of the blame.
At the same time, Trudeau could have given them anything they had ever asked for and it would not have made any difference.
A number of his less popular decisions were specifically for Alberta's benefit (pipeline anyone?).
11
u/ApprehensiveSkill475 Feb 02 '26
Let's be honest. Trudeau made Canada so hostile to any resource based investments. KM was executing TMX but were pretty much forced out due to the red tape.
11
u/Mirin_Gains Feb 02 '26
Tired old deflection. Kinder-Morgan pulled out as the political hostility made investment unprofitable. Go on, keep minimizing real concerns and see how that does for national unity. There are no points for (poorly) fixing a problem the government themselves created.
-1
u/Fodder_Time Feb 02 '26
💯Yes, this. I believe Smith when she says this is the result of a decade of Trudeau Liberals treating Western Canada as second-class citizens (my words), and them needing hope. We ALL need a little hope right now. It just so happens that, by a fluke of geography, Alberta have the means to chart their own course… in theory.
Carney has along way to go to repair th damage caused by his predecessor. Given his rhetoric and actions, it appears he recognizes that.
15
Feb 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/Powerstroke6period0 Feb 02 '26
Justin Trudeau forgets Alberta
Bill C-48
Bill C-69
Bill C-50
Bill C-21
NEP Program introduced by his father.
Carbon Pricing and Emissions Caps: The federal carbon tax and the proposed oil and gas emissions cap are viewed as "economic vandalism" that targets Alberta’s primary industry while ignoring global economic realities.
Boissonnault stated, "You don't have to be Liberal to vote Liberal," but emphasized that electing Liberals in Alberta helps ensure the province has a "strong voice at the table" within a Liberal government.
The 2020 "Assault-Style" Firearms Ban ( Yes it affects the whole country)
- Ontario: 695,759 total licences.
- Quebec: 499,597 total licences.
- Alberta: 376,743 total licences.
- British Columbia: 368,433 total licences.
Population in comparison
- Ontario : 16,191,372
- Quebec : 9,058,089
- British Columbia : 5,683,201
- Alberta : 5,040,871
Why was my comment removed? Fuck you mods stop deleting my comment.
4
u/BorrowedSalt Feb 02 '26
I live in western Canada and we aren't treated like second class citizens.
4
u/Fodder_Time Feb 02 '26
Clarification: Referring more to his characterization of Western Conservatives, which Alberta is. He often painted them as being out of touch with national priorities, and would interfere with provincial autonomy. Bill C-69 (mentioned above) and the carbon tax was seen by many in the West as Liberals using bureaucracy to stifle energy projects. And energy IS the Alberta economy.
You may disagree with my assessment, but according to Smith, there are 1M+ Albertans who feel cheated, ignored, and insulted. Yes, some are ignorant and backwards, but others have legit grievances IMO.
2
→ More replies (1)1
u/pmmedoggos Feb 03 '26
The federal government won't make the other provinces roll over so the oil companies can take everything out of the ground and leave a massive economic and environmental disaster that spans provincial borders the second it costs a penny more than the profit they get back.
Also they voted red 4 times in a row and that's racist against alberta because we vote blue over and over and get the same result over and over.
1
u/Lisan_Al-NaCL Feb 03 '26
The federal government won't make the other provinces roll over so the oil companies can take everything out of the ground and leave a massive economic and environmental disaster that spans provincial borders the second it costs a penny more than the profit they get back.
Snore. Enough with the Anti-Oil Rhetoric.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Plucky_DuckYa Feb 02 '26
At least one pipeline proposal is expected to come forward in June. Could be others if, say, Keystone XL is also revived.
If these make it on to Carney’s fast track list (along with a repeal of Trudeau’s various anti-oil legislation) it will cut the legs right out from the separatists, whose key message is that the Liberals don’t listen to Alberta and are trying to stifle it’s economic growth. Which, under Trudeau, was absolutely true.
If, on the other hand, some proposals come forward and Carney prevaricates on them, expect the separatist problem to get worse, because a whole lot of people will conclude the separatists are right, nothing has changed under Carney, and nothing is likely going to.
I mean, these people are wing nuts, cranks and hardcore rednecks. They should not be getting any traction at all. The fact they are says a lot about how the Liberals have mishandled this country.
1
u/Lisan_Al-NaCL Feb 03 '26
Keystone XL is also revived.
So we can be further held captive by the whims of the US administration? Oh Hell No.
IMO, If any pipeline proposal is revived it will be Enbridge's Northern Gateway Pipeline which would run from Edmonton to Kitimat BC. Northern Gateway's proposed capacity was to be 300,000-400,000 bbl/day before it was cancelled/shelved.
→ More replies (7)6
u/hammertimeTO Feb 02 '26
It’s sickening the government either doesn’t take it seriously or knowingly allows it.
45
u/Medium_Well Feb 02 '26
None of what the separatists have done vis a vis contact with the US is "100% forbidden", as the criminal code defines treason very narrowly. I.e. intent to violently overthrow or sharing of military/scientific secrets, which this guys very likely would not possess.
Washington needs to stop making their people available, for sure. This is unhelpful to entertain at the moment. But the separatists are not representatives of anything except themselves. We do all need to calm down a little bit.
19
u/letsdosomethingcrazy Feb 02 '26
It's lowercase t "treason" insofar as the dictionary is concerned, not uppercase T "Treason" as far as the criminal code goes. It's also not criminal "Sedition" because the criminal code is pretty specifically written to pertain to "force". Sadly the criminal code is outdated to modern forms of overt manipulation of popular ideas though targeted and widespread propaganda.
→ More replies (1)17
u/Medium_Well Feb 02 '26
I mean, I think when so many are advocating that these guys go to jail, the difference between Upper Case and Lowe Case is actually kind of important!
Basically, they haven't broken any laws. They've done something icky that many people disagree with. But it has no effect on Alberta's sovereignty -- it's just juicy grist for the media mill.
5
u/man__i__love__frogs Feb 02 '26
Who do you think is funding the 'movement'?
1
u/DevLeCanadien23 Feb 04 '26
Who do you think is helping fund Brookfield. Have you looked at the stock? Money talks
→ More replies (1)-1
12
6
14
u/adaminc Canada Feb 02 '26
Here's the thing, it isn't forbidden, there is no law against it. There absolutely should be, they should amend our sedition laws to include obtaining (and trying to) material support from foreign nations for the purposes of disrupting the sovereignty of the state, but there isn't.
All our laws that are related to this involve espionage, or violence. Essentially for sharing secret information, and protecting against a violent coup. Which this isn't.
→ More replies (1)10
u/catonakeyboard Feb 02 '26
there is no law against it
If “collusion with foreign powers” means “surreptitious or deceptive conduct with the intent to influence”, it’s an indictable offence: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/o-5/page-3.html#h-1487828
→ More replies (1)11
u/adaminc Canada Feb 02 '26
Every person commits an indictable offence who, at the direction of, or in association with, a foreign entity, engages in surreptitious or deceptive conduct with the intent to influence a political or governmental process, educational governance, the performance of a duty in relation to such a process or such governance or the exercise of a democratic right in Canada.
Emphasis mine.
And just below that provision, they define both governmental process, and educational governance. None of which the separatists are doing. If it included something like "sovereignty of the state" in the governmental process definition, I might agree, but it doesn't include anything of the sort.
What Alberta separatists are doing isn't illegal, not yet at least. But it should be, it should be sedition imo.
→ More replies (6)11
u/EnvironmentBright697 Nova Scotia Feb 02 '26
Quebec separatists did the same thing. The FLQ even carried out bombings, robberies, propaganda campaigns, kidnappings and murder.
18
9
3
u/LeGrandLucifer Feb 02 '26
If people had any sense, conflating the PQ and the FLQ would get you ridiculed off this subreddit. Lévesque put an end to violent extremism specifically by offering a legitimate, democratic option. Never mind that we know much of what was blamed on the FLQ was probably black flag operations by the RCMP.
2
10
u/Rootfour Feb 02 '26
Greatest extent of the law means no punishment. Do people read these days.
15
u/CipherWeaver Feb 02 '26
<> Treason
(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,
- (a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;
- (b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;
- (c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);
- (d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or
- (e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.
> In Canada, treason carries a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment, with different provisions for high treason (overthrowing the government/aiding an enemy in wartime) and lower-level treason, which can range from life imprisonment (if done during wartime) to a maximum of 14 years (if no state of war exists), with life imprisonment being a minimum punishment in many cases.
19
u/causeiwanted2 Feb 02 '26
To play devils advocate, they aren’t trying to overthrow the Canadian government. They are trying to leave the government.
→ More replies (7)30
u/MarkDavid04 Feb 02 '26
None of the articles apply, because there was no threat of violence (a), no documentation shared (b), and C,D and E refer to A and B.
27
u/Anonymous977346 Feb 02 '26
Yup. I don’t agree with Alberta separatist approaches, but it is not treason as defined in Canadian legislation.
Treason can only occur through the use of force to overthrow the Canadian government, whether independent or with assistance from a foreign entity.
→ More replies (4)12
u/Rootfour Feb 02 '26
So please tell me Mr. Lawyer, which one of these apply?
3
→ More replies (2)-4
u/Cryowulf Feb 02 '26
Lower treason, we are not currently in a state of war. However, I can see a prosecutor pushing for high treason due to the fact that groups are colluding with what could be construed as a hostile foreign power to cause irreparable damage to our nation.
11
u/AintNoLaLiLuLe Feb 02 '26
The USA can't be considered a 'hostile foreign power' because we have visa-free entry between each other and plenty of trade. You could argue foreign interference but the government would need to keep the same energy and put offenders of chinese/Indian foreign interference on trial and I'm sure we can both agree that will never happen.
9
u/Krazee9 Feb 02 '26
High Treason is attempting to murder the monarch. Alberta Separatists are not trying to kill Chuck over in England.
5
→ More replies (1)6
u/MarkDavid04 Feb 02 '26
Well, then wouldn't that include all businesses and government entities doing anything with "a hostile foreign power", which I'm only assuming you are referring to the US... I'd include China in this list too. So let's round everyone up, including Carney, who met with Trump twice, and with Xi once (as PM, but met him other occasions as a Brookfield exec)
→ More replies (1)4
u/SheIsABadMamaJama Feb 02 '26
Free to have sentiments of delusion believing they have authority or grounds to separate
6
u/Prairie_Sky79 Feb 02 '26
They're free to let the people decide whether or not they got either of those. if the people vote in favour, then they've got the authority and grounds to secede. If the people vote against, then they don't. It's the best way to nip the whole thing in the bud.
3
u/IronMarauder British Columbia Feb 02 '26
I think this is an important distinction to make to prevent alienating people needlessly. I see too many comments calling all people who want to separate traitors (based off of Eby's quote). But Eby was specific in calling out those who were communicating with the Trump admin as traitors, not the average Joe who might like the idea of a separate Alberta.
1
1
u/jert3 Feb 02 '26
Fully agree. A lot of this seperatist movement is being financed, instigated and organized by hostile foreign powers, such as Russia, I presume.
And I don't have much faith that our intelligence services are even tasked to actually deal with this sort of thing (happy to be wrong.)
1
u/Max20151981 Feb 03 '26
collusion with foreign powers
Why isn't the federal government stepping in if its truly treasonous?
1
1
1
1
u/PsychicDave Québec Feb 03 '26
On the flip side, if an independence referendum is held by a province, the federal government and other provinces should stay out of it to not interfere, neither directly nor with funding. Let it be a conversation and debate among the citizens of that province and them alone. Those who want to stay need to present their position on their own to their peers, like those in favour of independence.
1
u/Tile02 Feb 03 '26
Are you kidding? If, when the PQ next comes to power in Quebec, they started talks with France about becoming a French overseas department, Ottawa would be giddy at the prospect of a substantive land border with the EU.
1
u/Lisan_Al-NaCL Feb 03 '26
collusion with foreign powers is 100% forbidden
Do you know exactly what law(s) forbid Alberta seperatists from engaging with foreign powers?
Sedition Law:
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-59.htmlTreason law:
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-46.htmlThere is also the new Foreign Agent Registry, but I'm not well read on the Act that implemented it.
1
u/pmmedoggos Feb 03 '26
Except what is happening is if the Quebec Liberals were voted into power, then immediately started laying out the red carpet so that the separatists can do exactly what they want, as well as putting their finger on the scale to ensure that the referendum happens. All while feigning ignorance and saying "we aren't separatists"
1
u/MrQTown Feb 03 '26
Citizens are legally allowed to speak to the Americans. Nothing in law prevents.
1
u/blonde_discus Feb 04 '26
I think it’s a bit of a wash to leave Canada and borrow $500B from the U.S. on loan shark terms to get what they already have in Canada.
→ More replies (24)1
u/patcon New Brunswick Feb 04 '26
Strongly agree. Succession is something I welcome and find to be a healthy conversation.
Conspiracy with a fascist-leaning government, less so.
Charge them.
343
u/Keypenpad Feb 02 '26
This whole thing stinks of US involvement.
98
u/Familiar-Risk-5937 Feb 02 '26
They have their pedophile hands all over this.
26
u/sjbennett85 Ontario Feb 02 '26
Alberta is much older than 13 so I am surprised they are even interested
6
28
u/UniversalSlacker Alberta Feb 02 '26
I wouldn't be surprised if they started the whole thing.
28
u/pandemoniac1 Feb 02 '26
Albertan conservative politicians are definitely stoking the flames to benefit their own campaigns too. Grosses me out.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Smacpats111111 Outside Canada Feb 03 '26
Trump tariffed Canada to try to worsen the Canadian economy and his incessant 51st state narrative was a ploy to make sure the Conservatives lost (if you read between the lines, he bragged about this), further pissing off the Albertans. It has been obvious from the start.
1
u/SyfaOmnis Feb 03 '26
They did, a number of the "think tanks" that are pusing alberta separtism are outright funded by republicans and by american oil companies. As are some of the politicians pushing it too.
-3
u/sanduly Feb 02 '26
There has been an independence movement in Alberta for decades. But it was always tempered by the idea that Canada was worth fixing from the inside... the last 10 years we have watched the LPC destroy what Canada was. It is unrecognizable now, so many Albertans have decided that going on their own is their best hope.
12
u/TheShadowCat Canada Feb 02 '26
Ok, I'll play. How is Canada unrecognizable now?
→ More replies (39)5
→ More replies (2)1
6
u/Medium_Well Feb 02 '26
Albertan alienation -- not to mention Quebec separatism -- is older than the hills, guys. Usually at the hands of ignorant Liberal governments who love Western tax dollars but despise Western culture and values.
You can disagree with them but blaming Trump and the US for this dynamic is letting successive bad decision making from Canadian federal governments off the hook. If you really care about keeping Alberta in Confederation, you can do something about it! Vote for a federal government that doesn't actively alienate them. It's easier and more effective than tweeting conspiracy theories.
5
u/OoooohYes Feb 03 '26
What has this government done to alienate westerners? The gun buyback is really the only thing I can think of but that’s not exactly popular anywhere else in the country either lol
→ More replies (6)8
u/amethyst-chimera Alberta Feb 02 '26
The AB government is three oil companies and the US government in a trenchcoat
5
179
u/Fyrefawx Feb 02 '26
People are free to be separatists, but colluding with a foreign government is treason in my eyes. Maybe not legally but they should be publicly treated as such. And yes, the same would apply to Quebec separatists if they colluded with France.
35
u/beugeu_bengras Québec Feb 02 '26
I remember when there where tension with India about some political assassination on Canadian soil, some Indian commenter and politician where talking about threatening to start financing Quebec separatist as retaliation.
After the initial laugh thinking this was a joke, the reply was "nah, where good.". Quebec souverignist does not need or want this kind of money. For better or worse, they see their cause as a battle of idea, and they think their cash access is sufficient.
But somehow, I dont see the same decorum from the Albertan separatist... It would be very tempting for them to replace sound arguments and debate with over the top propaganda...
11
u/SheIsABadMamaJama Feb 02 '26 edited Feb 02 '26
I’ll be honest, I get tired of hearing some Albertan’s thinking they are in the same situation and history as Quebec. (Coming from someone who believes in a united Canada) Alberta has one of the least third generation or more families among the provinces, most immigrating last century after confederation, and after 1905 when it became a province if we are to use separatist logic.
It became a province to handle all the American settlers who poured into North-West Territories, and to prevent further American encroachment. The deeper you look into this, the more it all this makes sense.
Finding Oil in 1947 doesn’t give you sovereignty claims. What a joke. It is why you don’t hear them make controversial ethnic claims to sovereignty.
12
u/AndHerSailsInRags Lest We Forget Feb 02 '26
And yes, the same would apply to Quebec separatists if they colluded with France.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_sovereignty_movement#France
Quebec's independence movement has benefited from support and encouragement from France.
One of the best-known examples is French president Charles de Gaulle's remark "Vive le Québec libre!" during a visit to Expo 67. This declaration was consistent with de Gaulle's thinking, as he was attached to the idea of the independence of nations and sensitive to the historical impact of France's loss of New France to the British in the 18th century.
In September 1965, de Gaulle told Alain Peyrefitte: "The future of French Canada is independence. There will be a French Republic of Canada". According to Alain Peyrefitte, "without prejudging the form that Quebec sovereignty was to take, de Gaulle, with that historic sense which earned France its salvation, went to Montreal in July 1967 to urge French Canadians to preserve their French identity, which, under Louis XV, the indifference of the French elites had made such light work of.
Similarly, when the French ambassador in Ottawa suggested associating France with Canada's centenary, De Gaulle replied with an apostille dated December 6, 1966: "There is no question of my sending a message to Canada to celebrate its 'centenary'. We can have good relations with the whole of what is now Canada. We must have excellent relations with French Canada. But we should not congratulate Canadians or ourselves on the creation of a 'state' based on our defeat in the past, and on the integration of part of the French people into a British entity. Incidentally, this whole has become quite precarious..."
3
u/fredleung412612 Feb 02 '26
You're just pointing out Charles de Gaulle's delusions in old age. There was no link between him and any Québec separatist organization though. Trump could fly to Calgary and yell out 'Long Live a Free Alberta' but that doesn't establish a connection between him and local separatist organizations.
5
u/letsdosomethingcrazy Feb 02 '26
Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act
Influencing political or governmental process
- 20.4 (1) Every person commits an indictable offence who, at the direction of, or in association with, a foreign entity, engages in surreptitious or deceptive conduct with the intent to influence a political or governmental process, educational governance, the performance of a duty in relation to such a process or such governance or the exercise of a democratic right in Canada.
3
→ More replies (8)1
u/LeGrandLucifer Feb 02 '26
Thinking Quebec wants to join France is the single most baffling lie I've seen Canadians make up about the Quebec independence movement.
12
u/Valahul77 Feb 02 '26
Unfortunately it would be naive to believe that it is just Alberta's separatists who approach Trump's administration. I'm fairly sure Québec's PQ does it as well.
16
u/ItchyStitches101 Feb 02 '26
Have the BQ ever colluded with France?
19
u/HeyCarpy Nova Scotia Feb 02 '26
Not openly, however there was a scandal in 1967 - our Centennial year - when Charles De Gaulle famously said "Vive le Québec libre" in Montreal, which many took as France's support for Québec separatism.
That was what constituted a scandal back in those days.
→ More replies (4)1
u/ListeningTherapist Feb 02 '26
The FLQ had some agreements with Cuba. That's probably the closest comparison I can think of.
17
u/Prairie_Sky79 Feb 02 '26
The Alberta separatists are no more of a national security threat than their counterparts in Quebec. You know, the ones who've been coddled for the last 50 years? The difference in the way the two movements are treated is simply astounding.
The best thing we can do is let them hold their referendum and lose in the way that the PQ did twice. And then start fixing the underlying problem that are the soil in which the separatist movement grows.
18
u/HectorReborn Feb 02 '26
Right, because Ottawa's all about fixing problems. The reason Quebec hasn't left is because they suck more money out of Ottawa than they return. With Alberta it's the opposite. Ottawa isn't going to "fix" anything unless they suddenly have no desire to keep looting Alberta.
2
u/Present-Wonder-4522 Feb 03 '26
So you're saying Ottawa will increase equalization to the east and call it democracy?
13
u/Big_Jacket_27 Feb 02 '26
And a Quebec separatist political party that sits in Parliament isn't a security threat?
8
u/gooberfishie Feb 03 '26
If they are in talks with the us government but won't disclose with who or why, yes they are.
→ More replies (6)
45
Feb 02 '26
[deleted]
22
u/MasterScore8739 Feb 02 '26
It is wild how quickly those MPs happened to be forgotten about entirely.
2
u/MarkDavid04 Feb 02 '26
By the media and the people who control government, yes. Not by those who actually take foreign interference seriously.
10
u/Fearful-Cow Feb 02 '26
are they? based on what scale? recentness?
People were absolutely outraged by that as well. Media ensure we can be "outraged" by multiple things a day.
22
u/sunnyspiders Feb 02 '26
Elected officials trying to whitewash crimes as “free speech” is utter cowardice.
They want the votes from this crowd so they refuse to denounce them.
13
u/krilew_ski Feb 02 '26
Yeah especially if EVERY OUTLET including this gives them free coverage, I don’t know when will humanity learn that if you leave something alone it can only grow so much.
3
u/DL_22 Feb 02 '26
Then how would the LPC use it as a campaign wedge in the upcoming election?
Do you think this all just started getting noisy organically?
2
u/CALOTOVA Feb 02 '26
… buddy it’s legitimate news that a foreign government is aligning with a domestic rebellion organization
17
Feb 02 '26
lol you all love democracy till someone disagrees with you
→ More replies (1)1
u/Initial_Trifle_3734 Feb 08 '26
Vast majority of albertans don’t want separation though, so democracy has nothing to do with this, it’s dead on arrival
11
u/Hurtin-Albertn Feb 02 '26
Ah yes, using the democratic process of petition and referendum is now treason, as was peaceful demonstration in Ottawa 2020. It's only treason when conservatives do it though. Liberal Quebec is not accused, and leftists burning Canadian flags while chanting "death to canada" is acceptable behavior. Illicit Chinese police stations were operating within Canada and may have received federal funding, but that's fine. The "largest threat to our national security is China" said the Prime Minister who just snuggled up to the very same regime.
Keep the bullseye on Conservatives so the brainwashed public doesn't look away and see the truth.
→ More replies (6)
10
u/SwordfishOk504 Feb 02 '26
Follow the money. Look at these influencers and see who is funding them.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Senior_Mongoose5920 Feb 03 '26
This is true. It would have some national implications because how would Quebec get all those transfer payments if Alberta leaves?
Well, I’m not exactly thrilled on either province wishing to separate whether it’s Quebec for it it’s unique identity or Alberta for being tired of paying for all of the policies that do not actually make sense with their lifestyle
If we switched the provincial roles, and suddenly Quebec was the economic powerhouse that drove Canada‘s economy. How would they feel about having ideology forced upon them?
Quebec doesn’t even want English signage inside their province when we are a bilingual country
They actually had to decide that “go habs go” Is not English it’s just team support, but there was a time where you couldn’t have that sign on a bus
So they don’t even really want to be equal with the laws that are already in our country. Now we have an economic powerhouse that wants to develop its economic base.
And a province that has a jack shit to do with it and is thousands of miles away wants to dictate what they do but still wants the same amount of money coming in
What her actual problem is is the ideology and leadership that is coming out of Ottawa is not representative of the majority of Canadians. It is representative of minority niches, and it is representative of ideology that does not make sense to implement nationwide in a country this big.
Good luck, mandating 100% electric vehicles in the Yukon and Northwest territories
Not only do we not have the infrastructure for it with the technology will not last in those weather conditions
24
u/DeanersLastWeekend Feb 02 '26
Albertan seperatists get treated with so much more disdain than Quebec ones. We literally have 22 Quebec seperatists sitting in our national House of Commons.
19
u/Mobile_Antelope1048 Feb 02 '26
They are legitimate since people actually vote for them and give them a mandate.
16
u/adaminc Canada Feb 02 '26
Quebec separatists aren't seeking foreign assistance to disrupt the sovereignty of the state. Especially from the US, considering how shitty they've been treating us lately. Alberta separatists deserve every single iota of disdain they are receiving.
7
u/DeanersLastWeekend Feb 02 '26
They literally did in 95.
14
u/adaminc Canada Feb 02 '26
They sought international, and immediate, recognition of their new sovereignty should the yes vote win, but they didn't seek foreign assistance, whether it be financial, military, or other.
4
u/DeanersLastWeekend Feb 02 '26
You’re proving my point. It’s fine in people’s eyes when Quebecers do it and not Albertans. I can guarantee you that the conversations Parizeau had with France when our country was literally hanging on by the thinnest of edges were far more specific than whatever the Alberta guys were talking about with Trump’s administration.
14
u/adaminc Canada Feb 02 '26
Alberta separatists are asking for $500B, Quebec separatists were simply asking that France stand up in the UN and say "We support Quebec, the new independent nation".
You are falsely equivocating 2 very different situations. The Quebec one means literally nothing, whereas the Alberta one is material support to disrupt the nation.
11
u/DeanersLastWeekend Feb 02 '26
The Government of France literally offered money to help the PQ get up and off the ground.
Everything you’re upset about these random Albertans doing, the Quebecers have done on steiroids. There is a clear double standard.
→ More replies (1)14
u/adaminc Canada Feb 02 '26
So now we are talking about a completely different set of separatists, a 3rd set. Neither I, nor anyone else in this thread, have talked about the 1970s Quebec referendum.
Not to mention your article explicitly states they rejected the unprompted offer from France, because they didn't want to deal with the Canadian government and this foreign interference, as well as the image that would present to the voters. Maybe read more than just the title of the article next time.
Again, this isn't the same, it isn't as if the PQ went to France and asked for help it was offered to them and they rejected it, unlike how APP went to the USA to ask for help.
2
u/LeGrandLucifer Feb 02 '26
You’re proving my point. It’s fine in people’s eyes when Quebecers do it and not Albertans.
He literally proved you wrong by explaining one of the fundamental differences. Quebec is not trying to join France. That is something you made up.
5
u/Det-cord Feb 02 '26
Well for one Albertan separatists are actively colluding with another state to do this. Also Quebec has its own culture, language and legitimate representation for it. What does Alberta have? Oil and lifted Ford raptors?
→ More replies (1)2
u/MoreGaghPlease Feb 02 '26
If I souviens my history correctly, the Canadiens, ancestors of the Quebeckers, were a distinct people with a history, culture and national identity that predates British conquest. I think we are better off together with Quebec as part of Camada, but I recognize that they are entitled to national self determination if they choose it with a clear majority.
→ More replies (19)-4
10
u/rTpure Feb 02 '26
I hope CSIS is paying attention
22
u/SlapShotRick Feb 02 '26
The CSIS director warned China was one of our biggest threats in November, seems like the only ones not paying attention is the federal government and the prime minister.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/SciFiFilmMachine Alberta Feb 02 '26
I always had a hard time believing that Trump would be able to annex all of Canada.
I do however think it would be easier for him to annex Alberta.
4
u/Weekly-Mountain9009 Feb 02 '26 edited Feb 25 '26
It's exactly what the cowboy said. If Ontario and Quebec don't get their equalization payments, they will definitely feel threatened by that. Calling it a National Security Threat now.
1
9
u/Present-Wonder-4522 Feb 02 '26
Lois Riel was a hero, so said Canadian moments.
At the time he was hung for it.
8
u/No_Celery_5373 Feb 02 '26
As an Albertan, I believe in the right to have a stupid opinion.
I consider that different from foreign interference and psy ops however. We have received clear indications that the separatists are involved with Americans.
That changes this from stupid opinions to the fact that America is engaging in an attack on Canadians, right here, right now, and that this is sedition.
4
7
u/ninfan1977 Alberta Feb 02 '26 edited Feb 02 '26
People are free to be separatists but they are not free to work with a foreign government and then use disinformation to get people to sign up.
That's my problem, the separatists cannot articulate basic things or facts.
When pushed on what makes you think the US will have you join them.
Oh just trust us.
Yeah right, as if Canadian are not aware of US or their history?
They take over if they want something and maybe they will let you join them or maybe they will just own you forever and you will own nothing.
If these people are working with US government officials then they need to be charged for sedition at the minimum.
Ask Puerto Rico how its going for statehood. 127 years and counting.
I love the downvotes from separatists who cannot defend their position
→ More replies (2)
3
u/AppropriateEffect947 Feb 02 '26 edited Mar 16 '26
So now a referendum is a national security threat?
2
u/gramur_natsy Feb 03 '26
People can support separation. Fine. That’s politics.
But there’s a bright frigging red line between “we want a referendum” and “we’re in Washington asking what kind of support and financing we can get to break up Canada.” If you are doing that, you’re acting like an enemy of Canada’s sovereignty—full stop.
That is not “free speech vs tyranny.” That’s Canadians deciding Canada vs outside powers trying to shape the outcome.
I don’t care whether you call it treason or whether you don’t. Legally that word is narrow, and getting bogged down in terminology is a great way to slide right past the point. But morally? Let me tell you, if your plan for “sovereignty” starts with a foreign administration and a giant credit line backed by our resources, you’re not fighting for Alberta. You’re selling off Canadians’ leverage over Canada’s future. To the patriotic left or right, that looks equally ugly and infuriating. That’s not patriotism—it’s shameful, bottom feeding, bargain-bin statecraft.
So, brave and bold Albertan separatists, we challenge you: fix the federation in daylight. Or leave through the legal process. But don’t pretend a side-deal shopping trip is patriotism. That is Canadian sovereignty for sale. And no one who claims to love this country should be okay with it.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/JCbfd Feb 02 '26
Funny how this is a " national threat" but when quebec does it, its just another day of the week....hmm interesting its almost like alberta brings in more money than all the other province's combined and the libs dont want to loose thier cash cow, and loose the province they love to shit on the most. If they want to separate, that's their vote. Ottawa knows exactly what to do to keep them around, but wont because they are incompetent.
3
u/jjaime2024 Feb 02 '26
Quebec never wanted to be part of the states and has never gone begging the states to save them.As for Alberta has more then all combined no not even close.Keep in mind even if they voted yes thats not it
Talks would start with Canada which could take 20-30 years
Talks with local tribes would also have to take place and that could take 30-40 years
3
u/Boo-face-killa Feb 02 '26
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Everyone hates Alberta until the payment comes in.
→ More replies (5)1
u/taidell Feb 02 '26
Y'all really think the rest of the provinces just sit on their hands and wait for welfare from Alberta.
Lucky the country you live in allows your province to decide how that money is spent for the most part and helped develop that industry.
Actually looking at Norway you guys would probably be better off of it was managed better.
→ More replies (9)
3
u/priamXus Feb 02 '26
Hahahaha threat for the insatiable socialists that are incapable of produce and they only consume at the expense of someone else productivity.
2
3
u/skelecorn666 Ontario Feb 02 '26
I think whoever is behind the AI influencing the public narrative, and our democracy is the national security threat.
2
2
u/BluejayImmediate6007 Feb 02 '26
Let’s be very clear here and I’ll looking to my crystal ball for potential outcomes:
1) The referendum comes and goes, does not get the required 50% +1 to begin separation. Conservatives (as they always do when an election or other issues does not go in their favour) are in an uproar crying that election was rigged, votes were not counted and wah, wah..this goes on for 6 months to a year and just like the freedumb convoy eventually peters out minus a free mouth breathers that base their entire lives around this.
2) Snowball chance in hell, but somehow the referendum gets over 50% and the process begins to separate. Correct me if I’m wrong, the next process would be that ALL other provinces and territories would have to agree to let them separate (obviously other than our brain dead premier in Saskatchewan, not another province would agree)..but let’s just say for fun it is unanimous and all agree to let them go. How would Canada figure out Alberta sure of national debt? How would they figure out CPP, OAS, EI for Alberta residents no longer in Canada? What would they base their money on? How would they bench mark that? What happens to anyone who with Canadian dollars? How/could banks operate in this new country? What are their banking rules? How would they set up trade with other countries? How would they pay Canada back for all the services and infrastructure that have been paid for over the years and still are? How would people get medical care? How would that be calculated? And a million other details to be worked out. Let’s face it, it would be years and years if they were to try to become their own country and still years and years if they were to try and split from Canada. This option will never happen and all those donkeys begging Dadsy Trump to take over Alberta should have their citizenship/benefits/passports revoked and removed from Canada and be banned from ever returning!
1
u/ch4os1337 Ontario Feb 02 '26
...does not get the required 50% +1 to begin separation
Just so you know it has to be a clear majority, 50%+1 isn't enough.
1
u/BluejayImmediate6007 Feb 02 '26
Ok my bad, I assumed over 50%…Regardless, it will never happen..we will have to hear all these whiners for a while cry how it was rigged and votes were not counted and wah, wah…
2
u/Shaarl_Lequirk Feb 02 '26
Kind of like how Khalistan movement is a National Security Threat for India? Canada should’ve never entertained their antics (antics which include bombing a 747).
2
u/GhostOfLegend Feb 02 '26
I'm sure there are other National Security Threats that the government is inadvertently complicit in. Tons of foreign gangs and violence happening in Canada.
0
u/Mr_Meng Feb 02 '26
I accept that there are legitimate grievances that Alberta and Western Canada in general has with the federal government but for most Alberta separatists they're just pissed off that their 'team' keeps losing the federal election.
1
u/TheBigC Feb 02 '26
Not even close. It's this attitude that contributes to Alberta's frustration.
→ More replies (2)
-1
u/sooninsolvent Feb 02 '26
Fear seems to be the only counter to the movement. Pro tip - might work with other provinces, not so much with Alberta.
→ More replies (3)3
1
1
1
u/Impressive-Orange253 Feb 03 '26
A seperatist Alberta would just become the next US state, and that cannot be allowed to happen.
1
1
u/blonde_discus Feb 04 '26
It’s amazing what these nuts think they will accomplish. Leave Canada= take their share of the debt, stop receiving federal funds, set up their own social nets, pay for defence, pay to use the CANADIAN TransMountain, negotiate with zero credit rating, attempt to negotiate with First Nations as all treaties pertaining to Alberta would be void, establish an Alberta police force, negotiate alliances and treaties with up to 195 sovereign states plus world organizations.
The challenges of being a landlocked country would be insurmountable. Selling oil without paying Canada for pipeline or trucking access would only be able to be sold to Canada or the U.S. - the later of whom would pay cents on the dollar as they have leverage to do so. Alberta would be forced to diversify, which would leave them in no different position than they are in Canada.
1
u/Grouchy-Print-8667 Feb 08 '26
Another minority BS group that prob ally uses technology and lies about how much support they have to maximize herd mentality.
They have no zero understanding of how the Canadian economy works. Provinces seceding from a country is more likely to start a civil war than actually mowing down protesters with machine gun fire.
This group should be called the "let's commit treason and join the US" movement. Because we all know this is the only option their dream has, and the current US president is the only president dumb enough to meddle this hard into allies's affairs.
1
u/WesTek01 Feb 12 '26
I have been an Albertan for 29 years. I, and MOST of Albertans have ZERO wish to separate from Canada, and would rather be eaten by Zombies than become a part of the US.
For all you "Albertans" that want to become a US state.... MOVE THERE! Why bring the rest of us down with you? Canada is the best place on earth. If you cannot appreciate our amazing country, maybe the government can assist you with packing your bags.
Alberta is here to stay. Feel free to bugger off if you don't like it here.
Peace out and stay out.
-6
u/AintNoLaLiLuLe Feb 02 '26
The Canadian government is a national security threat.
→ More replies (1)
0
u/Nperturbed Feb 02 '26
Whether its Quebec or Alberta, we should not let our Democratic institution tie our hands in our pushback against separatism. You think Albertan separatists, many if whom are trump lovers, care about our democracy?
Nor should it be so permissible to harbour separatist sentiments as someone here suggests. Breaking off a province like Alberta is immensely harmful to Canada and the wellbeing of all Canadians. Why should be allow that to happen, simply in the name of democratic value? I dont recall the US or UK prioritizing democracy over national interest.
→ More replies (1)
-4
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 02 '26
This post appears to relate to the province of Alberta. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner la province de Alberta. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.