The Nationstates of Terran Explored Space

[helbent4]

Nate,

As a point of terminology, Canada's formal name is the "Dominion of Canada", although Canada is acceptable in formal use, too. Canada has never been called a "Commonwealth", although it is technically a confederation. (That is, the birth of Canada is called "Confederation".)

I think we should be a 2nd Tier nation, dad-gummit!

Tony

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Nate,

As a point of terminology, Canada's formal name is the "Dominion of Canada", although Canada is acceptable in formal use, too. Canada has never been called a "Commonwealth", although it is technically a confederation. (That is, the birth of Canada is called "Confederation".)

I think we should be a 2nd Tier nation, dad-gummit!

Tony

I know Tony, i went with Commonwealth of Canada since it's several hundred years (and post Twilight War) some things have changed. Canada became a commonwealth instead of a 'Dominion'... this is how they got Quebec back into the government. While the British Monarchy is still the head of state, Canada has a lot more republican style of government (a popular election of the Governor General from candidates nominated by the Monarchy). Post-Twilight War the British Monarchy has shifted away from just being ceremonial and figureheads... they have seen a resurgence of their power. From birth the Royals are raised in a manner stepped in public service and putting the needs of the average citizen above their own (something VERY few know about is the British Monarchy has their children spend a year as 'commoners' with families selected from a special lottery).

[Targan]

While I think that it is perfectly reasonable to have New Zealand join Australia in some kind of federation I have to point out that

a) New Zealand would not accept that new nation formed from both Australia and New Zealand being named "Australia" (Australasia or Oceania would probably be acceptable) even if it is 300 years from now; New Zealand is a very proud nation and under the Treaty of Waitangi the indigenous Maori people have special rights so neither the white (Pakeha) nor Maori sections of the population would accept being absorbed directly into Australia.

b) If Canada is still a constitutional monarchy in T2300 Australia would probably be too (especially if New Zealand was part of an Australasian Federation) as NZ is fiercely monarchist.

Obviously you can take or leave my opinions on these matters but as a citizen of both Australia and New Zealand I feel I'm qualified to offer an opinion

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by Targan

While I think that it is perfectly reasonable to have New Zealand join Australia in some kind of federation I have to point out that

a) New Zealand would not accept that new nation formed from both Australia and New Zealand being named "Australia" (Australasia or Oceania would probably be acceptable) even if it is 300 years from now; New Zealand is a very proud nation and under the Treaty of Waitangi the indigenous Maori people have special rights so neither the white (Pakeha) nor Maori sections of the population would accept being absorbed directly into Australia.

b) If Canada is still a constitutional monarchy in T2300 Australia would probably be too (especially if New Zealand was part of an Australasian Federation) as NZ is fiercely monarchist.

Obviously you can take or leave my opinions on these matters but as a citizen of both Australia and New Zealand I feel I'm qualified to offer an opinion

Thanks Targan...

Australia and New Zealand are monarchist... just not with the British Monarchy as head of state. they have their own! During the Twilight War, and the war of British Reunification that saw a decidedly anti-monarchist Labor Party Prime Minister damn near exterminating the Royal family... Prince Andrew's daughters were sent to Australia and New Zealand for their safety. And both nations rallied around THEIR Royals and supported the legal British Government during the three year campaign to return the British Armies of the Rhine and Danube back to the British Isles.

The story of how the two become the Federal Republic of Australia is long and drawn out... but it's part of the story of how the greening of outback happened as well. The outback has numerous freshwater lakes and 'inland seas' created... that turned Australia into a breadbaskets nation.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by natehale1971

The outback has numerous freshwater lakes and 'inland seas' created... that turned Australia into a breadbaskets nation.

Well that is absolutely feasible. Australia used to have huge inland seas and was covered in woodland and rainforests back before 100,000 years ago or so. Its only become a vast desert since then.

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by Targan

Well that is absolutely feasible. Australia used to have huge inland seas and was covered in woodland and rainforests back before 100,000 years ago or so. Its only become a vast desert since then.

Exactly... The Aboriginal & Maori Councils are very influential due to this project. they own some of the largest agro-businesses on Earth, outside of Ukraine & Russia, who have done similar projects with the invention of Hooch during the Twilight War...

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by natehale1971

I know Tony, i went with Commonwealth of Canada since it's several hundred years (and post Twilight War) some things have changed. Canada became a commonwealth instead of a 'Dominion'

Nate,

I don't particularly see the political logic or linguistic/historical rationale. The "Commonwealth" is something Canada would be a part of, it's not usually considered a term for a state in and of itself, albeit rarely. (Except for some American states, even less reason to call ourselves a Commonwealth.)

Canada, as a confederation, already contains the nation of Quebec, so there was no reason to change from a Dominion to anything else merely to signify a return to the historical status quo. I can easily see Canada remaining a confederation of provinces and territories.

If the British-led Commonwealth is somehow strengthened in the postwar world (and I don't really have a problem with this) then the members of the commonwealth that are constitutional monarchies will already generally be referred to as Dominions. Renaming Canada a Commonwealth merely seems redundant if not linguistically clumsy. Right now, the Dominion of Canada is a confederation that is part of the Commonwealth, instead of being a commonwealth that is part of the Commonwealth.

Besides, electing a Governor General from a list of choices given by the Crown hardly seems like a true republic in any sense of the word! For that matter, it means even less political control for Canadians, as currently Canada specifically tells the Crown who to pick, not the other way around. If the Crown were to start exercising political control over Canada then it makes even more sense to call Canada a Dominion.

The USA has gone through serious political changes since its founding as a republic, but ya'all haven't changed what you call yourselves because historical and cultural continuity is important. Such things would be even more important, I believe, after the Twilight War.

But hey, if you just personally like the name "Commonwealth", then there it is. I just like our name as it is, so I can't hold that against you all that much!

Tony

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Nate,

I don't particularly see the political logic or linguistic/historical rationale. The "Commonwealth" is something Canada would be a part of, it's not usually considered a term for a state in and of itself, albeit rarely. (Except for some American states, even less reason to call ourselves a Commonwealth.)

Canada, as a confederation, already contains the nation of Quebec, so there was no reason to change from a Dominion to anything else merely to signify a return to the historical status quo. I can easily see Canada remaining a confederation of provinces and territories.

If the British-led Commonwealth is somehow strengthened in the postwar world (and I don't really have a problem with this) then the members of the commonwealth that are constitutional monarchies will already generally be referred to as Dominions. Renaming Canada a Commonwealth merely seems redundant if not linguistically clumsy. Right now, the Dominion of Canada is a confederation that is part of the Commonwealth, instead of being a commonwealth that is part of the Commonwealth.

Besides, electing a Governor General from a list of choices given by the Crown hardly seems like a true republic in any sense of the word! For that matter, it means even less political control for Canadians, as currently Canada specifically tells the Crown who to pick, not the other way around. If the Crown were to start exercising political control over Canada then it makes even more sense to call Canada a Dominion.

The USA has gone through serious political changes since its founding as a republic, but ya'all haven't changed what you call yourselves because historical and cultural continuity is important. Such things would be even more important, I believe, after the Twilight War.

But hey, if you just personally like the name "Commonwealth", then there it is. I just like our name as it is, so I can't hold that against you all that much!

Tony

I totally understand all of what you're saying... But the 'recent' development of the Crown becoming so powerful with the Commonwealth nations.. that came about after the crown re assumed control of the British Isles and the new way the monarchy was established (ie High King/Queen of the United Kingdom, and the individual Kings/Queens of Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland).

Basically, Canada had to bring Quebec back into the fold on their won... And the ultra-nationalist French Quebec leader had French support (and thus had French military forces on their side when Quebec marched east to 'punish' the English Canadians for all the slights that he felt they had lumped upon French Canadians). The ultra-nationalist leader was killed by his own people (the was just like Hitler, and some of his military leaders saw him as horrible monster, but they actually succeeded in killing the bastard), and since they had such a strong hand when they started the talks to come back into the Confederation, they had issues with the name 'Dominion' since it made them sub-servant to a 'far away monarchy'.

And thus the name change to "The Commonwealth of Canada"

But i guess i really miss described the election of the Governor-General. The voters are the one who picks the candidates that the Crown chooses from. And the tradition is that the person who has the most votes is the one that the Monarch appoints as the new Governor-General. The only time this was not the case, was when a Monarch appointed his youngest (of six) sibling as Governor-General... while this controversial decision caused problems at first, said Royal ended up being one of the most loved of 'modern' Governor-Generals. So much so their family became the official Royal family of Canada. And to top that, the great-grand child of said Governor-General would be the first royal outside of the British Isles to elected to the Throne of High King!

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by natehale1971

And thus the name change to "The Commonwealth of Canada"

Nate,

To be sure, this is a personal preference on my part. As such, my objection is certainly part emotional.

My point is, if the Commonwealth is more politically relevant due to a more active Crown, then having Canada as a "Commonwealth within a Commonwealth" seems clumsy, assuming the Commonwealth is still the primary coalition for UK-allied states. Might as well just use "Canada", which is perfectly acceptable in modern terms.

In my own T2K background (which leads to 2300) the political process of bringing Quebec back into the fold is called "re-Confederation". this is because the political event where Canada was formed is not called "Independence" from Britain but is known as "Confederation".

If the Quebeckers object to "Dominion" (although they frankly would probably not care too much beyond being recognised as a distinct nation), why not then go with something more historically apt and certainly a more technically accurate: the "Confederation of Canada" or "Canadian Confederation". No Canadian could therefore object on technical or historical grounds!

As for our position with regard to tiers, I should think we''d be equal to the Aussies! With all due respect to the Australians, of course.

Tony

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by helbent4

Nate,

To be sure, this is a personal preference on my part. As such, my objection is certainly part emotional.

My point is, if the Commonwealth is more politically relevant due to a more active Crown, then having Canada as a "Commonwealth within a Commonwealth" seems clumsy, assuming the Commonwealth is still the primary coalition for UK-allied states. Might as well just use "Canada", which is perfectly acceptable in modern terms.

In my own T2K background (which leads to 2300) the political process of bringing Quebec back into the fold is called "re-Confederation". this is because the political event where Canada was formed is not called "Independence" from Britain but is known as "Confederation".

If the Quebeckers object to "Dominion" (although they frankly would probably not care too much beyond being recognised as a distinct nation), why not then go with something more historically apt and certainly a more technically accurate: the "Confederation of Canada" or "Canadian Confederation". No Canadian could therefore object on technical or historical grounds!

As for our position with regard to tiers, I should think we''d be equal to the Aussies! With all due respect to the Australians, of course.

Tony

I was thinking of the Canadian Confederation as we were having this discussion... and it'll be the name for my version of 2300ad.

the tiers aren't really as important, it's not about who's the best... but by their level of extra-solar colonization (the Sol System is heavily colonized by even those states without interstellar capacity).

Thus why France and Manchuria are first tier states, they have sponsored the most colonies.

Second tier states are growing, third tier states are just as powerful as the second tier... they just are not as tied down to so many colonial possessions (though many are looking to establish those colonies). Canada is taking a slow, methodical approach to colonization. They won't just seed colonies, they build a colony and get it self-sufficient. Then build another one.

of all the colonial powers, the Canadian Colonial program is described as 'Slow and Steady' and this has been paying off. They see coloinization as a long-distance run and not a sprint. And with the fact in my campaign, there are many abandoned and failed colonies... this is proving to be a very smart way of handling the expansion of their territory. because it's more stable in the long run!

So see it as a matter of Pride.

[helbent4]

Nathan,

The Confederation of Canada (aka Canada) could be formed from (say) three semi-independent states: the Maritimes, the Republic of Quebec and the Dominion of Canada (Ontario and the West). Over time, power in Canada has been devolving from the federal government down to the provinces, something that would accelerate due to the Twilight War. Still one unified nation with a central government, but power is now formally shared at a well-defined regional level instead of semi-informally at the federal-provincial levels. Defence, taxation, colonisation, health care and other large national programs and policies are still controlled at a federal level, but for administrative purposes the regions manage their own affairs (for example, all provinces have their militias but they are under a national command). By tradition, the GG post is rotated through each region (that is, one from Quebec, the next from the Dominion, the next from the Maritimes, and so on).

As for the tiers, nice sop to national pride!

Tony