Watch this space for a tactical analysis of Canadian Rebellions
THE ONLY MEANINGFUL REAL CHANGE IN THE CANADIAN GOVERNING
STRUCTURE HAS ALWAYS HAD TO BE FORCED BY ARMED REBELLION.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from
time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance.
Let them take up arms!"
Thomas Jefferson, 1788
The Canadian Populace is actually one of the most rebellious in the world.
It has had more rebellions than any other country in the same period of time.
(All politely an low-keyed of course.)
Seems to be the only way you can get change in a Third-World Banana Republic.
- And even they are having a better track record in dealing with corruption
than is Canada. In the Banana Republics the leaders are either voluntarily of
resigining, or being forced to.
1817 RED RIVER
1837 UPPER AND LOWER CANADA
1840's RED RIVER
1885 NORTHWEST REBELLION
1890's SOUP REBELLIONS
1890's SUNDANCE REBELLIONS
1913 EDMONTON REBELLION
1920'S PROVINCIAL REBELLIONS
1960'S QUEBEC REBELLION
1990 MOHAWK REBELLION
In ALL of these cases the Government of Canada refused to consider the
complaints that led up to the rebellion - and then instituted the necessary
changes AFTER the rebellion.
So now to summarize what worked and what didn't in Canadian Rebellions,
in case you have a mind to try it yourself.
Those of you who logged on earlier will note that I've removed the
summations of the rebellions. Plain and simple, it's because of theft
of material. If you've visited some of our other sites you will be now
be aware that the Government of Alberta has given several $MILLION to
an agency of the Alberta Museums Association to tray to duplicate the
work we have on our history files, and to download whatever they can
access from our sites - and attempt to break into our databank files.
Stupid thing is, they could have bought the data cheaper and had it
sooner simply by approaching us. Furthermore, we were putting more and
more of the history on internet. But of course, no more.
So, we've already had the summaries and analysis of the rebellions on
So here goes.
What were the results of the Canadian Rebellions?
1. a. Rebellions in Ontario and Quebec get results.
b. Rebellions in the west - no matter how well supported, do not.
2. a. The Government of Canada quickly makes accomodations with rebels
in the east.
b. Against any rebellion in the west they mobilize the entire
resources of the government and military to crush the uprising.
Co-incidentally, government cronies (and the military) seem to
find ample opportunity for massive profiteering during the
crushing of western rebellion.
This can be seen as a direct result of the view that rebellion in
the east is a credible threat to the leading politicians and their
supporters. In the west it is only the unwashed masses who bear
the burnt of injury.
3. a. The Government of Canada has never fired a shot against rebels in
b. In the west the Government undertook a policy of shooting women
and children, and firing into camps of sleeping civilians.
4. a. In the east, rebel leaders received token punishment and in time
became folk heroes.
b. In the west the leaders were executed (hung or shot) or
incarcerated until their health collapsed. Promises of amnisty
to those who fled were reneged upon once they returned.
5. a. In the east rebellion led to positive social change to address
b. In the west rebellion led to negative social change designed to
deprive the populace of such rights and benefits as they already
had. Indians - whether involved in the rebellion or not - were
confined to reserves and it became illegal to leave. Metis,
whether involved in the rebellion or not - were deprived of all
legal rights, and became legally non-persons without protection
in law. The only rights accrued were those given to settlers who
moved in from the east, who had the right to settle on any and
all properties previously occupied by westerners (excepting the
reservation concentrarion camps).
There you got it.
1. Rebellion in the east invariably is seen as social progress and
results in real improvements.
2. Rebellin in the west is invariably seen as a civil war and is
answered with the butality normally displayed by governments in
such occasions. The only rebellion in the west that was at least
partly successful was that of thw Wesley Band - and they were
eventually burned out and had their livestock shot by the government
to herd them back on the reserve.
So while the Government of Canada panders to Quebec seperation tendencies,
don't expect it to do the same for westernt seperatist tendencies. All
indications are that if the west raises a strong seperatist sentiment, the
government of Canada will take it as a call to war and send in to put the
peasants in their place (not to mention securing Alberta's oil and a few
other such strategic materials - diamonds, gold, uranium, etc.).
So in closing, having endorsed seperation and almost advocated sedition and
rebellion, I leave you with these closing thoughts.
Ralph Klein: Emperor of Canada West ?
Hell, that's worse than Paul Martin.
Truth is , Ralph's World and the so-called Alberta Advantage
have done absolutely nothing for the average, low-income and Senior Albertan. It has
exclusively benefitted the Suits, Cronies and Corporates.
The only ones who have spoken for the concerns, interests and welfare of the
common, senior and low-income Albertans has been the Government of Canada.
Only the Government of Canada, Liberals and (Heaven Protect us) N.D.P. speak
for the little guy (while undoubtedly themselves filling up at the trough).
Keep that in mind. In Alberta there may be a good reason for the little guy
to back the Feds. Fat Ralph, the Provincial Conservatives and the Corporates
sure as hell don't.
"Democracy is worth fighting for"
As far as this gun confiscation goes:
Speaking of Conspiracy Theories, consider that the registration and
confiscation of the mass of legitimate firearms from legal owners is in
keeping with expected future Civil Control actions - what some would call
Oppressing of the People.
This is consistent with the change in military tactics and deployment
initiated by the Liberal Party. Deployment priorty for the Canadian military
has been shifted from Combat against other military forces to "Peacekeeping",
in the form of Combat in Built-Up Areas and Population Control.
Back to Limits To Growth.
The Liberal Party of Canada about a decade ago came to accept the tenets
put forward by the Limits To Growth study, which projects increasing costs
of raw materials to an unsustainable economic level. Their projections were
that the net result would be that starting about 2010 this economic spiral
hits a peak, at which point it goes into a downhill run resulting in
economic collapse by 2050. The postulate that this will result in massive
There. Makes sense to get whatever weapons you can off the street. The fact
that the only ones you get are those owned by law-abiding and upstanding
citizens (who would probably be pro-law in the first place) and leaves those
in unlawful hands in place is irrelevant in the cost-benefit equation. It
removes the main potential source of weapons available to the public. The
unlawful use of weapons will simply go on as normal anyhow.
But look on the bright side. You won't have to store handguns anymore in
lockups and with trigger locks.