It is as tightly bound to the US as Puerto Rico. I can't imagine Canada adopting economic, military or cultural policies that favor US enemies without being strong-armed out of it by the US.
It is a charged question, and I mean it as a hypothetical. But countries form through common language, culture, religion, geography, interests or trauma/war. Anglo-Canada and the US have all the good things in common and no war/trauma keeping them apart.
At times, Anglo-Canadians feel more distinct from French-Canadians than they do most Americans.
Ofc, if you've been a stable nation for century+, then there's no good reason to fix what's not broken.
Quebec has tried to separate twice in the past 50 years, and comes within a Brexit's margin of actually getting it done (and if it wasn't for Montreal, they'd already be gone).
The seed of that separation was, naturally, caused by a military conflict between what would become Western Canada and what used to be Upper Canada.
Canada isn't actually as stable a country as Ottawa might have you believe.
The whole Quebec movement is basically dead in the water now.
An entire generation of Canadians didn't exist or don't remember that.
I'd argue the GWOT, the Great Recession, and COVID have had a stronger impact on modern (2020s) Canadian politics and discourse than the Quebec Independence Movement.
Quebec's Separatist party has complete electoral dominance (except for Montreal, but Montreal is the least Quebec part of Quebec) and has the ability to force the government's hand on most things.
If the Eastern Big City Party loses the next election as is projected (and the Bloc correspondingly loses all of its power) they'll be back.
Only voters who are 65+ are split on soverignity. Every other age demographic overwhelmingly supports remaining in Canada [0]
This can be seen with the CAQ, which has poached most of the PQ's leadership and campaigns almost entirely on Bill 21 and immigration [1], not on "Quebec Libre"
[0] - https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/17/quebec-francois-leg...
[1] - https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/bill-21-groups-f...
[0] - https://policyoptions.irpp.org/fr/magazines/mai-2024/sondage...
Your initial point was not that people chose the PQ over language concerns, but that the party had transitioned. The party has done no such thing. It's doubling down on separatism if anything. It's crazy.
Did you mean Lower Canada instead of Upper Canada?
Had Quebec voted Yes, Quebec City would have immediately declared independence. <https://np.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/tkg5gf/who_has_...>
I don't know how that still is a problem?
Quebec exiting anytime soon would be annoying for the country but a tragic mistake for quebec especially in seeing how poorly it has workout for the UK which had been an economic engine. Quebec has been sputtering since the 80s after their last referendum vote and since montreal lost its status as a city of import to Toronto. They would go from a poor economic performer to exceptionally poor.
City of import? Speaking as a tourist at least, Montreal is a much more interesting place to visit than Toronto. Toronto might be larger and have a bigger economy with more industry, but for a tourist I can't think of any reason to visit offhand.
>Quebec exiting anytime soon would be annoying for the country but a tragic mistake for quebec especially in seeing how poorly it has workout for the UK which had been an economic engine.
Separatists might not be that worried about economic power. Are all the Brexit voters unhappy with their vote now? A few maybe, but most probably are happy to be out of the EU, and blame their continued economic problems on immigrants, the EU, etc.
People love to talk about Quebec and separatism, they can go if they want, but they owe us $300B, so I doubt they are going any time soon, their "country" would likely fall over on go.
I don't disagree - separatists don't care because they would be trying to grab power at all costs. The rest of the population would be the ones along for the ride.
Also worth reminding Brexit was reverting to a former country state, quebec separatism would be wholly new uncharted waters.
It was on the table.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red
From the Canadian perspective too, don’t think an American annexation of our landmass would go smoothly… Russians and Ukrainians are indistinguishable to an outsider and are currently unleashing centuries of built up ethnic turmoil on each other.
Anecdotal: I used to work with very right wing Canadian guys who cursed the name of the last president and called him all manner of names because of the trade war. These were the kind of guys who south of the border would have voted for him and bought the hat.
It’s not as simple as shared heritage == shared values.
The US war plan for the UK was similarly weird: according to Miller, _War Plan Orange_ War Plan Red was the result of a deal between the US Navy and Army. The Navy wanted War Plan Orange (war with Japan) and so they let the Army write War Plan Red (the UK). Which was why a war between the two mightiest naval powers on the planet in 1925 called for the US Navy to be on the defensive, at most seize the Bahamas, Jamaica, and Halifax to try and deny them as bases to the RN, and then the US Army would invade a separate nation (Crimson aka Canada) that would probably try and be neutral in the war!
Basically, from what I can tell, the US, Canada, and UK were putting their best war planners on the likely threats, and putting their less experienced and good planners on these war plans. Because War Plan Orange was, at least if you squint, how the US defeated Japan. And the Canadian and UK's war planners for mobilizing in World War Two and sending them to France did a bang-up job. It was just these plans that were not thought through and would have been disasters if implemented.
Both the West and East coasts would immediately have their power grids upended by the loss of Canadian hydro. Fuel supplies (and practically everything else in both countries) would be disrupted as Canadian suppliers turn off the taps and American refineries go dark. Pipelines would, in all likelihood, be sabotaged so that they can't be started up quickly even once controlled. Large parts of Canada would go on a sudden bread and meat diet, since they rely almost entirely on imported fruit and vegetables.
Neither side would likely have the element of surprise, since both sides would be compromised by a large number of people in their command structures who are either from the other nation or sympathetic to it. A significant portion of U.S. forces would likely refuse to follow orders unless there was a damned good reason to invade Canada. Civil unrest in the U.S. itself would be a huge problem for the same reason. U.S. rivals such as China would pounce on the opportunity to take advantage of things while all this is going on. If the U.S. rolls into Canada then nobody is going to give a fig about Taiwan.
Occupation would be another matter entirely. The territory is massive and the enemy indistinguishable from yourself. Canada would present many of the same difficulties with terrain as Afghanistan, but with a populace that can tell which end of a toaster to plug in.
And the line loss would be too great to economically ship canadian electricity to California
The reality is that there is no dividing line between Canada and U.S. when it comes to electricity. Power grids cross the 49th at will. In California, you're on the same interconnection as Vancouver and Calgary.
Conflict would disrupt power in both countries, and much further from the border than you may suspect.
I don’t buy it. Massive generators larger than the Canadian market go down from time to time. There’s dozens of contingencies in place.
The modern and even pre-modern history of Ukraine is inseparable from a degree of violence that only existed in north america when directed towards slaves and indigenous population. There are not centuries of built-up ethnic/nationalistic turmoil between the U.S. and Canada, although I'm sure you could find some crazies who've convinced themselves there must be.
Similarly, Poland once occupied Moscow in the distant past and has managed to persist as a distinct nation, though the Russian calculus sometimes worked out against Poland such as during Russian-Prussian or Soviet-Nazi alliances.
Ukraine and Russia have their own history yet Ukrainians have managed to valiantly persevere as we can witness today. Unfortunately for geographic reasons the strategic calculus there is much tighter than US-Canada or Russia-Poland.
By the British, not by "Canada" (which didn't exist).
To put another way, even had the US not invaded British North America, the UK would still have attacked Washington as part of the overall war. The one did not cause the other.
The strategic reasons for a potential attack are similar, and the same risks remain.
The US invaded and failed. Had they succeeded I doubt the British would invade Washington vs strengthening their position in the remaining colonies.
I think this is a misconception. It is the responsibility of the general staff to have a plan for any eventuality. The existence of such a plan does not imply that the political leadership has seriously considered launching military operations against a friendly neighboring country.
The only real opposition to this in the USA will come from conservatives who are upset at the large amount of "New Democratic" voters.
Also, Doug ford is no conservative, he’s just liberal lite. A pathetic spineless being
Americans on either side of politics think that Canada is full of super-leftists (and there is no shortage). But were Canada a part of the US in 2016, Trump would have won AB, SK, and quite possibly enough of the GTA (the parts that loved Rob Ford, and as "Ford Country" has repeatedly won the province for Doug Ford as mentioned) to win ON, the province most resembling MI/WI/PA, the three states that Trump unexpectedly won the election with.
Just this little hiccup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812#Invasions_of_Canad...
Although with our cooperation at D-Day maybe Canada considers that water under the bridge.
On the other hand, the difference between a dialect and a language is an army and a navy, neither of which Canada has much of.
Midland American English is what we would call the standard American accent. Most of Iowa, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and parts of surrounding states speak in this.
French-speaking Quebecers self-identify as follows:
- Canadians first, and Quebecois second.
- Quebecois first, and Canadian second.
- Quebecois, and not Canadian at all.
The majority of French-speaking Quebecois do not self-identify as being in the first category, and a very significant percentage identify as being in the third category, with a plurality falling into the second category. I think it's safe to say that almost all French Canadians in Quebec identify as culturally Quebecois.
I lived in Quebec during the Cultural Revolution in the 80s, and was there for the first referendum, but I left because it became clear that Montreal was a bad place to be if I wanted to raise English-speaking children. In the end, I didn't feel any great need to pay for the sins of centuries of Quebec Anglophones that weren't my ancestors.
Once you wander outside of Montreal, into the countryside, dislike of Anglophones is common to the point that it feels almost dangerous, and gets even worse the closer you get to Quebec City.
In my experience, tolerance of Anglophones in Montreal has decreased dramatically in recent years. I was in a clothing store on St. Catherine, neer Bishop Street (once the heart of Anglophone Montreal). When two American tourists came in, and asked for help, the young shopkeeper responded: "On ne parle pas Anglais ici" (one does not speak English here).
A friend of mine graduated from a high school in Westmount (home to the Anglophone elite, most pointedly hated by Francophones). He said that of his friends in high school, none had remained in Quebec, because even though all of them spoke fluent French, being Anglophones, they were not able to find jobs.
A point of translation nuance here: in American English “one does not speak {language} here” carries with it an overt sense of pretense or unpleasantness, whereas in French “on”/one is very commonly used as an alternative to “we” in informal conversation, and does not carry any of the same tone as using “one” does in English. While the translation is correct at a literal level, idiomatically it’d just be “we don’t speak English here”.
The "on" is impersonal and quite different from "nous". I think a translation should reflect the universality of the statement.
Oh I agree that the translator understood the nuance and I agree why "we" was proposed. The translation is correct, as is the original one.
I was proposing another alternative that incorporates the cold impersonality of "on" whilst not sounding pompous. The server was being viscous, not pompous.
I don't think my translation is "correct"; it hinges on my reading that the server was rude and nasty. A reading based on living in latin countries but also one based on my English Canadian prejudice that French Canadians all speak English but resent having to (don't fault them for it either)
I find translations fascinating as a subject. While there can be a bad translation, there is never a perfect one.
https://www.commeunefrancaise.com/blog/on-or-nous#:~:text=%E....
French Canadian is the cruelest sounding language I have ever heard.
Note: there are some wonderful French Canadians out there. Just not that day at that register in that Macdonalds.
We tried to annex them in 1812, but they were technically British so it doesn't count.
I'd say Cuba is the exception that proves this rule
I was in Canada last week and I saw a bunch of (real) English and (real) French Canadians. It dawned on me that the French Canadians resemble "redneck" Americans quite a lot more than the English whilst speaking a language that resembles French
The English Canadians (I wasn't in a major urban area, so these are what I call "real" Canadians) were quite different. Very reserved, low key and "proper". Unbearably stuffy.
Are you familiar with NATO? Clearly Canada wouldn’t do that - Canada can’t. But the existence of a treaty organization does not change how distinct we are.
As an example, school shootings. They’re far more rare here than population would dictate.
Canada is indeed an anomaly. I can't think of another circumstance in which two countries that
* share land borders
* are 95% culturally, economically, and politically identical
* do not have longstanding historical grievances against each other
have not unified after two centuries; if anything, this fact implies that annexation is more likely than not to occur, perhaps sometime this century.
Americans on either side of politics think that Canada is full of super-leftists (and there is no shortage). But were Canada a part of the US in 2016, Trump would have won AB, SK, and quite possibly enough of the GTA (the parts that loved Rob Ford, and as "Ford Country" has repeatedly won the province for Doug Ford) to win ON, the province most resembling MI/WI/PA, the three states that Trump unexpectedly won the election with.
When annexation happens I do not expect the US to be interested in Quebec because of language. I suppose that means that sovereignists ought to be in favor of US annexation.
The Americans know as much as me that quick and painful assimilation is possible. Why wouldn’t they wish to impose it on my nation?
It's possible that the US would annex Quebec and similarly keep it as a territory, but more likely is the US not bothering with it at all; why bring within itself an ethnic conflict that has bedeviled Canada for 250 years?
But even setting aside the unlikelihood of Quebecois used to having so much say in governing Canada accepting no longer having voting delegates in the national legislature, surely any such benefit for the US would be a lot less, relatively speaking. And, again, why would we bring in yet another ethnic conflict into our country?
But in general the relationships in NA work more North/South than East/West and the construction of Canada is fairly contrived. So while Canadians have a lot in common with Americans just across the border, this may be more regional cultural relationships. I would posit that your typical Seattle area Washingtonian has a more common culture with a nearby Vancouverite than they would with someone from Florida, Texas or New York.
As a Canadian who is in the process of immigrating to the US, I feel that most Canadians think they are more similar to European than American. I'm basing this from having interacted with many Canadians during grad school in the US whom it would greatly trouble them if someone thought they were American. Perhaps it is a generational thing because I think my parents would probably say American if forced to choose but would say they are Canadians. Perhaps it is an international student perspective. I think most Canadians who think they are American just immigrate.
Curious choice of words.
Why not 'emigrating' to the US?
In my experience, many (Anglo) Canadians behave like the coastal Americans who think of themselves as rather not American despite behaving very, very American.
Case in point: America is a racist country. But the racial quotas in Ivy League Universities are perfectly fair. There is nothing wrong with punishing Chinese immigrants for the sins of English colonists from the two centuries ago.
One I realised I fell into was universally condemning everyone from places I hadn’t been as ignorant. I think what stalls the self awareness is that you think you’re just joking. But you’re not. You’re socially reäffirming a stereotype.
I do it too. It's the way we're socialized here in the US via everything from the media and music to political speeches.
What would be really interesting to know is if either of you are non-American? I have a sense that this proclivity might not be simply an American thing. I've wondered more and more if it's just human?
I’d call out honest self reflection in small groups as uniquely and proudly American. We don’t have small group face-saving as a strong cultural streak. Almost in inverse, we champion it as a sign of trust and intimacy.
> interesting to know is if either of you are non-American
Immigrant American. We tend to be so convinced of our blue-blooded Americanness that we unblushingly use phrases like “blue-blooded American.”
More seriously, America is a superpower. Look at the contemporaries of any great superpower—Rome, the Han Dynasty, the Abbasid, the Ottoman, the British and the USSR—and the dominant narrative—paranoia, almost—is one of decline. Because that’s what’s left. There isn’t a competitor to aspire to. There isn’t pressure to improve. It’s partly why I think a bipolar world is for the best, even if it’s quite deadly—America and China competing is good. Russia diddlyfucking
When I go to Montreal, I definitely feel this way. The rest of Canada feels pretty much like a clean America.
And the convoy protests were funded by interests in the US. So it was a US political protest on Canadian soil.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/class-action-rcmp-abuse...
Are you arguing that Canada "physically segregates" its underclass to a greater extent than the US does? I don't think that's actually true.
In 1970 Detroit, the city was 30% black. What comparable city does Canada have?
Also, keep in mind that in both Canada and the US, a plurality of the underclass are of European descent: in 2020, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that 37.2 million Americans were living below the poverty line, of whom 42.7% were non-Hispanic White, 28.0% Hispanic, 22.8% African American, 1.6% Native American, 4.8% Other. [1] (I don't have equivalent figures for Canada at hand, but I expect they will tell a broadly similar story, with European-descended people being the plurality of the Canadian poor.)
[0] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/2021-census-...
"Higher numbers of hate crimes targeting a race or an ethnicity (+12% to 1,950 incidents) and a sexual orientation (+12% to 491 incidents) accounted for most of the increase in 2022. In 2022, hate crimes targeting a religion were down 15% from 2021 yet remained above the annual numbers recorded from 2018 to 2020."
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/240313/dq240...
Compared to 6,567 in the US during the same year.
https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/hate-crime-statistics
Per capita values are indeed higher for Canada due to the population difference.
It escalated pretty quickly. She got so frustrated that she comparted the flyover provinces to the Deep South in the US. The situation took five years to resolve.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/joni-mitchell-wants...
I have a great respect for the US. Realistically, feel the US is family, and like family, I love and care for it. Yet at the same time, sometimes I shake my head, wonder what my sibling is doing, baffled... often concerned out of care for them, sometimes out of self interest. Yet I still care, and want the best for them.. even if pissed off, angry, or upset with that sibling.
There is so much shared history, coupled with so much bafflement.
I guess the best way to put it, is the relationship Canada has with the US is exceptionally nuanced, and this holds true for many Canadians.
But it's not like you guys are completely normal ;-). For example, Confederate flags are actually a thing in Canada. That's wild to me.
As my history teacher explained to me, back in the day, a small offshoot of Confederates had it with the war. They were weary. They were exhausted. And so, as many American hippies and conscientious objectors have done in the past, they decided to flee to Canada.
At this time however, they were worried about passing through Yankee territory, and also about their own troops shooting them for desertion. So, cleverly they modified their flag, and their uniforms, in subtle yet not quite discernible ways.
When approached, they would hold up their hands and describe at great length that the flag was much like the Ship of Theseus, each thread had been carefully replaced, and that their philosophical belief was that it therefore was not a Confederate flag. It may seem and look as such, but it as most certainly not! "What!", they would decry at such statements, "Are you ignorant louts! Have you no philosophical roots?", and so soldiers would feel great shame, and let them pass.
Thus after much hardship they managed to cross the border, settle down in a small town. I'm sure the flag you saw was probably only isolated to that one rural town though, but even so it just looked like a Confederate flag. It was instead copied from that other, unique flag.
Okay that got a good chuckle out of me lol. Quality shitpost, could have sprinkled some lost cause/daughters of the Confederacy gaslighting in there too
Also seen one in Cambridge. And I don't mean Cambridge Massachusetts, I mean the original.
Next thing you know, people will start getting their knickers in a twist over someone flying a Daesh flag.
Both of which aimed to solve for problems faced by Americans in America by doing something in Canada, when the same problems don't apply to Canada.
Nah. Canadians regularly see themselves as Americans with respect to political processes and laws. Presumably because of said American media consumption and believing what it portrays also applies to Canada.
Like how Tim Horton's, the quintessential Canadian institution, was bought by Burger King and remains "Canadian" if only for tax reasons.
Many countries and cultures are struggling with the excessive power of American capital, it bring with it Us-style management and 'way of doing things'.
I bet if you rated all countries in the world by how much common people know and spend time looking at the internal politics of neighboring countries, Canada would be easily top 5. On the other hand, most countries outside North/South America have thousands of years of shared history, unlike the 3-4 hundred ones by (non-native) Americans.
In my opinion, Canadian should stop with this obsession and engage more with local politics.
Same with Mexico, but Mexicans are nowhere near as addicted to American news (Spanish language or English language).
TBH, most people consume news as entertainment, and outside of Postmedia Network media, Canadian reporting is fairly bland and boring.
Also, having spent some of my youth in rural and urban BC, in most cases purely Canadian television media didn't even really exist - everyone would be watching either a reskin of an American channel (Family Channel aka Disney) or an American channel (CNN, PBS, Fox).
Sure you had CBC but it was filled with ads and never talked about local issues anyhow.
That said, Western Canada is for all intents and purposes the exact same as Washington/Montana/Alaska - almost everyone in BC, AB, and the territories has at least 1 close relative who's an American or immigrated to America, and the only difference was that signs were occasionally in French, BC Ferries had a tiny portrait of Queen Elizabeth tucked in a random corridor next to a portrait of Harper or Trudeau, and Costco served poutine and charged 2x for milk and goods compared to the one in Bellingham
In my opinion, this should be done by the entire world instead of obsessing over a no named senator said something scandalous on Twitter
So what is being a Canadian anymore ? It doesn’t really matter but they really should stop trying to illegal cross the northern border into the US
Of course, when you're a small nation right next to the most powerful nation the world has ever seen, it's easy to have your media sphere be overwhelmed by the glut coming from south of the border. This is especially true as institutions like the CBC and NFB have come into increasing irrelevance while the internet replaces them. But this should not be misinterpreted as the country missing an identity or viewing itself as the same as the USA - that's simply not the case.
On a casual viewing, the similarity of external culture looks the same: we have the same shops, the same ugly modern strip malls, etc. We mostly look at talk somewhat the same, certainly in urban centers. But when you dive into the heart of our cultures, we had very different histories, and that's reflected in some big societal discrepancies. The USA is a bit of an outlier in a number of ways, and in many ways Canada resembles Scandinavian countries more than the USA.
Also, Canadians may not think of themselves as Americans, but young Anglo-Canadians are products of American culture. I roomed in college with one for a year and nothing was distinctly non-American about him besides the accent.
War Plan Red by Kevin Lippert suggests relations between the two countries is also similar to mutually annoyed suburban neighbors.
Canadians who visit for a year think we are totally different.
Disclaimer: I only ever go to BC (and I have lived in the PNW most of my life), so this might be a very biased hot take. I bet Quebec is a little bit different, as well as the other provinces & territories.
I once heard, in the early 2000s, that more than 1/2 the languages spoken 150 years ago are gone.
I will say though, weighing in on a neighbouring nation while only having visited one of its provinces strikes me as a little bit conceited. A visit to BC is not going to give you much of a perspective of the diversity of this country.
Also: our health care is amongst the worst of the western nations at this stage. Subsequent governments have carved it away to be a shell of its former self.
That's a little harsh, I admitted as much in my post. I figured that my disclaimer would clarify that what I really think is "The PNW is very similar no matter which side of the 49th parallel you find yourself on."
I withhold any opinion on your health care; I've heard negatives, sure, but I've got no skin in the game. Philosophically I like it better than what we're doing in the US, even if the results have been lackluster so far.
The state has a monopoly on the purchasing of healthcare services, it is illegal in most provinces to buy any healthcare for your family. The official marketing is that services are given out in priority order. In practice, it's rationed according to a lottery, your connections, whether you can afford to live near medical center, your ability to advocate for yourself, ability to show up an hour before a facility opens and wait in line for 5 hours, push through constant gaslighting by doctors whose goal is to dissuade you from receiving care (they'd rather you just give up and go home, here take this antibiotic and get out of my face), willingness to embellish symptoms to get higher priority placement, etc.
When the system utterly fails you, you have zero recourse. You just accept that you won't get to see a specialist for 6 months (if you're lucky, often a year). There is no escape hatch. Only if you're lucky enough to afford paying out of pocket and be able to get out of the country to get medical attention.
Millions of Canadians have no access to a family doctor (25-60% of British Columbians, for example). With increasing frequency, Emergency Rooms themselves are closing their doors (can't operate a whole 24/7 rotation).
On a philosophical level, I think it plainly evil that, even after I've paid such high taxes to fund everyone else's treatment, and then after the government refuses to provide me with adequate healthcare, after already paying for services not received, they then make it illegal to use whatever money I have left to provide basic healthcare to myself and my family.
The evil part seems to be where they bilk you out of your tax dollars a few steps up the chain.
Why is it illegal to purchase healthcare privately? When I lived in the UK, I skipped the NHS and used my private insurance all the time to avoid all the issues you listed. Why not make it available to those that can afford the option?
It’s, of course, a both/and situation. Try to improve things at home while searching for options if needed.
I do believe there is a bit of absurdity going on where parts of the Canadian system are trying to save money though by offering suicide.
We don't really have "universal healthcare" at all anymore, I don't know what you'd call such a dysfunctional system.
Canadians have known more what is going on in America than Americans for at least the last 35 years.
I love Canadians but never in my adult life have Canadians not been just salivating to have a conversation about American news with an American.
Those are the West (everything west of Upper Canada), Upper Canada (triangle formed by Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal), Lower Canada (Quebec), and the Maritimes.
If you're going more granular, you have Newfoundland, which is very different from the rest of the Maritime provinces (they have their own dialect of English), the North (sparsely populated but the kind of Canadian that lives there is different), and to a point Vancouver and Vancouver Island.
Of those, the West is functionally the Midwest (Vancouver and Island are not meaningfully distinct from Seattle/Portland/Bay cities in terms of politics) where each province is flavored towards the State to its immediate south, Upper Canada is culturally NYC-DC North (and for that reason is as hostile to the rest of the country as NYC/DC are to the US in general), Lower Canada is French (obviously), and the Maritimes are the Rust Belt.
The reason for Upper Canada's insularity (and to a point, Lower Canada's) is its age and geography: as the US found out in 1812 it's very difficult to reinforce across the Great Lakes. As for the West, there might as well be no border at all, so commerce and culture move freely (it also helps that, because plentiful natural resources and space causes a freedom-focused outlook on human rights, most people who live in the West will naturally have that in common with their southern counterparts).
Definetly need to split this further:
Prairies - Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta
Mountains - Everything inside the Rockies
BC - Its it's own thing
Just a heads up, Newfoundland isn't a part of the Maritimes at all, and those from Newfoundland will certainly remind you of that if you lump them in :)
The cultural division between BC and the 'west' (AB, SK, MB) is pretty strong.
Southern Ontario is a lot closer to upstate ny / the midwest than NYC, I'd say.
The Maritimes is much more like New England than the rust belt. Newfoundland isn't even part of the Maritime provinces - it's part of the Atlantic provinces.
If you are from BC, you are more likely to travel to or move to California than you are Nova Scotia or Florida.
Likewise, if you are from Montana, you probably feel more comfortable in Alberta or Saskatchewan than you would in New York or Alabama.
While our governments function very differently, NAFTA has removed most of the institutional barriers preventing the natural movement of money, people and culture between the two places.
And much lower wages and opportunities, but the same (or higher) housing prices. There's a reason you don't live there.
As an American, I get most of my US news from Canadian sources these days. They tend to be a whole lot better.