# How has the Canadian political system survived? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 8, 2003, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-has-the-canadian-political-system-survived/173853 "2003-05-08T05:27:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-has-the-canadian-political-system-survived/173853/41 "2003-05-12T02:31:42Z")
If voter turnout is a litmus test for stability and legitimacy, I’m a little unclear as to why the U.S. Constitution is stable, since their voter turnout is dreadful, and much worse than Canada’s. As to struggling for land, water, or power, I would suggest that ain’t coming anytime soon, at least domestically. Canada’s population grows quite slowly, about 1% a year. Personally, I’m of the opinion that the ONE thing that should be changed, without changing much of anything else, is creating an effective and elected Senate, but with inferior powers to the House of Commons. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2003, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-has-the-canadian-political-system-survived/173853/42 "2003-05-12T13:45:39Z")
emacknight wrote, “Another point my friend made was that our population density is low. We don’t have a strugle for land, or water, or power, the way other countries have. But its coming, are you prepared?” What do you mean, it’s coming? Is Canada expecting a massive influx of immigrants? A baby boom? What? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2003, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-has-the-canadian-political-system-survived/173853/43 "2003-05-15T22:58:22Z")
By the way, I posted a thread on the GD forum: “Should the United States expand its territory?” Mainly about the possible annexation of Canada. (I argue in support of it, but with definite reservations.) I haven’t figured out how to imbed an intra-board link, but you can find the thread by a word search if you’re interested. Also, check out “Should the United States Senate be abolished?” which covers some points of relevance to this discussion – federalism vs. centralism, etc. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2003, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-has-the-canadian-political-system-survived/173853/44 "2003-06-06T03:47:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RickJay \* > **…I think you misunderstand what “legitimacy” means. You MUST misunderstand it. If you really don’t see the legitimacy in our system, then what you are saying is that you don’t really think Jean Chretien is the Prime Minister, and you think Queen Elizabeth II is not really the Head of State, and you think the Supreme Court does not actually rule on laws. “Legitimacy” doesn’t mean everything thinks the government is perfect; it means everyone thinks the government IS THE GOVERNMENT. I would assume that you will admit that 99% of all sane adult Canadians really do think that the current body of government we have is the real, honest-to-God government of this country, whether or not they happen to agree with it, and do not think the real Prime Minister is actually Cynthia Dale or someone.** Are you still convinced that there is legitimacy?]([http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030605.ulibs0605/BNStory/National/?query=martin](http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030605.ulibs0605/BNStory/National/?query=martin)[/url) ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2003, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-has-the-canadian-political-system-survived/173853/45 "2003-06-06T15:45:34Z")
So when these Martin backer issues a bill outside parliament and they vote for it, it will be recognized as law by whom exactly? All I see is the largest faction within the Liberal party playing “shadow cabinet”. That hardly constitutes a threat to the legitimacy of our system. ---
**Author:** ![FranticMad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c68b51/32.png) [@FranticMad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FranticMad)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2003, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-has-the-canadian-political-system-survived/173853/46 "2003-06-06T16:05:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by emacknight \* > \*\*Are you still convinced that there is legitimacy?]([http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030605.ulibs0605/BNStory/National/?query=martin](http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030605.ulibs0605/BNStory/National/?query=martin)[/url) \*\* Yes, the government still passes laws, and everyone in the country recognizes that. The burden of proof is on you, **emacknight** to explain how a parallel caucus has any effect whatsoever on “legitimacy”. I though **RickJay** did a good job explaining what he means by legitimacy, but the article you linked to has nothing to do with the concept. BTW, a link to an article does not replace a well-reasoned argument. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-has-the-canadian-political-system-survived/173853.md?page=2)