We don't use the term 'independent', as that would connote a former period of dependence, which was never the case, in fact quite the contrary, brits were able to depend on us in numerous crises - en.wikipedia.org
'Autonomous' is used, but long before it was formally the status [statute of Westminster 1931], there was a high degree of autonomy in practice ... even before the BNA act of 01 july 1867, the average canadian/canadien had far more control over his life than did the average brit, largely due to being spread out in a roomy country with space to grow, also partly due to rights of self-government given to quebecois in the mid-1700s [one of the Intolerable Acts to which catholic-hating USian rebels objected] ... if the french had self-rule [well actually the priesthood and nobility], theory was you couldn't deny a degree of it to upper canadians, fact was though that you simply can't govern people the same as you can a large population packed into those little british isles ... Whitehall never came into it much, from the first disputes tended to be mild and settled in favour of canucks, who saw themselves as a british people anyway, with political divisions following the same lines, tory whig reform radical etc ... quite distinct from what is now the US, where the term 'independence' connotes a bloody-minded us-vs-them split on nationalistic lines, it was never like that here, canadians subscribed more to an overall empire-wide political split between liberals and conservatives and the various other whacko factions of any group |
