Re: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, and the structure

 and
> these forces immediately begin to deploy into the US.  Joint British
> and Canadian landings in Georgia and South Carolina are fiercely
> opposed by FCC forces, but after the previous years of tough
> conflict during the Civil War, these forces are worn down and have
> little equipment remaining in good condition.

But a bunch of Combat Veterans. That would be nasty. And they know 
the terrain. And its far warmer than Brits or Canucks prefer. 

  The fresh foreign
> troops, landing in large numbers with new equipment and massive air
> superiority, have little trouble defeating FCC and the various local
> warlords ruling the region.

I don't know. Maybe. 

  Within weeks, British and Canadian
> troops have deployed through almost all of the US, begin restoring
> order and start providing humanitarian relief.

Neither we nor the British have enough troops even with callups to 
manage this. Maybe with significant US help. or UN help. 

  The areas destroyed
> by nuclear weapons and suffering from fallout are given special
> attention, with NBC teams from many nations including Japan and
> Russia providing additional support.

Makes sense. 
 
> >Despite opposition from France and a Germany that sees opportunity
> >in an economically prostrate North America, Britain manages to
> >shame the EU into providing large amounts of aid to rebuild the
> >U.S., helped at first by Europeans who feel this will finally repay
> >the Americans' efforts following the Second World War. 

Hmmm. Yes. There would be some repayment, although some memories are 
short. All the survivors may be gone by then.

 This
> >sentiment doesn't last long once the true scale of the necessary
> >effort becomes apparent, but Britain perseveres, with the vigorous
> >members of the new generation of the Royal Family (which I have to
> >assume has somehow retreived its reputation in Britain already by
> >this point) taking an active and highly visible part.

Good point, its rehabilitate or be irrelevant and kicked out 
eventually 

> Despite initial opposition from France, Spain and Italy who see an
> opportunity in keeping the US out of the international market,
> Britian and Germany convince the EU to provide large amounts of aid
> to help rebuild the US - helped at first by Europeans who feel that
> this will finally repay the Americans' efforts following the Second
> World War.  There is a certain cynical edge to this support, since
> many Europeans also feel that the US never hesitated to advance its
> own agenda by reminding the Europeans of the debt owed it - and
> these same Europeans now wonder if the situation could be reversed,
> with Europe dominating the relationship with a rebuilt US. The
> German government is very uncomfortable with the direction being
> taken by the French, Spanish and others, but is not willing to break
> with them directly as it is still trying to maintain cohesiveness
> within the EU. 

That'd be new.

 The UK, however, with the strongest ties to the US
> and long historical positive relationship with its former colony,
> feels much resentment at this underlying cynicism among its fellow
> Europeans.  As the true costs of rebuilding the US become apparrent,
> and one after another the European nations start to back out of the
> aid plans or reduce their contributions, the UK's ambivalent
> feelings toward Europe become stronger.  Some historians see this
> period as the beginnings of the fractures in the EU that eventually
> lead to the split between the French and the Germans, which led to
> the formation of the FSE and the NSL.

That's not bad at all. :)
 
> >The Mainstream Culture movement in the American Remnants fastens on
> >the Royal Family as the unifying symbol they have been looking for.
> > One by one, most of the American (and former Canadian) Remnants
> >join the new NAC, with only California (and Texas?) refusing. 
> >Anti-monarchical sentiment in Texas is just too strong, and both
> >regions have culturally moved into the Hispanic/Central American
> >sphere of influence anyway. (Does anyone know what the official
> >language in California Free State is?)  Maine and Florida also hold
> >out for a while, but economic realities soon force their
> >submission.
> >
> 
> 
> Rebuilding the United States' infrastructure is a simple engineering
> problem compared with the extremely complex and sensitive issue of
> trying to recreate a cohesive society among recently warring groups.
>  A flow of former refugees who spent the war in relative contentment
> hosted in Canada starts back into the US, bringing with them the
> positive feelings developed toward Canada and the UK.  

If history is any guideline, many would settle in Canada. 
 
> The conflict between the UK and the rest of Europe over the
> rebuilding costs of  the US comes to a head, just as leaders in
> North America are searching for some means of unifying the disperate
> groups in the US.  The Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs suggests
> a plan whereby the states of the former US, Canada, Quebec and the
> UK join together in a political association based on a common
> history and shared culture, shared language and shared interests -
> with the Crown as the unifying head of the new Confederation. 

And this would sell in Quebec? Especially an Independent Quebec? It 
would be even more polarized than current day Quebec as many 
moderates would have moved to Canada. 

> Quebec and the largely Hispanic areas in the former US are at first
> hesitant due to cultural and language issues, but when assured that
> provision would be made to protect the Spanish and French languages
> and cultures as integral founding elements of the new Confederation,
> they agree to join

Similar assurances exist in Canada or could, but that doesn't seem to 
be enough for some elements in Quebec. 

 - seeing the advantages of being part of a large
> protected market framework in a world dominated by large trading
> blocks in Europe and Asia.

They'd be able to negotiate market deals even if they didn't join the 
NAC. 
 
> The New Anglian Confederation, as it quickly comes to be known, is
> formed officially by acts of the various member governments -
> Quebec, Canada, the UK, the rump US government representing the
> North-East, and the various state governments in the remainder of
> the US.

It's an attempt to explain the GZGverse, look how hard a sell the EU 
had.... and it has problems with French Pride, British 
Nationalism, and Norwegian and Dutch law. I'll be convinced of 
your scenario when I see it.... (I don't think it is viable). 

  Much of the US is organized under the direct administration
> of Canadian, UK or US military forces who organize civilian
> elections to recreate the state legislatures - which represent the
> people of the state during the formation of the NAC.	

What happened to the civil gov't of Canada? The military wouldn't 
have this capability in Canada. The Military will not organize 
elections in Canada nor the UK ever again I suspect. 
 
> THE NEW ANGLIAN CONFEDERATION
> 
> 
> 
> Head of State
> 
> The Crown - embodied in the personage of the reigning monarch - head
> of the House of Windsor, and King or Queen of England, Scotland,
> Wales, Ireland (it reunited and rejoined the Commonwealth), Canada
> and the associated members of the Commonwealth - and now
> Confederation

I think a lot of the Irish must have buggered of to somewhere like 
the colony of Tir'Na'Nog to continue their Irish independence. 
Someone pointed out and justly so that they are more likely to join 
with the EU than the English....
 
> Executive Body:
> 
> The Confederation Prime Minister and Cabinet - all of whom are
> members of the Confederation Council.  The Prime Minister is
> formally appointed by the Monarch, chosen from a list presented to
> the Monarch by the Speaker of the Council.  In practice, the Council
> votes on the names to be submitted on the list presented to the
> Monarch, and the Monarch traditionally chooses the senior choice of
> the Council.	Normally, the process of politics among the membership
> of Council will have determined who will be chosen and the Monarch's
> reaction well before the voting takes place.	The Prime Minister
> appoints a cabinet of Ministers to assist her/him in the
> administration of the Confederation Government - with Cabinet
> members heading the various government ministries.

Sounds British .... and possibly what would have originally been in 
place. Or perhaps the Prime Minister is elected.... like in Canada? 
 
> Legislative Body:
> 
> The Confederation Council - Composed of representatives of the
> states making up the Confederation.  Council members are elected in
> popular elections, similar to the way EU parliament members are
> elected in Europe. Each region or state determines how its public
> will vote for its Council seats.  Representation on Council is
> limited to a maximum of twenty members per area/state.  Each has a
> minimum of 10 seats, and up to 10 more depending on population size
> - though some effort is made at the formation of the NAC to see that
> the various areas are roughly equivalent in terms of population and
> thereby representation in Council.  The founding members did not
> want to start with a gross imbalance...

You seem to be avoiding the tendency towards direct-er democracy we 
can see in Canada and the US today. 
 
> Confederation Membership:
> 
> The New Anglian Confederation is composed, initially, of the United
> Kingdom, Canada, Quebec and the former United States.  The United
> States is broken up into several large parts, based on common
> historical, cultural and geographical   factors.  The old State
> organization of the US is disolved, with several exceptions: The new
> areas include New England, The Great Lakes Region, The Carolinas,
> Florida, Texas, California, the South West, the Rocky Mountain
> States, and the Great Central Plains.  Each area is organized as a
> larger version of what the States once were.	In Canada, the three
> Prairie provinces join to form a single large Western province - and
> Canada is then reduced to four provinces and three territories
> (British Columbia, Ontario, the Maritimes, the Prairies, and the
> Yukon, North West and Nunavut Territories).

I think they'd amalgamate the Yukon and NWT. 

  Quebec joins on its
> own.	A widespread debate begins within the UK as to how it will
> join the new organization.  After previous decades of devolution of
> powers to the various member countries of the UK, there is much
> interest in Ireland, Wales and Scotland in joining the NAC
> independantly and doing away with the UK government all together.
> The UK government argues that joining together will give them
> greater clout, but "nationalistic" interest prevails in the end and
> Scotland, Ireland, Wales and England join the NAC independantly as
> the UK government disolves itself.

And Ireland, a newly independent Scotland, and the fiercely 
nationalistic Wales would as soon jump into deep space in a pair 
of boxers as put themselves under English again...

> Confederation Areas of Government
> 
> The NAC Government is granted powers in several areas.  It has
> control over foreign affairs, international trade, national defense,
> national banking and financial stability, the NAC Supreme Court, and
> coordinates standards organizations (such as those that govern
> weights and measurements, set educational guidelines, set health
> care guidelines, set telecommunication standards, and so on).  There
> is a separate Royal Auditors and Ombudsman organization that reports
> directly to the Monarch and exists separately of all other
> governmental agencies.  Its role is to provide a completely
> independant and impartial view of government operations at all
> levels, and enable public confidence in the government by keeping it
> honest...

That would be the Auditor General?
 
> The member "states" (ie Canada, New England, Scotland) have control
> of health care, education, public works, natural resources,
> immigration, cultural policy, etc.

I don't think resources. We've already argued they are the ultimate 
strategic resource in the future. 
 
> Language, Cultural and Religious Rights in the Confederation
> 
> (The "official" picture:)
> 
> Due to the variety of backgrounds in the constituent members of the
> Confederation, and as a means of generating confidence in Quebec and
> the Hispanic areas of the former US toward joining, the NAC adopts a
> policy of recognizing official language rights for the major
> minority groups.  While the official spoken language of the Monarchy
> and NAC Council is English, the NAC government and Supreme Court are
> required to provide all services, publications, etc and publish all
> laws, policies, decisions and so on in English, French and Spanish. 

Expensive.

> Each of the NAC member states/regions is encouraged to follow this
> lead and provide services in the three languages.
>  In practice, the areas with significant population groups in one of
>  the
> official minority languages provide services in those languages -
> while areas with unilingual population groups tend not to.   

Do you have NAC wide rights? Or are you subject to different laws and 
rights in different areas? This would be problematic I think. Esp 
given the differences between a law system based on the Napoleonic 
seigneurial system and one based on an English or US system. How do 
you resolve these differences?
 
> All founding members of the NAC remember the results of
> racial/cultural/religious conflict seen in the radioactive ruins of
> American cities - and there is a broad based support for greater
> public tolerance.  This is enshrined in the NAC Constitution, and
> the NAC government strongly enforces where necessary the provisions
> for official tolerance.  Religious and political groups advocating
> discrimination are marginalized.  

What about letting small groups form independent enclaves?
What are the provisions for leaving the NAC if you want to?

Big Question:
How does the UN figure in? How has the alterations in UN mandate 
affected its role? How do new UN rules and new UN proclamations 
affect the way the NAC is constituted? What might these be?

> The New Anglian Armed Forces
> 
> The largest branch of the NAC government, the New Anglian Armed
> Forces is composed of ...

They should not be so. They should be a tool of government, not a 
part of it. That implies they control things rather than are 
controlled. 
 
> At this point I'm going to stop - though I've more ideas, I want to
> get other people's thoughts on this going...	The armed forces is
> the bit that most directly interests us, obviously, so I'm
> interested in what everyone else thinks!

I loved (whoever's) solution: retaining member character.
You end up with cool stuff like 
The 151st Light Infantry (The King's Own Memphis Rifles). 
 
> The next "chapter" beyond that would be entitled "The NAC Off Earth"
> and would discuss how the Confederation changes as it grows into an
> interstellar organization.  The capital moves to Avalon and it grows
> with a number of colony worlds and colony provinces on jointly held
> worlds.  How does this affect the way the NAC operates?

Hmmm. Based on population, not as much as it should. I can see the 
colonies being constantly trodden under the will of the larger south 
american populace (and the on earth populace for sure) and I can see 
small rebellions as a result. 
 
> I hope those who've taken the time to actually read through all this
> have found it to be worth the effort!  I'll enjoy any and all
> comments that come of it.

Nice approach. Better than the last one (which was also a novel 
effort). Seems a bit utopian at parts and sells short the conflict 
that will occur as Canada disintegrates and makes the reassembly a 
little too pat. Seems to me we'll see civil war here if some of your 
scenario plays out. But your long term picture of the NAC isn't that 
far from my own.  

My $20.00 (since I've been working on this rant for a long time). 

Tom. 
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay		     
Voice: (613) 831-2018 x 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255

 "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot.  C++ makes
 it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg."
 -Bjarne Stroustrup
**************************************************/