(2) Why didn't the Canadians want to kick English butt as happened further south in 1776? Due to the French again?
There were a variety of factors but fleeing loyalists were only part of the picture. The following quotes are from
Defining Moments and Recurring Myths: Comparing Canadians and Americans after the American Revolution ,
By: Grabb, Edward, Curtis, James, Baer, Douglas,
Canadian Review of Sociology & Anthropology , 00084948, Nov2000, Vol. 37, Issue 4
“The Revolutionary leader, John Adams, estimated that only about a third of the population truly supported the break with Britain, with another third largely indifferent and the remaining third opposed (Shenkman, 1988: 84; Hanna, 1902, Vol. I: 84). Analyses by historians place the proportion somewhat lower, at between 20 and 30 per cent, or about 500,000 people (e.g., Condon, 1984: ix, 20). In either instance, the vast majority of those who opposed the war with Britain appear to have done so passively or tacitly, since estimates indicate that no more than 100,000 moved elsewhere (Smith, 1968; Wood, 1992: 176; Thompson and Randall, 1994: 15; Osborne and Swainson, 1988: 25).â€
However not all of these folks remained in Canada
“It is also significant that, of the roughly 100,000 Americans who did leave during the Revolutionary era, more than half, or perhaps 60,000, abandoned North America altogether, many of them returning to Britain, and others moving to Bermuda, the West Indies and elsewhere (Condon, 1984: 1; Stuart, 1988: 23; Noel, 1990: 9; Thompson and Randall, 1994: 15; Bell and Tepperman, 1979: 45; Senior and Brown, 1987; Upton, 1971: 43). This contingent may have included the most steadfastly loyal British subjects of all the emigres. Although speculative, this hypothesis seems plausible if we consider that the Loyalist elite leaders and top bureaucratic officials, most of whom would have been fervent proponents of British ideas and interests, were heavily represented among those who chose not to go to Canada (Bell and Tepperman, 1979: 53; Craig, 1968: 93; Upton, 1971: 44).†(Bermuda sounds not too bad today
)
The author indicates that another argument has been that Canadians were provided with incentives to remain loyal.
“One basis for Lipset's argument that Canada has always been a more statist society than the United States concerns the British provision of economic assistance to some Canadian colonials, especially during the period spanning the Revolution and the first few decades of the 19th century. British officials at this time did offer forms of aid to Loyalists, military veterans and others, especially in frontier areas. As noted previously, these included opportunities to acquire their own land at little or no cost, as well as free tools, weapons and other supplies to help in the initial phases of settlement (Errington, 1994: 22; Noel, 1990: 34; Duncan, 1976: 51-52; also Harris and Warkentin, 1974: 113-16, 166; Craig, 1963: 7-8, 52).â€
However, the author indicates that these giveaways were provided to the elite in society and many missed out.
The other issue is geography, the 13 colonies had an integrated economy and more cooperative arrangements.
(3) Why didn't Canada want to become a part of the USA when the North American populace proved that it had the heart/brain/stomach to exist without the English/European backbone?
This also has as much to do with the fact that the Crown changed many of its policies after the Revolutionary War. (See the land give-aways etc.)
I don't get it. It would be just a symbolic recognition, and it is obvious to me that Quebec "distinctiveness" would be subordinated to the charter of rights. Legally, I really don't think things would change relative to the way they are now. Different but equal, man, that's all!