The Federal Election And The U.S. Factor: Part One

Posted on Sunday, June 06 at 12:24 by Robin Mathews
This may be the first time, however, that the born-again politics of a U.S. president adds attraction for the born-again leaders of a Canadian Right party.

The strange creation of the Preston Manning, Stockwell Day, Peter MacKay, Stephen Harper Right is not unrelated to Brian Mulroney. An economic annexationist, Mulroney sang Canada into the falsely vaunted Free Trade Agreements with the U.S.A. He also DID hitch Canada to the "Desert Storm", 1990s, first U.S. war against Iraq. He did it, moreover, without U.N. approval and without debate in the Canadian House of Commons. He did it, you might say, as a U.S. agent, not as a Canadian Prime Minister. To add salt to the wound, he took Canada eagerly into that illegitimate war.

Brian Mulroney is said to have helped create the Alliance Party by ignoring the needs of the West. That is simply a load of malarky. Ernest Manning made feints and overtures at a Bible-belt, Right, U.S. Clone national party before Mulroney came near office.

John Bircher, anti-semitic, white suprematist, U.S.-loving supporters always gathered around the Alberta Social Credit Party of Ernest Manning, Preston Manning's premier father. What Brian Mulroney taught those forces was that a Canadian conservative party could front for annexation/integration with the U.S.A. (Look how Mulroney, the last Progressive Conservative prime minister DIDN'T make a public fight to save the party that founded the nation.)

The Mulroney actions constituted a political about-face. Canada?s history - until Mulroney - had been an anti-annexationist/pro-annexationist battle, sometimes in the open, sometimes underground. But the annexationist forces for most of our history were among the Liberals. The staunch Canadians were among the Conservatives. Brian Mulroney changed all that. But surely you must want to ask: "Why annexationist forces? Where did they come from?"

The explanation is simple, and unlovely. The U.S. never intended Canada to exist. With its early preaching of Manifest Destiny (God's intention that the U.S. should fill the whole continent), and its 1823 unilateral declaration called The Monroe Doctrine, the U.S. intended to take the North American continent. A lot of its supposed hatred of monarchy was a front to disconnect Great Britain from Canada, and then to take Canada over, virtually unchallenged.

Ironically, the U.S. Civil War (1861-1865) helped save Canada's bacon. In order to set up the policies and institutions needed to become a full-fledged imperial power, the U.S. North had to break the plantation, conservative, hierarchical South where wealth was based on land (not capitalist entrepreneurship). The freeing of the slaves was incidental to the Civil War. It became a propaganda tool not unlike the present U.S. claim to be fighting to bring democracy to Iraq. Abraham Lincoln didn't formally adopt his slave emancipation policy until two years into the Civil War!

The U.S. Civil War was total war, with huge casualty lists and property damage. For nearly fifteen years the U.S. was almost totally self-absorbed. In that time Canada pulled together far-sighted people and established (in 1867) the Dominion of Canada. Every Canadian student should learn (and doesn't) that not a word of congratulation was sent by any U.S. federal representative to Canada upon Confederation. The U.S. did not want Canada to exist.

It went to work immediately to un-pick Confederation, to break Canada-Great Britain ties, to grab disputed land, to make excessive demands for "rights" in Canada, and to set up pro-U.S. lobby groups on the ground in Canada.

In its growing imperial strength, almost until air power was fully developed, the one thing the U.S. couldn't best was the British navy - which, in a way, was Canada's navy, too. As long as Canada was a legal extension of Great Britain it could call on the British navy in a Canada/U.S. war. Canadian leaders knew that and hugged the British connection. U.S. leaders knew it, and they tried to break Canada's identity as a constitutional monarchy with a shared monarch who morphed from imperial head in the nineteenth century to titular leader of the Commonwealth of Nations in the twentieth. The U.S. spent the last half of the nineteenth century urging Canadians to gain "freedom" from Britain, to untie from the monarchy, to modernize - in short, to become sitting ducks for U.S. takeover.

The U.S. wanted unimpeded access to Canadian wealth. It spent the last half of the nineteenth century, too, building pro-U.S. lobby groups in Canada. They urged annexation to the U.S.A. They were persistent. They became a traditional aspect of Canadian life. Their latest manifestation, after Brian Mulroney, is the Stephen Harper/Peter MacKay party-of-the-Right vying to be the Canadian government in the present election campaign. My next column will describe the story of the continuing U.S. annexationaist lobby in Canada from Confederation to our day.

But one last note here. Even before Confederation there was a famous Annexation Movement in 1849. Government of the day in the united Canadas gave consent to what was called The Rebellion Losses Bill, a bill essentially intended to salve the wounds of the 1837 rebellions and to recognize francophone legitimacy. In addition, some tariffs were lifted that had benefitted the merchant/capitalist class. In response, the supporters of that class attacked the Governor General, Lord Elgin, and burned down the Parliament Buildings. (The Right always gives democracy a slightly different look than we are used to.)

The merchants themselves, caring first for their pocketbooks, advocated annexation to the United States as a way of frustrating a more just society in Canada. And so annexation was put on the Canadian agenda as a continuing factor by people foolish enough to believe that joining the U.S. would somehow make them rich, beautiful, superior, loved, and free. There are people who still believe it, and they?re fighting to become the government of Canada.

--------
Robin Mathews publishes on culture, politics, the arts, and Canadian Intellectual history. He lives in Vancouver with his wife, a potter. His column appears regularly on Vive le Canada.

Comments: rmathews@sfu.ca

Note: rmathews@sfu.ca

Contributed By


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:23 am
    Robin, great article, we need you to write a real Canadian history book for our schools, wouldn't it be great if the next generation really knew our history. Heck, It would be great if Canadians knew our history prior to the election June 28, it really is true that if you don't know where you came from, it makes it hard to know where you are headed! Thanks for the great article I look forward to the next.

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  2. Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:53 am
    The only word that came into my head after reading this was Shit! Sometimes I'm just too tired and beaten up to think of anything more constructive. The more our history with the US is exposed the more I understand the undercurret of animosity I've always had towards them. They've treated and continue to treat us abominably. Our PMs that enjoy that kind of perverted treatment have certainly complied. Maybe by the time part two is posted I'll have had a chance to take a breather from all the election/ceasfire/coat/fairvote/citizens assembly/answer/united for peace/amnisty international/not to mention MY LIFE.

  3. Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:03 am
    4Canada, I hear you loud and clear, I too feel overwhelmed with the negative atmosphere and also the hopelessness of what is happening to our country. The only thing that keeps me going on this issue is hope, that with all of the people who are awake and speaking out we can make a difference. I believe that the problem historically has been that Canadians have been so busy with building our country and working hard to do so, we have been very trusting of those 'politicians' and we haven't questioned their actions. We have rarely been told of the goings on in Ottawa, and from what I see most of the previous leaders and politicians hold average Canadians in contempt, they see us as too stupid to understand the world situation, so they neglect to tell us.

    I think we clearly do understand, and that today we have the ability and the need to take back our country! We have the will, we have the technology and we can do it, so don't lose hope.

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  4. Mon Jun 07, 2004 3:01 pm
    Republicans in the U.S. do not want another 30 million people to vote Democrat - so you guys can just relax! Interesting interpretation of history by the way.

  5. Mon Jun 07, 2004 3:48 pm
    OK, but they surely want unrestricted access to our vast natural resources... (which they are pretty much already getting with NAFTA etc..)

    A good book is David Orchard's "The Fight for Canada" which explains very well all the repeated attempts to gain control of Canada - I recommend everybody read it!

  6. by avatar Milton
    Mon Jun 07, 2004 3:51 pm
    I enjoy reading your articles Robin, Whelan is right you should write a book. I got the impression that you were saying that, nowadays, the Conservatives were the only party trying for deep integration with the USA. As far as I can tell from reading what the CCCE and the Liberals have had to say they are also committed to deep integration with the USA. <p>"According to Murray Dobbin, " the deep integration plan was launched in the spring of 2002 with an article for the C.D. Howe Institute written by economist Wendy Dobson, a former finance department official under Paul Martin. She presented her blueprint as a " Big Idea, " but far from being something new, imaginative, or visionary, this Big Idea was designed, said Dobson, to get the attention of the Americans, who would otherwise continue to ignore us. She wrote, 'Canada should anticipate change and initiate a Big Idea that serves the major interests of its partner, while channeling action in ways that best serve its own interests.' Dobson claimed a key component of the Big Idea should be the handing over of Canada's energy resources as a sort of initial sacrifice : 'instead of waiting to be told what's expected of us, Canadian governments and industry should prepare for this possibility in a proactive way. <p> …The plan to ensure American energy security, said Dobson, 'could also provide a model for dealing with demand pressures on other …natural resources such as water.'…Other sacrifices would include joint continental defence, aligned immigration policies, and border security. <p> Dobbin, who is a research associate with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, argues that the deep 'assimilationists' argument for giving up so much would be full access to the US market for canadian goods and services. " The form of that access would be a customs union whereby all customs regulations and tariffs would be completely harmonized, and Canada would no longer be subject to US's arbitrary trade remedy laws. Over the long term, the border would be dismantled entirely through a harmonized immigration and refugee policy. Further down the road, the assimilationists would press for adoption of the US dollar as Canada's currency. " from <a href="http://committeerepubliccanada.ca/English/Articles/MartinMinister.htm">IMF's Paul Martin becomes Prime Minister of Canada</a> <p>On Friday I got an email that ruined my whole weekend, it said that the Federal and Provincial government had signed (on May 31st ) a memorandum of understanding (MOU) which opened the border to bring in foriegn workers on a temporary or permanent basis. The thrust of the MOU was that there were not enough skilled workers in Canada to build the Tar Sands plants. What a shock, the union halls in Alberta are overflowing with people waiting to go to work, contract negotiations are going on and suddenly this MOU comes out of nowhere and takes away our sovereignty. This happens when Parliament is adjourned so I can't even write emails for Martin and his peers to ignore but King Ralph is going to get an eyeful.

  7. Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:39 pm
    Especially if Canada were brought in as a territory, rather than a state. That way, we have no rights and get no representation, and the USA gets unimpeded access to all that timber and farmland and water.

    If Bush gets another term and Harper gets a government, expect to see proposals like this getting floated between the corporate boardrooms of their backers.

  8. Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:43 pm
    <p><em>Excellent</em> article. Pinned down, to a T, what I loathe about the current Conservative party. (Despite being fiscally conservative - IE, believing in a government that doesn't bother with corporate welfare but focuses on providing vital services to its citizens - myself) Yes, Canada needs a good relationship with the US... But that doesn't mean we should try to <em>be</em> the US. We need to be Canada, and if the US doesn't like that... Well, the EU's got a faster-growing economy anyway.</p>

  9. Mon Jun 07, 2004 7:10 pm
    Lots of negativity here! I'm looking forward to a refreshing new Conservative Party majority in the HOC. It will take some time to undo the Liberal damage to the country but increasing our productivity and therefore the value of our dollar will eventually lead to a better standard of living for all Canadians. Although Mulroney did many good things, like the Free Trade Agreement, unfortunately he also tried to beat the Liberals at their own game by taxing and spending on wasteful budget items like corporate welfare and culture - things that are just a drain on the economy. The Americans are rich, so let's sell them stuff instead of being caught up in jealousy.

  10. Mon Jun 07, 2004 9:37 pm
    'Mulroney did many good things, like the free trade', not sure what your definition of good is, but it certainly doesn't fit with mine! If you really want to know what Mulroney did to and for this country, which I doubt you do, but if you do read, 'On The Take, The Mulroney Years'. Then come back here and tell us how great he art.

    There is a little joke about comparisons, There was a real crook, a mobster who died and his brother offered the priest a hundred thousand dollars if he would eulogize his brother as a saint; the priest's parish was poor and he really wanted that money, but also knew the character of the deceased, after some reflection he celebrated the funeral and said, 'Joe was a very bad man, he killed for a living, he broke all of God's laws, he was greedy and punished the weak, but compared to his brother, Joe was a saint!'

    So if you are trying to tell us that Mulroney was good and Martin is bad, I say it's all relative.

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  11. Mon Jun 07, 2004 10:04 pm
    Sometimes negativity is reality. The USA considers Canada as a 'lucky accident' that stalled the completion of the manifest destiny. But thank God Canada did exist, for the world witnessed the closest thing to a just society achieved by any country in the Americas. And anon is right, the corporate fascists in power in America don`t want a good influence coming into the union messing up their Enron style prosperity. They don`t want gay marriages, and they don`t want a morally right public health care system eating into corporate profits! Now I see why a border was made all along! The USA and the sellouts in corporate Canada want to destroy Canada, but ultimately, they won`t succeed!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  12. Tue Jun 08, 2004 12:40 am
    There is something missing in this article and it is a major one.
    Liberals have governed this country for more than 80 of the last hundred years. Almost all public corporations, instruments of fighting foreign financiers were established by Liberals.

    The Americans had a fully developed military plan to invade Canada. Mackenzie King doesn't tell us of this but every step he took was foiling it.

    The conservatives are never confident about Canada, they were always waiting for approval from London and Mulroney from Washington. The Liberals are confident, can show the finger to Churchill or Nixon or Saskatchewan farmer or BC radio listener and Quebec city hooligan all at ones.


    Mackenzie King is one person who told us everything, even his sleepless nights and stomach aches. I trust his diaries to be truth, nothing but the truth and he tells a very different story than the article above.

    At the moment the International financiers that control even the US have declared war on the Canadian Liberals. Their crime is that they brought back the debt instead of leaving it in the financiers's hands where Mulroney got it from.

  13. Tue Jun 08, 2004 3:29 am
    HI!
    I'm Mike from the evil U.S.A. E.U. Growing faster on the economic scale? please! 10% unemployment! I don't think so.
    We have more in common than you think. Stop your knee jerk reaction to anti-Americanism it's intellectually weak. Social programs are good to help people get on their feet but should not be a life style. Get government out of the way! be free for crying out loud. Taxes should be viewed as a necessary evil, for defense, judicial, roads, schools, etc. My roomate was a Canadian, when he told me about the 50% taxes he was paying ( while he was attending University )plus 18% for goods and services I was stunned. Sounds like slavery to your Government to me!
    Personally I don't care if you all like us or not ( I used to, until recent events ), or agree with our foriegn policy. The simple fact is that Canada, Europe have benefitted from the U.S. for the last century. our economy can survive with or with out you, can yours? We don't want your oil, trees, land, etc. we can do for ourselves, like we always have.
    When there is a problem in the world who do they call? the U.S.A. We give more foriegn aid than Europe, Canada COMBINED ( Capitalism, true freedom ) It's sad to see some of our closest friends stab us in the back----- Thankyou very much.
    Mike, an American.

  14. Tue Jun 08, 2004 5:15 am
    Well Mike from the U.S.A., welcome to vive and thanks for your insight, apparently you have been reading your own history books, but if you read a little history on Canada you'll see that trade used to work both ways. Once again, you represent the attitude that if we don't want your American way we are bad, stupid, foolish etc etc. We are not attacking the American people, we are attacking our own politicians that are trying to force feed us the American way, which we do not want. We do not want to serve corporations any more than a government, you are wrong when you say that we are slaves to our government. Unfortunately we have had poor representation and we admit that, we are about to make a change in this country, we are about to take back our country, our government and the Canadian Way.

    The only reason the American way is discussed and compared is because of the association our politicians have with your corporations. We don't wish to insult you, if you like your system, that is great for you; however we like the system we had prior to our politicians buying into the serve corporations first attitude. We don't mind if you don't want our softwood, our beef, our water, oil or electricity, but do us a favour and tell that to your government and perhaps they can stop force feeding us their policies. We certainly don't want your ethyl corporation's poison gas, for which they threatened to sue us if we prevented them from selling it here; that threat cost us the taxpayer mega bucks, it also will cost us in health concerns because they are allowed to use it here.

    So thanks but your insults to us don't quite matter, we are talking about our country not yours, we don't want the American way, we want the Canadian way which we prefer, and we are still free so we do have that choice. You might want to reread that American history and all the great things you've done for the world, not that we don't buy into the America is the greatest propaganda, but we just read history a little differently. Some of it is even true.

    Thanks for the post.

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.



Latest Editorials

more articles »

Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news