Are We Ready To Be Citizens Of NAFTA?

Posted on Wednesday, March 23 at 10:10 by Perturbed
Cultivating a notion of "citizenship" with respect to NAFTA (and any other continental institutions that may appear on the horizon) is essential to ensuring the success of further economic integration. "Citizenship" in its broadest sense includes not only the right to equal treatment before the law, but to more positive political and social entitlements such as the right to vote and stand for public office, as well as access to publicly funded social services. We most commonly associate it with swearing-in ceremonies and passports, but its most substantive purpose is to give people a voice in the affairs of the institutions that affect their lives -- which, as NAFTA demonstrates, are becoming increasingly continental in character. One need only look to the experience of the European Union to understand the importance of citizenship in continental integration. The 1980s were marked by significant strides to deepen economic integration -- including the free movement of goods, capital and economically active citizens -- that culminated in a single European market in 1992. But it became clear in the 1990s that the channels of political participation were not keeping pace. As a result, the Maastricht Treaty allowed EU worker-citizens to vote in and stand for local elections in any member nation in which they reside, irrespective of their nationality. This helped transform a "businessmens' Europe" into a "people's Europe," giving the European common market added legitimacy. The recent draft treaty establishing a constitution for Europe goes even further by enshrining the notion of citizen equality and involving national parliaments in the legislative process of the EU. It also includes concrete provisions for engaging European civil society. But lessons from Europe can only go so far in a North American context. First, it must be remembered that Europe's integration project was initially fuelled by the political desire to prevent another major European war. NAFTA, by contrast, was a product of business and economic forces, and its institutional footprint has always been small. www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/editorial/story.html?id=808429f9-1bf1-4a80-a9fa-c689660c4e4e&page=1 [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on March 23, 2005]

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:28 pm
    In summary. Mexico, Canada and the U.S will join under one currency. It will be similiar to the European Union. Only one difference is Mexico will be asked to adopt the American currency, rather then create a new currency all together like the Euro. It's the U.S arrogant approach. No compromising is in the plan. It will be the U.S way (U.S favour) or the highway.

    Will we Canadian's who believe in a independent Canada win this fight? I'm starting to think it's naive to think we will.

    I'm already saving my air miles and money for my first trip to where my roots began (Norway). Stay there until the right wing poison reaches that country as well.

    Kevin

  2. Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:52 pm
    This article assumes that Canadians have the same political, moral social and ethical values as the US.
    It is time to get out of NAFTA and stop further intigration. On the other hand, I think we should be developing closer ties and develop trade with countries other then the US and follow our own path.
    Please move Nafta(American Policy sympathizers)to the USA asap

  3. Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:10 pm
    Do you have citizenship Kevin? Norway is great right now but I wouldn't let Canwest scare you....people are starting to wake up to how Canada works.....Canadians won't accept this without a major fight.

    ---
    The midget, Bush, and that Rumsfield deserve only to be beaten with shoes by freedom loving people everywhere.

    - Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, The Iraqi Informat

  4. Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:12 pm
    Perturbed,

    I don't hold citizenship, but recently found out my mothers dad was born in Norway. His parents immigrated here not long after he was born. My grandpa isn't alive today though, but his family is still in Norway. I'm gonna meet them sometime in the future.

    Kevin

  5. Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:15 pm
    I also found out that on my grandmas side of the family, she has native roots. Natives that were from Canada before we white people took over. I have strong roots in Europe and Canada :-)

    Kevin

  6. Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:50 pm
    No need to give up now! Let`s fight! General strike!!! I`m glad someone else here also agreed that it`s needed! I couldn`t live with myself if we just accepted what we`re told is inevitable. Resistance is NOT futile!! We`ve been resisting for 200 years! Let`s not shame ourselves and our ancestors!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  7. Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:38 am
    OK, but setting aside the rather heinous assumption in the article that continued integration is a great idea, the author is making an important point here: a major problem with integration as it is currently proposed is that it doesn't give Canadians political power within the U.S. equal to the unique ability to set our own policy we are giving up. We are not being taken over and assimilated and integrated completely into the U.S., not becoming the 51st state, because by and large Canadians would vote Democrat and the Bush govt obviously doesn't want that. Therefore we have no democratic way to set policy in the U.S. even though we are being asked to harmonize and adhere to it. If integration is inevitable, and I still refuse to believe it is, wouldn't adding in some democratic power for Canadians within the new inetgrated structure help offset some of the problems of integration and give us some tiny control over policy and destiny, even if the US population is much much bigger? The most obvious problem that presents itself to me when considering that is that U.S. and Canadian definitions of "democracy" are not the same, and we'd likely be forced to accept their version far more than they would have to accept ours. And I do believe that it makes more sense, and will work far better, to keep the existing democratic structure we have here in Canada rather than settling for some half-democratic/half-corporate NAFTA mishmash. Still, isn't this an important point to raise in the debate on this issue?

    ---
    Now call it extreme if you like, but I propose we hit it hard, and we hit it fast, with a major, and I mean major, leaflet campaign.--Rimmer, Red Dwarf

  8. Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:31 am
    Canadians may vote for democrats in the states, but if you have been following the american political scene, they are as corrupt as the republicans and have no vision whatsoever. If they did, Kerry would have won.It is all an old boys club as is much of Canadian politics. The only difference is that politicans in Canada tend to regard polls so that they can retain power, while americans try to manipulate public opinion,via sound bites.

    ---
    rhondda

  9. Thu Mar 24, 2005 2:07 am
    Great point Susan.

    If I recall correctly, there was once a discussion on Vive about how to join the U.S. Apparently, the country that wants to join must vote in referendum, and get a two-thirds majority. That wouldn't happen in Canada, which is why the U.S. tends to simply rule from the outside by manipulating politicians as it has over the years. No one would vote to join them anymore.

    As long as Canada maintains paper ballots, and our own democratic system, there's always the opportunity to change course--no matter what anyone says.

    What angered about Welsh is her dismissal of nationalism as a tool, and her eagerness to harmonize standards.

    ---
    The midget, Bush, and that Rumsfield deserve only to be beaten with shoes by freedom loving people everywhere.

    - Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, The Iraqi Informat

  10. Thu Mar 24, 2005 7:49 pm
    I see what you`re saying, Susan, but the REAL point here is that the majority of Canadians don`t want to integrate any further in any way! I also think that with the power structure in Washington being the way it is, we as Canadians, or, nouveau-Americans, will have less power over our lives! I believe our Charter of Rights is a much better protector of our rights and freedoms than the US constitution. I also don`t want that Hitler wish list, the Patriot Act, to have even more influence over Canada! No, every time we give them something, we get shit on in the end. All this being done against our will, I say, resistance is the best measure! Appeasement has always shown to weaken Canada`s position!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  11. Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:09 pm
    <p>Dave,</p> <blockquote>I believe our Charter of Rights is a much better protector of our rights and freedoms than the US constitution.</blockquote> <p>I read through the <a href="http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/">Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</a>, and was wondering why you believe it to be more effective there than the <a href="http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm">Constitution</a> and <a href="http://www.constitution.org/billofr_.htm">Bill of Rights</a> are here. Obviously there are features in each document that were specifically tailored to the specific national circumstance (e.g. language rights in 1982 Canada, arms rights in 1791 USA), but to me it looks like the guarantees that both documents hold in common (e.g. freedoms of religion, speech, press, peaceful assembly, life, liberty, &c.) outweigh those that are specific to only one of the documents.</p>

  12. Fri Mar 25, 2005 12:09 am
    Be careful Brother Jonathon...these people don't want to hear a viewpoint different than their own here...



view comments in forum


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




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