Harper Not Just Americanizing, But Abolishing Canada

Posted on Thursday, August 31 at 09:00 by sthompson
Harper, of course, is not solely to blame. He was the merely the last Canadian Prime Minister to sign on to the plan, issuing a Leaders’ Joint Statement with the U.S. and Mexico in Cancun in March, but every successive Prime Minister since Mulroney has played his part regardless of party affiliation. The sad fact is it hasn’t seemed to matter if we’ve had a Liberal or Conservative PM—all have been just as willing as Mulroney to sing the praises of the U.S. administration, and just as willing to sign away Canadian sovereignty on the latest in a long series of dotted lines. Mulroney kicked things off by signing the original FTA, although he was acting on the advice of a Royal Commission chaired by former Liberal Minister of Finance Donald S. Macdonald. Chretien signed NAFTA without changes despite his Red Book promise to renegotiate the agreement. And Martin fulfilled his role as an “amigo” to the U.S. at the Waco Summit in 2005, signing the Security and Prosperity Partnership Initiative, the foundation for NAFTA-plus and a future North American Union. Harper has only had to pick up where they left off, although there is little doubt he has been more than willing to do so. Nor has it been any different in the U.S., where it hasn’t mattered whether it was Republicans or Democrats in power—every President since Reagan has been on board. It’s seems it’s no longer just the black cats and white cats of health care we have to worry about, it’s the black cats and white cats of deep integration. Mice in all three countries should take notice. Although our leaders deny that the deep integration “dialogue” or agreements will affect the sovereignty of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, it seems obvious that as they create new supra-national organizations to "coordinate" everything from border security to health policy it is sovereignty and democracy that will suffer. What we are seeing is the creation of an unelected mega-government that answers to no one—except perhaps the giant multinational corporations who have been pushing for this for all these years. It is their CEOs who have been on the task forces and overseen the signing of the documents that have made their dreams a reality. It is these same corporations who will be able to not only influence but practically decide public policy, when everything comes down to whether North America is “competitive” enough and whether goods and services are being allowed to “flow freely” across the old borders. Ironically, the very politicians signing away their sovereignty will be the ones made pretty much redundant once they are overruled by the new North American Union (NAU). In Canada we should also remember that while the EU was more or less a joining of equals, Mexico and Canada are not roughly equal in size and power to the U.S. but are rather dwarfed by the world’s only imperial power. In practical terms this means the U.S. will most certainly be setting policy for all three countries, especially since most multinational corporations involved in this process are U.S.-owned. Considering the unpopularity of the Bush administration and its policies in the U.S. itself, not to mention Canada, and around the world, erasing the borders between our countries and adopting U.S. policies at this time will likely create economic, political and military insecurity in this country rather than the security the “dialogue” promises. In the end it would also mean the loss of any unique policies and therefore identity that Canada has had, including everything from our past emphasis on multilateralism in foreign affairs to our public health care system. We will finally become America Lite, even as the U.S. itself also concedes its sovereignty and the democratic rights of its own citizens. Consider also the differing economic fortunes of Canada and the U.S. at the moment. Deep integration and union would almost certainly mean saddling ourselves with a U.S. debt that is rapidly spinning out of control thanks to factors such as the expensive war in Iraq. With Canada continuing to experience surpluses the clear loser in this case is Canada, while conversely it is obvious why the U.S. may want to hitch its wagon to ours at this point in time. Yet there is hope. The final nails have not been hammered into the coffin just yet. In Canada, progressive critics of our “free trade” agreements who have long argued that these agreements would lead to an eventual merging of North America into a border-free area and the increase of corporate power, such as the Council of Canadians, continue to raise these issues. In the U.S., even American conservatives such as Pat Buchanan are loudly denouncing the plan, largely due to xenophobic fears about merging with Mexico, but also for some of the same reasons as Canadian progressives, namely that establishing a North American Union means conceding sovereignty. The more voices that are raised against the plan, the more likely there can be real debate and a chance to stop it. Elected officials in all three countries must take it on themselves to ask questions and make these issues news, and if they won’t do it, citizens must pressure them. There is a Canadian federal election coming up after all and this would make an excellent election issue. Free trade has been an issue in at least one past election and with the rapid progress being made towards union, it should be again. In the last federal election, the NDP promised to renegotiate NAFTA, and this year new Green Party leader Elizabeth May has already promised the same thing. Perhaps they and other politicians would do better to not only commit to renegotiating NAFTA, but to refuse to sign on to any further agreements (or “dialogues”) that will herald or speed the creation of NAFTA-plus and a North American Union (NAU). Even according to the SPP website, "the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America represents a broad and ambitious agenda." It will be up to regular citizens to understand and oppose this agenda and hold their politicians to account--before it’s too late. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For more information on progress toward a North American Union (NAU), see http://www.vivelecanada.ca/staticpages/index.php/20060830133702539 Susan Thompson worked for U.S. advocacy organization MoveOn.org before founding Vive le Canada.ca, an alternative media and activist website with the goal of protecting and improving Canadian sovereignty and democracy, in 2003. She was a candidate for the NDP in the last two federal elections and has also worked as a freelance journalist for several years. [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on September 1, 2006]

Note: http://www.vivelecanada...

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. by lombar
    Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:50 pm
    The only thing Canada will get out of this 'north american union' is a piece of the USA debt and mexican wages.

  2. by Deacon
    Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:24 pm
    sorry lombar, but I must disagree with you

    Canada will also gain the following:

    the wholesale raping of her resources

    the eradication of our culture

    the targeting of Canadians as viable targets by those who currently do so to Americans

    the wasting of Canadian troops lives while in service as American Auxillaries in unjust wars

    the extrension of American law into our nation and our lives

    and so much more!!

    Damn that quisling PM

    ---
    "and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

    "The Weapon" - Rush

  3. by e.p.1
    Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:41 pm
    "The only thing Canada will get out of this 'north
    american
    union' is a piece of the USA debt and mexican wages."

    I kind of like that. Harkens back in a way to the much
    older: "It's the rich what gets the pleasure, and the poor
    what get the blame!

    And it ties to today's news that Dow is closing its
    chlorine plant (170 jobs) in Fort Saskatchewan. And
    something's closing in Sarnia. Just a bit of Bush-league
    grief-sharing.

    Deacon's right to say that the list of stuff we stand to
    lose but can't afford to, is much longer. These are
    troubling times.

    It was said that Ronald Reagan would take his troubled
    mind (when he could) and go chop firewood. Simple
    solutions are often good ones.

    For example, how great would it be if 20,000 more
    Vive-subscribers would jump into the effort to appoint the
    least obnoxious candidate to leadership of the federal
    Liberal Party?
    With $5, I got my (senior's) membership, and
    early enough that I can vote to select my riding
    delegates. It's now too late to get this privilege, but
    you *can still* speak at delegate selection meetings, and
    also still offer yourself as delegate-candidate (For which
    you must fill in and submit Form 6 before Sept. 15).

    Look where the Liberal Party has arrived controlled by the
    wealthy & privileged.
    You can change that. Yes, you! (Pointing the Uncle Sam
    finger).
    See you in Montreal!

    Vive la Reine!
    e.p.1

  4. by Wraun
    Fri Sep 01, 2006 2:17 am
    <p>the wholesale raping of her resources<br> - Already got it<br> the eradication of our culture<br> - it's happening<br> the targeting of Canadians as viable targets by those who currently do so to Americans<br> - They're doing that to<br> the wasting of Canadian troops lives while in service as American Auxillaries in unjust wars<br> - You guessed it...<br> the extrension of American law into our nation and our lives<br> - Yup<br></p><p> Not that I think the SPP is a good idea, or anything like that but even without it, we are losing our country. As far as the Liberal Party of Canada is concerned, even if they had a leader, I really don't think they're the answer. In fact, they're part of the problem. The answer is coloured green </p> <p>---<br>Canada for Canadians

  5. Fri Sep 01, 2006 7:15 am
    Excellent article Susan!

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

  6. by avatar Milton
    Fri Sep 01, 2006 2:36 pm
    Yes, good opening salvo Susan.

    If understand this correctly, this is one step closer to a cyclops one world government which will fold our money together as follows. Existing Mexican pesos and Canadian dollars are to be exchanged for US dollars at the current market rate. US dollars are to be exchanged for the Amero dollar on a one for one basis. Isn't that nice, the two colonies enter the union as inferiors.

    But wait, it gets worse. The US has stopped reporting the M3 monetary supply figures so the privately owned Federal Reserve can issue as much junk money as its still born heart desires without having the US dollar devalued because the market place is not receiving the pertinent data to base decisions on.

    But wait it gets worse because the Federal Reserve is a privately owned bank and its owners will know the M3 figures and be in a position to fleece the global market places at their leisure.

    But wait, it gets worse. Mexico and Canada will still exist as economic enclaves and their working citizens will still be paid at the devalued Mexican and Canadian dollar/peso exchange rates. In other words, we are to be locked into an unjust evaluation scheme.

    But wait, it gets worse. The roads will have chip readers intalled in them, so that the chips which will be installed in our cars can be read at certain intervals so that we can have an individually tailored use charge prepared and deducted from our bank accounts. Our bodies will be chipped so that we can be tracked by chip readers which will infest the cities like an out of control algae bloom. You won't beed to fill out a census document because the chip will contain your history.

    We do need to fight this, to hell with Rockefeller, Rothschild and the rest of their Final Solution.

    One way to stop this dead in its tracks is to expose what happened on September 11th, 2001. The new world order has its heads caught in the crooky jar and we don't decapitate them at our own peril!

    ---

    "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."
    (Albert Einstein)

  7. Fri Sep 01, 2006 6:30 pm
    Unfortunately, what researching this timeline has demonstrated amply to me is that regardless of which party becomes the ruling party and regardless of which leader of said party is in power, they will sign on to the process of integration. The reason is, of course, that with this political system, anyone who can make it that far has the support of some large corporations and their representatives, and will also be lobbied by them once in power, and it is of course those large corporations who want deep integration and even a North American Union. (The CCCE for example has been loud and lavish in its support for deep integration.) Politicians in the system as it is are still in the end beholden to their supporters and donors because otherwise they can't get or hold power (and I am speaking as someone who has run in two federal elections), and that's why you see explicit election promises by everyone from Mulroney to Chretien broken on this front. Liberals of late also tend to run left and govern right and I'm a bit cynical about what they'll actually do once they win regardless of who they are.

    It may help a little to have a Prime Minister who is more inclined to listen to the Canadian public, but in my opinion the only way we can slow or stop the progress of deep integration is to create public pressure on whoever has or takes power, and also the opposition parties, like we did re missile defence, like we did re the MAI. Our current PM and whoever becomes the next Prime Minister will have to listen if we make the potential political consequences of not listening too high. We can start by making this an issue by contacting all current MPs and asking them to raise this issue. Not to mention pestering the media (letters to the editor, requests that the media cover this story). We can also make it an election issue, questioning every single candidate about it and not letting up until they give us good answers and commitments to stop this process. That can include the Liberal leadership candidates but I personally wouldn't expect them to take a stand on this on their own without some encouragement from party members and the public. Ultimately, I feel that rather than expecting someone to come in and save us, we need to work hard to be heard by whoever is in position to do something about this, and just not let up.

    ---
    Don't want to be an American idiot / One nation controlled by the media / Information age of hysteria / It's calling out to idiot America.--Green Day

  8. Fri Sep 01, 2006 7:10 pm
    I agree, Milton, when you say that the 9/11 truth will shock people into re-examining the fascists who perpetrated it, but so many North Americans are locked into their cognitive dissonance that they sub-consciously block all 9/11 truth from their reasoning faculties and it never reaches their intellect. The fundamental changes in the ordinary citizen's psycho-social awareness that are a prerequisite for the necessary mental evolution to a better world inevitably include the rejection of several fundamental myths fed to them from birth that really prop up the predatory capitalist psychosystem and the fascism it breeds. It is a huge battle for the literally sub-conscious hearts and minds of humanity.

    ---
    Michael

  9. by e.p.1
    Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:50 am
    "Unfortunately, what researching this timeline has
    demonstrated amply to me is that regardless of which party
    becomes the ruling party and regardless of which leader of
    said party is in power, they will sign on to the process
    of integration. The reason is, of course, that with this
    political system, anyone who can make it that far has the
    support of some large corporations and their
    representatives, and will also be lobbied by them once in
    power, and it is of course those large corporations who
    want deep integration and even a North American Union.
    (The CCCE for example has been loud and lavish in its
    support for deep integration.)."

    Susan, I fully agree. "One cannot (faithfully) serve two
    masters."

    "Politicians in the system as it is are still in the end
    beholden to their supporters and donors because otherwise
    they can't get or hold power."

    Agreed. To me, there is *no* other issue even *nearly* as
    important to the commonfolk as this. And I believe that
    noone other than ourselves is going to fix this for us.

    "Liberals of late also tend to run left and govern right"

    Too true.

    "and I'm a bit cynical"

    Only a bit, huh? Lucky you, Susan.

    "about what they'll actually do once they win regardless
    of who they are."

    If the next leader is chosen by/for the corporations, as
    was Martin, I expect a Martin-like performance if they get
    to govern. So we'll get another sub-purchase fiasco, more
    "Three Amigos" (less Mexico) striding through Texas,
    sending Canadians to Afghanistan to make the world safe
    for Zionist expansion, more trade round-heeledness, and,
    and, just as you say, descent into integration. Nay:
    absorption!

    You, Susan, and thousands of other web-journalists (close
    enough?) are providing a service to the commonfolk more
    precious than diamonds: giving the commonfolk the
    unfettered and largely unvetted- and convenient and
    accessible means of communicating with the whole
    community.
    I think that that alone is a third of the battle (to
    return government control to the commonfolk) already won!
    The other two-thirds (And I admit that this is a greased
    pig) is in persuading our vast number to recognize the
    undeniability of our strength. And that we *will really*
    get the government we demand. And in the demanding, we
    will not be bound to play the cards dealt to us by/for the
    corporations; we can deal our own, 'ta.

    So my message, to clarify, is this. For best management of
    our country, we need the commonfolk in control of *all*
    the parties. So please, folks, take your choice, and take
    control! I've chosen the Liberal Party because (I think),
    taking control of it offers both the earliest- and
    biggest-bang-for-buck- opportunity.

    If what I propose doesn't work, then; reluctantly, because
    I prefer to control than oppose, I agree:

    "the only way we can slow or stop the progress of deep
    integration is to create public pressure on whoever has or
    takes power, and also the opposition parties, like we did
    re missile defence, like we did re the MAI."

    Salus; et Vive la Reine,
    e.p.1



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