Zeitgeist

Yes it’s very much about intellectual property. The Greater Toronto-Greater Golden Horseshoe running from Bowmanville to Niagara and north to Barrie and northwest to Waterloo is a series economic region that can do it all, from growing peaches to producing steel and cars and smartphones. Connect that with high speed rail to Montreal and its AI centres and cultural assets and the sky is the limit, but you’re right, with or without Quebec, Ontario is impressive. I forget about Ottawa, which is also an Ontario tech and cultural centre. It’s also on that corridor. But it can only work through gradualism and enticement. An economic union facilitates that without stoking fears of takeover. Annexation threats and economic pressure backfires on Americans.

Canadians aren’t giving up their sovereignty. Travel from Canada to the U.S. is down 70% since the 51st state talk and the country is in rapid realignment mode away from US dependence. Canada won’t be Puerto Rico. Canada has the 10th most powerful economy in the world, a proud history of military, technological, and industrial achievements. Canada has created one of the most harmonious and peaceful countries on Earth. Canadians want to chart their own course and have the strength to do so. A good article by Jim Stanford today said that in fact only 20% of the economy is export dependent, as 80% of what we produce is for Canadians. We can well afford the removal of internal barriers and a retooling of our economy away from US dependence. I agree we needed our asses kicked on defence, but the trade imbalance with the U.S. is BS as they get our energy at a discount. Canada needs to enhance the Canadian military and build the infrastructure and policy framework for a more productive economy. We should be prepared for the unreliability of the U.S., so any trade deal with the U.S. has to have assurances in it with penalties upon violation. The “national security” excuse can’t be abused to break trade agreements without clear justification. Canada is better off becoming less integrated with an unreliable partner.

It’s not just transfer payments. Its labels on products in Canada, its official language status and use of French in Parliament. It’s the numerous French language education programs and international Francophone ties. Pitting the regions of Canada against each other just creates more barriers to be removed later on, and look at what American threats are doing to those barriers. The country is unifying and harmonizing at lightening speed. It’s not in the U.S. interest to weaken the biggest market for its exports or to alienate its biggest foreign tourist nation. The best long term gain is a strong union of two strong countries that function economically and in many other ways like one giant country. Forced annexation is far too damaging and costly to manage. I can see a common market reducing as much duplication as possible over time. Ottawa may slip somewhat into irrelevance, but probably not completely, which is fine. The provinces won’t want to give up their legislatures, which as you said are strong in Canada.

That’s saved the Americans from having to manage Quebec. Basically Canada pays to maintain a French enclave in North America. You know as I do the the Americans wouldn’t prop up Quebec. It’s no surprise that in the face of American annexation threats, calls for Quebec independence from Canada have tanked. Even the Bloc has dropped it from their platform, for now at least. Canadian sovereignty works in the Americans’ favour. Bill Clinton knew this, which was why in the second referendum he said America supports a strong and united Canada. The U.S. boomed at that time. The answer I think is an American Union of Canada and the US and over time harmonize our policies. Eventually Canada might be able to drop some of its departments and bureaucracy. While we may do more adoption of U.S. policy than the reverse, I can see the Americans liking some of our approaches on agriculture and food quality or pharmaceuticals in certain ways. Canada is a work around for some limiting US policies. I don’t think Americans want to give up the prospect of importing our cheaper generic prescriptions. I think it would be a huge boon to businesses on both sides of the border not to have to worry about work visas. Security could be harmonized fairly quickly. The existing border between the two countries basically becomes a quick passport security checkpoint. There’s no need to have each country meet all of the other’s regulatory product requirements. Instead a label for consumers can indicate whether it’s US or Canadian compliant. You’re right that the provinces have strong jurisdiction in Canada, but right now our interprovincial trade barriers are being torn down. Canada will function much more like a country where you can pick up and leave from any province and set up shop in another one without hassle or qualification. Goods will move freely too. Quebec is always the snag, but that’s not going away, and people like the cultural value of Quebec. Trump should consider a common market with Canada

I agree but I think there are reasons for our complacency. Canada has always fought other countries’ wars. We’ve deferred the biggest decisions about what path to take to France then Britain then the U.S. When we tried to chart our own course we were naive about what is needed for true independence. We can’t have true domestic and foreign policy without the ability to defend ourselves and back our talk about world affairs with hard power. We can’t decouple our society from the American way of life while being dependent on the U.S. market and consuming so much American media that our major cities and cultural identity are more American than anything else, and they are. Moreover, the American way of life and living standards are pretty great. Why would we want to decouple from it? How far away do we want to be? Canada gets more distinct in the far north, in the Maritimes and Newfoundland, and most of all in Quebec, but even these places are distinctly North American. None of those unique qualities have to disappear within an American Union, but they will disappear in a society that relies too heavily on government and foreign powers and refuses to pay the price of defence. Trump has served Canada in this one very important way, which is to remind Canadians that real independence and assertion of authority requires honesty about the compromises a country must make, which means you don’t grandstand about your virtues if you’re not prepared to defend them, and you must never betray your own country by emphasizing its mistakes over its good achievements, especially in a great country like Canada. What happened to Canada’s stature under Trudeau is simply terrible and Trump is right to call it out and question whether our leadership should be taken seriously. Unless our federal government gets serious about what it takes to run the country responsibly and make the sacrifices to pay our way on defence and economic development, this kind of annexation talk will continue. I wouldn’t assume it will end with Trump and Trudeau. We can’t afford to have another showy PM who doesn’t understand economics and nationalism.

I agree with most of what you’re saying, but most Canadians don’t agree and have been raised to fear the US through our media and education. There are good reasons to fear America, but of course the game changes completely if we become Americans and stop thinking about Canada as a separate sealed off entity. When we have the same rights, freedoms and opportunities as all other Americans the only real issue is making sure that the Canadian state prioritizes its culture and policy distinctions from the rest of the U.S. Is that possible? I think it is on the most part. The firearms are the only challenge I see in not having a border, so perhaps maintaining a border as a security checkpoint would be important to Canadians. Again though, Canadians won’t give up their sovereignty anytime soon, so the answer is an American Union of the countries of Canada and the U.S., a tariff free zone of the free movement of people and goods between the two countries.

However, we must maintain the kind of Churchillian calm alacrity and wit that keeps it very clear internationally who caused this mess. Britain, Europe, South America, East Asia, and Africa are all impacted by American mercantile aggression and threats to sovereignty. Any U.S. failure to respect sovereign territories and hard-won post WW-2 alliances puts smaller countries and economies at risk of aggression from the largest powers. I wondered when this kind of crisis would happen, but I knew it would come eventually, after the Greatest Generation died off and the younger, weaker generations forgot how hard our current world order and rule of law were to come by. The checks on executive US power are being tested, but so is the loyalty of our allies and the willingness of citizens to stand up for democratic principles. Canada’s show of strength will be our ability to adjust our economy and make sacrifices for a way of life. The good news is that we are now forced to articulate those values. The world wants to know that such values exist and can be successfully defended.

Right, and Carney is also talking about complete made in Canada supply chains for Canadian auto production, which is an inefficient alternative to the current supply chain which takes advantage of centres of excellence and locally available resources. You end up with a factory on each side of the border producing the same vehicles merely to dodge tariffs. It’s just not smart business. Of course no one country, including the USA, can produce every model of vehicle in existence, so the range of affordable options to consumers decreases along with competitiveness, making cars less cutting edge, because the market is artificially controlled Soviet style. At least Carney is only proposing this as as a response to tariffs. I would suggest building 2 or 3 models of Canadian vehicles that aren’t made anywhere else, so that they can be sold both for export and domestically. They have to be special and meet the needs of most consumers, so basically a small fuel efficient vehicle, a larger family sedan, and/or a crossover family car. Make hybrid and EV versions. I wouldn’t duplicate any existing products. I’m sure China and other international players could be partners in some of this work. Maybe bringing in the full battery of Chinese autos and signing a security agreements with China is an option we need to keep on the table. Diminished production resulting from tariffs in the auto and steel and aluminum industries should be directed to important long-term infrastructure, trade, security, and national independence needs: east-west pipelines, refineries, LNG ports, high-speed rail, military expansion, northern bases and ports. There’s plenty of work for these industries to do without having to pay people to stay home or pay companies to shutter facilities. The test for Carney is whether he can prioritize the Canadian economy over his Net Zero international interests, which are radically stakeholder capitalist. We’re going to have to gear up for total independence from the US market and security arrangement while crafting a potential long-term trade pact with the US from a position of strength, understanding that the U.S. could renege at any time. Tall order but what choice is there?

A wealthier version of Canada

I would say that if Canadians could convert their Canadian dollars at par with the USD, that would be a big incentive, but don’t forget that simply converting to a state would essentially reduce our political representation within a much bigger country. It also gives Americans unassailable access to our huge resource and land assets. Diane Francis wrote about this and said that Canada should only join the U.S. if Canadians are essentially paid for it. I don’t see the Yanks doing that unless the price was relatively small. The bottom line is that Canadians don’t want to give up their sovereignty. I also don’t think they’ll give up their healthcare or gun control. Americans won’t accept a flood of new Democratic representatives into their Congress. That leaves economic union as the only acceptable option for further integration of our economies, but I’m not even sure Canadians are receptive to any other option right now than increasing our independence from the U.S. Most Canadians and probably most people around the world don’t think they can trust the U.S. to keep promises right now and no one wants to be at the mercy of unpredictable destructive forces.

I wonder if Canada’s smartest move is to let all the Chinese manufacturers in on condition of joint ownership with our parts manufacturers. Just let the Yanks tax their citizens with tariffs and pay far more money for cars that are going to lose their quality as competition dwindles due to US protectionism. If we do this we have to go big and ensure that our infrastructure allows for international exports and domestic consumption of our oil and gas. Basically we have to gear up for total independence from the U.S., including eventually militarily. It’s going to require massive investment and take time. Interestingly, Carney was talking today about a complete reorientation of Canada’s economy. I’m surprised that he’s thinking on that level. It’s middle power thinking, as though we have the wealth of a UK or France instead of a modern Roman province. I believe he’s right. Carney’s globalism can create new alliances for Canada, but there’s a risk that Canada becomes beholden to unaccountable international bodies like the UN. We see this with our membership in UNDRIP and our signing of international agreements that lock us into commitments that are potentially crippling. Carney was on the right track saying that no other country can take more away from Canada than what we can build for ourselves. That was a pretty profound statement, but is he really willing to assert Canada’s interests over all other international interests? I’m not sure. I’m still in Poilievre’s Canada First camp for that reason and because I think that the Liberals have done far too much damage over the last decade to be trusted at the helm for some time. If we do get a Liberal government, my only hope is that it’s a minority that can’t be turned into a majority with NDP or Bloc support. It would mean that essentially the Libs would have to work with the Conservatives to get anything done. That would give Carney a chance to be PM of a much more centrist government than we’ve had for a decade. I still think Poilievre has earned the chance to be PM. Any Canadian government is going to have to scrap all fluff and woke nonsense and get hyper-focused on redirecting industry towards a massive energy and transport infrastructure program that boosts employment and sets the conditions for an east-west economy oriented away from the U.S.

It’s a question for Canadians only.

Should Canada become a U.S. state, remain as it is with its current trade relations with the U.S., or join an economic union with the U.S. of two sovereign countries allowing the free movement of people and goods?

Would you rather live as a citizen in a giant United States running from Florida to the Arctic Ocean or remain in Canada as a Canadian?

The dominant narrative in Canadian politics and media over the past decade is that Canada is a settler colonial state of oppression and the current population of taxpayers owe money and resources to identity groups that are held up as victims either because they can trace their ancestry to people who at certain times in history occupied areas of Canada in mostly impermanent settlements or because they happen to have a different skin colour, despite that fact that slavery was banned in Canada from its inception and was practiced in pre-colonial times by Indigenous. This narrative picked up steam after the public outrage over the death of George Floyd in the U.S. and an unproven theory that there are mass graves of mistreated students at former residential schools, which were the only forms of free education available, provided by teachers with European cultural values. As a result of this narrative and U.S. economic aggression, Canada has become locked into a victimhood mentality wherein the role of the state is to pussyfoot around a soft, guilt-ridden public that has been warned by the pandemic Emergencies Act not to question government policies or propaganda. It means that Canada is likely to remain a socialist nanny state for the foreseeable future, with a weakened, unproductive economy ruled by the most left wing government in Canadian history. The Conservative Party of Canada will continue to be vilified. The answer provided by the current federal government to US economic threats is welfare rather than economic development through deregulation of the energy sector, the building of infrastructure, and strengthening of our military (meeting our NATO commitment). Canada should be building east-west pipelines, refineries, LNG ports, high speed rail, and arctic military bases. We should be signing trade deals. Instead we are hearing about more money for nothing government spending from a government that serves itself and maligns Canada’s history and culture. Rather than fear-mongering about threats from the U.S. against Canadian sovereignty, Canada needs to drop all DEI funding and end the politicization of its universities and K-12 education. As we seek new markets for our goods and ways to keep our industries and labour productive as tariffs damage our exports to the U.S., we need to hammer out a much broader trade deal with the U.S. that stops pretending we can justify paying for the duplication of so many departments and layers of government. A tariff free Can-Am Union must be formed that allows for the free movement of goods, people, and services between both countries, with the aim of harmonizing as many of our regulations as possible not only between provinces but with the U.S. It means that both countries can adopt the best policies from each country over time, while restricting federal voting rights to the citizens of each country for as long as the citizens of both countries want to remain distinct countries. It means that each country could retain the federal policies supported by the citizens of each country. Access to public services such as healthcare for non-citizens would require some kind of private transitional insurance until Americans in Canada and Canadians in the U.S. meet a minimum residency requirement (such as the two years required in the EU to be able to pay domestic tuition instead of international student fees). We have to get to a bigger agreement with the U.S. that gives the citizens of each country as many opportunities as possible within both countries without compromising the sovereignty and national will of the citizens of each country. Anything less will keep Canada in a holding pattern of endless renegotiations and economic threats. We need a long-term plan that over time could eliminate much duplication. At first we will see products comply with two sets of regulations which may eventually be reduced to two different standards displayed on different products, so that consumers can decide which policy-compliant products they want to buy. Hopefully over time we get to one standard, saving billions in duplication costs. Over time it is likely that only a few distinct policies will separate the two countries, probably around healthcare and firearms. Canadians should embrace the opportunity to reduce taxes and government bureaucracy while having the ability to live and work anywhere in the U.S. Keep our dollar (if you really want it), but my guess is that eventually the opportunities will speak for themselves and the government of Canada will no longer be able to justify its excessive size and barriers to new generations that are hungry for the American/Canadian Dream. How much has our government stood up for Canadian culture in recent years? Do we really need more tales of genocide and Post-National State?

There will be another major upheaval in less than two weeks when the U.S. imposes counter tariffs against multiple countries. We’re also going to see whether there are carve-outs for the North American auto sector, products that fall under USMCA, and steel and aluminum. If any one of those three are left in place, there will be big economic implications. If all three are left in place, the impacts will be immediate and lead to production shutdowns. The economic indicators will lag and we won’t know the impact of whatever is in place for April until May. At that point we’ll have had a federal election in Canada, so we’ll probably know by end of May what Canada’s policy moves are regarding all these U.S. tariffs. The stupidest move the Trump administration could do is continue the uncertainty over tariffs on a monthly basis. Not only will that destroy stocks but it will totally isolate America, as other countries realize that they can’t afford to keep waiting for the next announcement coming out of the U.S. Countries and businesses have to make major decisions long term about investment and expenses. If companies don’t have a rough idea of expected sales in a given market and expenses for labour, production, and other inputs, that can be enough to make them shut down production or slash workforces. There are major costs to moving production and finding substitute suppliers and markets. What Trump is doing puts whole economies under major stress.

I don’t think the American or Canadian peoples can be blamed for this discord. That Apple of Discord was about Trump’s personal desire as much as the Trojan War was about the gifting of Helen to Paris, or the way the shooting of Franz Ferdinand started the First World War. Whole peoples caught in the narcissistic web of one person’s sin. It will be fascinating to watch the adaptation to a world against which the US has imposed a tithe. We’re back to the Roman Empire, but it’s not clear to the world who the barbarians are. Perhaps America is now imprisoning itself because it can no longer sustain itself without the revenue and support of other countries (External Revenue Service). This one big policy shift puts Americans at the mercy of a world that may not be keen to buy American. The tariffs only work if markets believe that they are fair and reasonable. If they are tilted disfavorably against countries, those populations and governments will stop buying and supporting a perceived threat. Gunboat diplomacy is bad for business.

I’m going to disagree with you on that. I’m saying this as a Catholic. Islam has generally been a positive force in Canada in terms of respecting the family and leaving out the radical woke excesses. Civilization is a numbers game. The most successful societies are the ones that literally reproduce themselves. Radical woke lifestyles will only collapse the birth rate further, necessitating mass immigration just to maintain the population and baseline growth, and the inevitable loss is culture, or rather the civilization becomes a world civilization. Not a bad vision in some ways, except that eventually all civilizations disappear in the melting pot. So ultimately you want to preserve culture in order to preserve diversity. Society doesn’t need to become more progressive. In some ways it has to become more traditional: bigger homes and bigger families. Instead people are buying overpriced one bedroom condors because that’s all the current Canadian Dream can provide. It wasn’t always so.

Trump is just too into himself and his own ideas to listen to reason, which isn’t to say that he doesn’t have strengths and persistence. It gets exhausting just watching him. He’s just too full of anger it seems, and there’s no one to moderate him. That’s the biggest difference between him and Reagan. Reagan was affable.

Yeah well Trudeau won about a third of the votes in the last election that gave him his minority government before the Freedom Convoy. The Liberals received fewer votes than the Conservatives but got more seats. Trudeau is a divisive figure mainly because he likes to virtue signal and take ultra progressive positions that most Canadians find ridiculous and that he himself contradicts in his actual conduct. He certainly made an international stir early on because of his name and youthful looks, but he stayed far too long and expanded government overreach and spending to unprecedented levels. Trudeau is gone and now we have a smarter, stronger Liberal PM who is nevertheless a staunch globalist. Well Canada has always been more multilateral than the U.S. and more outward looking, at least partly by necessity. Though I want Poilievre and the Conservatives to win the federal election, Carney is probably a good check on Trump right now. He’s well connected and well-respected and known internationally. Trump is watching the impact of good soft power and diplomacy play out in Carney, which is a weakness for Trump. Ultimately Canada and the U.S. will return to the bargaining table, but this chapter has been a huge wake-up call for Canada to do what it should’ve been doing for the last decade. In that regard, Trump’s disruption is a ladder for Canada.

All the research puts the deficit at about $60 billion US, and that’s including the discounted oil we sell to the U.S. and buy back from Texas at a higher price as gasoline.

I hear your argument and I’ve never felt more Republican than during the Freedom Convoy. I really started resenting the Canadian government, but then I reminded myself that this was a very overbearing Liberal government that would’ve collapsed if an election was held from that time until Trump’s tariffs and 51st state rhetoric, which it turns out is an even greater threat to the Canadian truckers who rely on cross-border trade for their livelihoods. It makes much of Trump’s freedom talk during the Canadian Covid mandates look more like political posturing than real empathy for ordinary Canadian workers. Trump’s willingness to risk businesses and jobs to achieve his peculiar old-timey economic vision is recklessly selfish. It risks destroying markets for US goods and making life costlier and more complicated for Americans. It’s also troubling that Trump would be willing to hurt so many people, American or not, out of partisanship and animus towards leaders like Trudeau, who was a lousy PM overall but a leader of a significant allied country, indeed the biggest market for the goods from 37 US states. Carney hit the right notes going to France and Britain first and demanding respect for Canadian sovereignty before agreeing to sit down with Trump. No one wants to be Zelenskied.

That’s largely because the provincial Conservatives have tended to do better under federal Liberal governments. I also think Ford has the rare ability to come across as centrist and unifying. Trump’s threats have favoured incumbents, which is bad ideologically for a Republican government trying to deal with Canada.

I don’t. Canada should’ve been prepared for a leader like Trump to take as much advantage of American power as he can get away with. We’ll see whether Canada rises to the challenge. It has many historical examples of doing just that. I’m not worried about whether Canada has the ability to maintain itself as a sovereign state. It should be very wealthy and strong. The question is whether today’s Canadians will choose to make the necessary moves. The country has changed so much in just 10 years.

Well I don’t need to explain the history of Canada’s military decline. Trudeau Sr was probably the worst PM for military. His pacifist policies kept nukes off Canadian soil. He also degraded the uniforms and reduced the number of branches. The Liberals have been worse on military than the Conservatives. They’re the party of cancellations (helicopters, aircraft, airborne…).