Playing the Indian Card

Wednesday, December 04, 2024

Unburdened by What Has Been?

 




Discussion of the US annexing Canada is spreading, in the media and on X. 

I watch carefully the Canadian responses. What arguments does anyone have? Why is Canada independent?

The one argument I see is “we have universal health care.”

Not a good argument. In theory, if it so chose, Canada could still offer and provide universal health care for its residents as a US State.

Most often, no argument is given. Just an expletive, usually one beginning with F and ending with off.

This proves those who react this way have no argument.

As a businessman and entrepreneur, Trump has the skill of seeing a business opportunity. He sees when money has been left on the table. 

Canada was left on the table by the Statute of Westminster, and then progressively by the dropping of preferential tariffs when the UK entered the EU, the patriation of the Canadian constitution, and the influx of new immigrants. Its reason to exist was its British ties. They are gone. Britain walked away.

I think Canadians have felt this in their hearts for some time. Hence the frequent lament about an absence of Canadian identity. Justin Trudeau himself has said Canada has no identity, no reason to exist, no "mainstream." Hence the Canadian desire to join any international association going. Hence it's idolization of anything coming from abroad, its "multiculturalism."

Perhaps it would be a mercy.

I Think He's Serious

 

Someone leaked Trump's comment at his recent meeting with Trudeau, suggesting Canada become the 51st state. 

Why was this in particular leaked, and nothing else from the meeting?

Actually looks like a trial balloon.

Trump has since posted this on X:



Yeah, could be a troll. 

Bet it isn't. He's certainly forced the idea into the public discourse. Trump knows how to move the Overton window. Remember when building a border wall was a crazy idea?



Tuesday, December 03, 2024

Was Manifest Destiny Really Such a Bad Idea?





Report has leaked that, at their recent meeting in Mar-a-Lago, Justin Trudeau argued that Trump must not impose his proposed 25% tariff on Canada, “because it would wreck Canada’s economy.” To which Trump reputedly responded, “if the Canadian economy can’t survive without ripping the US off for $100 million a year (or whatever the figure was), maybe you should just become the 51st state. You could be governor. 

And everyone is taking this as a joke.

Is it?

And is it a bad idea?

Let’s consider it from Trump’s point of view. People, including me. have been assuming that his threat of 25% tariffs was just a gambit to open negotiations. But Trump has also said he wanted to finance the government with tariffs rather than income taxes. So the high tariffs fit in with his plan. Why would he sacrifice it for Canada’s sake? America first!

Trump is also concerned with legacy. He has already floated the idea of buying Greenland. High tariffs could indeed force Canada to plead for union. Trump would have more than doubled the land mass of the US, outdoing Thomas Jefferson’s Louisiana purchase, and surely earning him a place on Mount Rushmore.

(Much easier to do, by the way, with modern AI and 3-D modelling. They are already being used to carve stone decorations for building exteriors. Not the major undertaking it was for the president already there.)

Annexing Canada makes huge sense for America’s national security. It secures vast strategic resources and control of the Arctic, more urgent with global warming. Canada is incapable of securing the Arctic for itself. By joining forces, on the other hand, America becomes stronger and better able to defend our joint interests.

Canada has, after all, been a useless military ally in recent years, underspending on its defense and relying on the US taxpayer to defend it. Why should the US put up with this?

The argument against annexation is that Canada is politically more left-leaning than the US; so giving 40 million Canadians the franchise would be bad for Trump’s Republican Party. But this might not deter Trump personally, since he is not running again. Moreover, Trump has shown an ability to alter the electoral map, and appeal to new coalitions of voters. He has won over most of the working class; of the rust belt; he has drawn Hispanics--all formerly considered bedrock leftist constituencies. He seems to me to already be in progress of winning over Canadians. “Maple MAGA” is becoming a thing. Why not? The Republican party is being remade in Trump’s image. Trump’s agenda has really never been either clearly traditionally left or right.

One might worry that there would be much unrest among the local population if the Americans took over. It would have to be voluntary. But the tariffs could do a lot to convince Canucks of the need.

Why, given all this, would Trump back down on his tariffs? As a personal favour to Justin Trudeau?

Where's that laughing emoticon when I need it?

Now let’s look at it from the point of view of Canadians. Why not? What is the argument for Canada remaining independent? After all, the two countries share the same language (but for Quebec), the same culture, the same geography, the same history. Nova Scotians have at least as much in common with the people of Maine as they do with those of Quebec; or as Maine does with Louisiana. It has often been observed that British Columbians have more in common with, and more common interests with, the people of Washington or Alaska than with Newfoundlanders. Anywhere else on the globe we would probably be one country. 

The sole reason Canada became independent was loyalty to the British crown and the British connection. The British connection evaporated for all practical purposes in 1932 or so. Since then, there is only the sentimental attachment to the Royal Family. 

How much is that worth?

Canadians, if they joined the US, would not lose self-government. That is the beauty of the federal system. Canadians can continue to tend to their own Canadian affairs within the wider union. Rather, joining the US gives greater assurance of self-government. As we have seen recently, Canadian governments can go rogue and trample human rights. The Americans have a longer and culturally stronger tradition of democracy; with union, in such cases, the feds could step in. Just as Eisenhower sent in the national guard to desegregate Arkansas back in the day. Moreover, with greater ease of movement, Canadians could more easily escape a repressive local or regional government. One could always easily move to Florida, say, or some other given state whose policies suit you better. You can do this now to a more limited extent within Canada, but the choices are far fewer. Historically, Americans have always found it easier to move about than Canadians have.

Joining the US gives a greater measure of self-government in another sense too. It is a reality that who is in power in the US, and what policies they pursue, matters vitally to Canadians; arguably more than their own government. This is true for the entire Western world, but to Canada more than anyone. Nevertheless, as things stand, Canadians have no vote on who is in power in Washington, or what policies they pursue. We would surely be better off with representation.

And what are we paying for independence? Canadians have almost always made less than Americans on average, and everything costs more. Opportunities are much fewer for those hoping to rise to the top of their profession or business, without full access to the vastly larger US consumer and job market. We are paying a huge premium merely for a sentimental attachment to the British monarchy.

And if Trump imposes a 25% tariff across the board, that premium becomes dramatically greater. We already seem skidding into Third World status under current government policies; this would cast the die.

Let's see: Canadians, how about better pay, more opportunities, lower taxes, cheaper food and housing, and easy escapes from winters in Florida?

Canada is surely too large to be admitted as one state. Granted, the population is about the same as California, the biggest current state. But with its land area, Canada could soon have a much larger population. Besides, you really must recognize the distinctiveness of Quebec.

Ten states might be too generous. Five makes the most sense: BC, the Prairies, Ontario, Quebec, and the Atlantic Provinces.

The assimilation of Canada might start a trend: for many of the same arguments apply for the rest of the English-speaking world. Once, it might have made sense to have separate governments, because of distances and poor communications. Today, everyone in Australia knows everything that is going on in Canada, instantly, and everyone in the US knows and cares about everything that is going on in Britain. Separation is increasingly artificial and undesirable.

Monday, December 02, 2024

What We Lose by Losing Our Christian Faith

 

Jesus exorcises the Gerasene/Gadarene demoniac


The latest column by my left-wing friend Xerxes was unremarkable. But I found some of the reader comments on a previous column most interesting, and concerning. They illustrate the current prejudice against ethical monotheism.

“It's easier to hate a monolithic category of people (‘Christians’) than to admit that many people in the category actually believe in much of the same liberties and freedoms these anti-religious folk do.”

That is an attempt to play nice with Christianity, but it is pretty off base. Our concepts of human rights and personal freedoms come from Christianity. Christians necessarily believe in them more than non-Christians. John Locke based his philosophy of human rights on the Bible and the story of creation in Genesis; the Declaration of Independence argues that our rights come from God. Human rights and human dignity are based on the concept of free will as the divine spark in mankind.

The decay in belief in Christianity is the great threat to our liberties. 

Note how well human rights were observed in Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, Khmer Rouge Cambodia, or Nazi Germany; all anti-Christian regimes.

On paganism—condemning missionary activity in the Americas as cultural imperialism:

“All the people whom they encountered, who had a different belief system, were deemed to be pagan.  The word pagan is a word that is used to demean, belittle, and negate the value of the other.  By labelling these people as ‘pagan’ it enabled the colonizers to abuse, enslave, and slaughter these newly encountered humans.  By calling them pagan it took away their humanity.”  

 To which Xerxes responds: “I apologize. ‘Pagan’ was a shorthand way of saying ‘other,’ and I should have been more careful.”

“Pagan” is a critically meaningful term. Christians do not refer to Muslims or Jews as pagans; nor do Muslims refedr to Christians or Jews as kaffirs, the equivalent Arabic term. “Pagan” refers to the older, more primitive shamanic practices which have been supplanted by the great universalist religions.

And polytheism/shamanism is as unlike religious faith as darkness is to light, magic is to science, or madness is to sanity. Asians, still familiar with both, will immediately insist that shamanism is not a religion; Buddhism or Christianity are.

Paganism not only allows, but endorses and requires, such practices as human sacrifice, infanticide, self-mutilation, and slavery. The pagan gods are not morally good; they are at best indifferent to mankind, and usually hostile. Recall the myth of Prometheus, the concept of hubris, and the many rapes of Zeus.

In India, where there is residual paganism (although devotional Vaishnavism is now dominant, and an ethical monotheism) the British had to suppress human sacrifice by sects like the Thuggi, suttee (the immolation of widows), and the caste system. These are things that would be unthinkable under ethical monotheism; but considered a necessary religious observance by pagans.

This is why the ancient Hebrews felt they needed to exterminate the Canaanites, and forbid even dining with them. This is why the Quran says you are supposed to kill a kaffir on sight. Paganism is fundamentally immoral.

And this is why paganism quickly evaporates wherever one of the ethical monotheisms makes contact. The pagan gods are demons; monotheisms exorcise them. So people flock quickly to the new faith; it is their refuge from demons. This is why Christianity, under active repression, spread rapidly to take over the Roman Empire, and then Europe beyond. It was their reputation for successful exorcisms. This is clearly documented in the ancient manuscripts; and in the New Testament. The order of exorcists was larger in the early church than the priesthood. This was indeed Jesus’s commission to the apostles: to go about casting out demons. Which were common, clearly, in the largely pagan society of ancient Palestine. Especially in non-Jewish areas, such as among the Gerasenes.

For the same reason, Christianity spread rapidly in the Americas, with little opposition, once it arrived. It protected against the demons of the night. In South India, Saint Francis Xavier was able to personally baptize 50,000 people in ten years, despite the requirement to first be properly catechized. Today across Africa, exorcisms are common, and Christianity is sweeping the continent.

Unfortunately, with the waning of Christian commitments in North America and Europe, the demons are returning. So we are seeing a rising tide of mental illness, addictions, infanticide, child mutilation, self-mutilation, pedophilia, and suicides. 

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last….


Sunday, December 01, 2024

Interest Groups

 

I keep hearing left-wing commentators lamenting that women, or blacks, or the working class, are foolish to vote for Trump, because they are “voting against their interests.” Anna Kasparian, recently gone independent, laments during an interview that “neither party any longer represents my interests.”

This is not how a good person talks.

A good person, and a responsible citizen, does not vote for their self-interest. They vote for what they believe is best for the country as a whole. They vote for the policies that they believe are just.

It is a striking testament to our depravity that this keeps passing without comment.


The MAGA Dance

 


I see on X a post by someone mocking Trump supporters in Staten Island for dancing to the tune of “YMCA.” 

“You see how stupid Trump supporters are? They don’t realize they’re dancing to a gay song!”

Nice self-own. Why does he think Trump supporters would have any objection to dancing to a “gay song”? He thinks there is something wrong with being gay.

Trump and many of his supporters oppose transgender ideology. But any educated person knows there is no relation between being gay and being “trans”; and no common interest. In fact, their interests conflict. JD Vance has pointed out that “normal gays” are as disturbed by the trans agenda of sex change, child transitioning, and men in women’s spaces as anyone else. There is a common argument that it is often gay kids who are put through the puberty blockers and sex change surgeries—instead of allowing them to be gay.

The commentator also does not realize—and pundits recently all seem to make the same mistake—that the Staen Island crowd is not actually dancing to “YMCA.” They are dancing to that tune; but it became the Trump anthem because in 2020, gay musician Ricky Rebel put out a viral version with new lyrics. “YMCA” was replaced with “MAGA.” 

Young man
Walk away from the hate
We're all human
And we don't segregate

Just like women
Help make America great
We are all
In this
Together

Our colours
Are red, white and blue
And they stand for
Every wo-one of you

And together
Here's what we're gonna do
We're gonna make
America great

Everybody sing

M a g a
M a g a-ay

It is this that the crowds are dancing to. Some in the Staten Island video were actually signing the letters M-A-G-A on the chorus.

The left is kept in the game by “low-information” voters, who never stray beyond the legacy media for their views. This is an echo chamber, allowing them to grow so sure of themselves that they do not even check their assumptions with so much as an online search.