Greater Canuckistan

 The USA is dissolving into warring camps.

Here’s a solution. 

Some of the left-leaning bits should join Canada.

Not all of the left-leaning bits. That would demographically overwhelm. It might also leave the USA too weak: losing, for example, the entire west coast.

But there are portions of the USA that Canada has something of a claim on, historically and/or geographically; that just make more sense as part of the upper nation, and always did. And they tend to be leftist bits. 

They and their citizens would not be disadvantaged by this. Apart from sentimental ties, they would of course retain their democratic rights, and would have a louder voice in a smaller nation; with a political tilt more to their liking. Instantly they get stricter gun control, government health care, more restrictions on hate speech, all those things they want.

Their inclusion would probably not change Canadian politics much: leftist in US terms is middle-of-the-road for Canada.

The bulk of the rest of the USA might be happy too: for the remainder would tilt further right, and be freer to have things their way too. Bad news, perhaps, for California or Massachusetts. But as a whole, the Remaining States of America might not protest. 

Since the US and Canada are close allies, there should be no issues in terms of future defense or world diplomatic footprint. Since they are joined in a free trade zone, there should be no worries in terms of trade opportunities.

Here are some options:

1. Maine. Maine was historically part of French Acadia, not New England. It was British-occupied down to the Penobscot River at the end of the American War of Independence, and again at the end of the War of 1812. Each time, Britain gave it to the US. Ending plans to make it New Ireland to balance Nova Scotia as New Scotland.

But it makes more sense as part of Canada. It gives Montreal a winter port, Portland. It makes the haul from Quebec to the Maritimes a straight run, instead of an awkward dogs-leg north. The territory is geographically more useful, more integrated, and potentially more prosperous as part of Canada than as part of the USA.

2. Greater Vermont. You might have noticed that Vermont was not one of the original 13 states. They did not secede. After the revolution, it was wondering briefly whether to go with the rebels or be joined to Quebec. But, the French and Catholic nature of Quebec being perhaps too intimidating, they then cast in with the rebels.

But one obvious reason why they hesitated is that it always made more economic sense for Vermont to integrate with the St. Lawrence and Quebec. 

The geography and natural trade routes tie it more easily to Montreal than to New York; Lake Champlain flows north, to the St. Lawrence. The traditional dividing line between New France and New York was Fort Ticonderoga, near the base of the state.

It is a very left-leaning state, home to Bernie Sanders. It would probably also be politically more at home in Canada.

The geography and natural transportation routes argue for upstate New York, above Fort Ticonderoga, to move with it over to Canada. This area was purely a free gift to the new United States in the peace treaty that ended the Revolution. The Adirondack region is geologically an extension of the Canadian Shield. It further disrupts transportation south to New York City, while the rivers flow north into Quebec.

A land swap of the bottom of Vermont, below Ticonderoga, for the top of New Hampshire, also makes sense. The northern border of New Hampshire was also for some time in dispute, and there was a move in that region to join Quebec. 

This would rationalize the border, and at the same time allow a straight haul overland from Ontario to the Maritimes without passing through Quebec. This could be a valuable safety net in the future if Quebec chose to separate. Canada would not be split in two.

3. Michigan. Given the financial troubles of Detroit and Flint, the US might be happy enough to hive off Michigan, quite apart from any political alienation. It is apparently not thriving as part of the US. Give it to Canada in receivership, and things might improve.

The entire Midwest was originally part of New France, not of the British Thirteen Colonies. When Britain won the Seven Years War, it became part of Quebec. At the end of the Revolution, it was still in British hands. At the end of the War of 1812, it was again in British hands. Each time the British handed it over. But the fact that they so easily held it or took it illustrates the fact that it is naturally more accessible from Canada than from the Eastern Seaboard, from Montreal than from New York or Philadelphia. 

Taking the entire industrial Midwest might demographically overwhelm Canada, and rip the heartland out of the US, leaving it unacceptably weakened. 

Much of the southern part of the industrial Midwest is also probably not that leftist: as one gets closer to the Ohio River, as one gets closer to Kentucky.

The Ohio River flows south into the Mississippi.

 But the Great Lakes flow north through Quebec to reach the sea. Canada, following New France, was formed along these water routes, over which the couriers de bois and the fur traders travelled. They remain the natural highways of commerce, as water freight is cheaper than land freight.

Michigan, bordered by the Great Lakes on three sides, really belongs to the Canadian natural economic zone. 

4. Wisconsin. Michigan’s northern peninsula awkwardly dead-ends in Wisconsin. To complete the natural trade routes, Wisconsin probably ought to be tacked on. Another left-leaning state.

5. Minnesota. The logic of the rivers and waterways as natural transportation systems was strong enough that the American insisted on independence that the border with Canada should end in the West at the source of the Mississippi: commerce naturally flowed south, not north, below this point.

However, they got it wrong. They put the source of the Mississippi, and so the border, too far north. It should be at about 47.2 degrees north, not the 49th parallel. 

Moreover, the Red River, on Minnesota’s western border, flows north to Winnipeg, and that area was first colonized as part of Britain’s Selkirk Settlement. 

The problem with correcting this error all the way across to the Pacific, moving the border down from the 49th to the 47th parallel, is that it moves some quite conservative areas of the US over to Canada; which defeats a large part of our purpose, the peaceful separation of America’s warring tribes.

I propose a swap, like the swap of land between New Hampshire and Vermont further east. Let all of Minnesota, a resolutely left-leaning state, join Canada, and leave the rest of the border to the West as is.

Annexing Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota to Canada rationalizes land as well as water routes: now rail and road do not need to make that long lonesome arc over the north of Lake Superior to get from Toronto and Montreal to Winnipeg and points west. There is an alternative more direct route for trade across the North Peninsula and through Minnesota.

Reconnecting the natural trade routes here ought to boost prosperity for Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota as well as for the rest of Canada.

For what it is worth, incorporating Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, along with northern New York State, into Canada, repatriates the entire Canadian Shield, Canada’s most characteristic landscape, with its many hills and lakes.

6. Lesser Washington State. The Oregon Territory, comprising Oregon, Washington, and BC, was originally disputed between Britain and the US. But the main British outpost was at Vancouver, Washington, on Washington State’s southern border and the Columbia River. When the negotiatiors decided to extend the 49th parallel border to the Pacific, it disrupted the obvious trade route from the interior, the Columbia River, which runs from the BC interior to the sea at this point. The British and the Hudson’s Bay Company were forced to pick up stakes and transfer everything to what is now the new Vancouver, Vancouver, BC. Which can connect with its interior only by going over the Cascade Mountains, North America’s highest mountain range.

A thoughtless border. The natural integration of the region is so obvious that a separatist-unification movement has developed, for a “Cascadia” union of BC, Washington, and Oregon, with its own flag. 

At the same time, the rural eastern counties of Washington have been militating for separation from the extremely left-leaning coastal portion.

Solution: let Washington State west of the Columbia River join Canada. The eastern portion joins Idaho. 

For Canada, the addition of urban Washington State would give added influence to the West coast, which often feels dominated by the East. A sense of imbalance between East and West has been a problem for Canada. Washington State plus BC gives a population of 12 million, in better balance with Ontario’s 14.5 million or Quebec’s 8 million.

For Canada as a whole, taking all of these add-ons together, we get about 26 million added on to the Canadian population. Not enough to overwhelm Canada’s 37.5 million, but enough to bring Canada up to roughly the population level of the large European powers, Britain, France, Germany or Italy.

While the US remains at over 300 million.

I think there is no chance that any of this would happen. But it could solve a variety of problems.

A map of the expanded Canada, showing new land transportation corridors.