Dave Pollard's environmental philosophy, creative works, business papers and essays. In search of a better way to live and make a living, and a better understanding of how the world really works.
It
is hard to imagine that the US doesn't have a plan to annex Canada. A
nation that has no hesitation in trumping up charges against a country
half a world away when it is perceived to threaten its energy security,
and then bombing the hell out of it, killing and injuring hundreds of
thousands of civilians and utterly destroying its infrastructure and
social fabric, would not think twice about seizing control of a nation
that offers it even more (and whose animosity would severely threaten
its national interest).
There was a plan, in the years between
the two world wars, to do just that. It was declassified decades ago
and now makes rather quaint reading. But there is no question that
there is an American "contingency plan" to annex Canada if need be,
just as surely as there is one to bomb Iran as the next stage to secure
the oil on which the entire American economy utterly depends.
There
are reasons to believe that the US doesn't expect it will have to do
this. More than half of all Canadian business, by revenue, is
foreign-owned, and the vast majority of that is American. The
employment picture is probably comparable, although it's hard to
compute when franchisees of foreign companies are considered Canadian
companies. Likewise, there are no records of citizenship or residence
of land-holders in Canada, so determining how much land is in foreign
hands is impossible to determine. But it is pretty evident that the
Canadian economy is substantially foreign-owned and foreign-controlled.
If we did something to displease our American owners, they could shut
down our economy pretty effectively.
This sell-out has occurred
over decades, with both Liberal and Conservative regimes dismantling
Canadian ownership regulations consistently. Then we signed NAFTA,
effectively ceding authority to write social or environmental laws any
stronger than those of the weakest laws anywhere in the three
countries. When you can't write laws to protect your own people, you
really have no sovereignty left. The right-wing Harper minority
government has made no secret of its desire for full political and
economic integration with the US, and the reaction of the Canadian
people has been astonishingly blasé. Our economy is so dependent on the
US already that the value of the Canadian dollar relative to the US
dollar moves in lockstep with the Dow.
There is reason to
believe that this control will not be enough to placate those in the US
concerned with trying to sustain that country's unsustainable economy,
however:
The US desperately needs the oil from Canada's
bitumen sludge mines (the so-called "tar sands"), the worst ecological
disaster on the planet. These operations are currently uneconomic, and
it will take huge improvements in technology, and the energy from whole
farms of nuclear power plants and natural gas from Canada's fragile
arctic, to extract the oil from the sludge. It will also take
staggering amounts of Canadian fresh water.
Speaking of water,
the US needs Canada's Western glacial water to replace the rapidly
disappearing glacial water that provides people, industry and
recreation with most of their water in most of the Western US states.
Canada's water is also running out, except in the Arctic, but the US
shortage will be much more severe and come much sooner.
Electricity
from Canadian hydroelectric plants supplies a substantial amount of US
electrical needs. But Canadians are trying to shut down coal-fired
power plants and use hydro power to make up some of the difference.
As
global warming melts the Arctic, there will be huge pressure to plunder
the hydrocarbons in that area. It's a drop in the bucket compared to
the US thirst for oil, but the US is desperate for anything they can
fill gas tanks with. Much of this energy is under Canadian waters, but
the US has recently said it will not honour Canadian sovereignty over
these waters, and considers them "international waters". Burning this
energy will, of course, accelerate global warming.
Likewise, as
the Arctic melts, the lucrative Northwest Passage will be open for
shipping year-round. It is clearly in Canadian waters, but the US
disputes this sovereignty.
None of this bodes well for the
future of Canada-US relations, and as the US starts to run out of land,
the hunger for more land will make the situation even more volatile.
This could all come to a head if Canada were to do (or try to do) any of the following:
Restrict foreign ownership of land, resources or assets or shares of businesses in 'strategic' industries.
Increase
social or environmental regulations to the point the bitumen sludge
mining operations or Arctic development became non-viable at any price.
Restrict taking of water from Canadian waters, or sale of electricity to non-Canadians.
Proclaim sovereignty over Canadian waters.
These
are not especially grievous things for a country to do -- most
countries believe it is their right to do these things in areas of
their own jurisdiction.
But not Canada. If we were to try to do
any of these things, the US would simply say "no". They would start by
protesting, and suing us under NAFTA and other extraterritorial laws.
And if that wasn't enough they would do whatever it took to get the
restrictions on their untrammeled access to our resources, land and
waters removed. Whatever it took.
Harper
rolled over on NAFTA already, settling for a fraction (still unpaid) of
what the NAFTA courts said the US stole from us illegally. He has no
intention of doing anything to impede Canada-US integration.
But
at some point Canadians will have had enough of Harper's arrogance,
just as they did with the previous Conservative administration of
Mulroney, and turf him out of office. He is in power now only because
his right-wing party competes with four left-of-centre parties who
split the vote in our absurd first-past-the-post voting system. Most
Canadians would be glad to see the end of him, and sooner or later they
will get their way, and a party or coalition amenable to the majority
will be elected. And that new government will almost certainly do one
or more of the four things above. The US will then say "no" and do
whatever it takes to have the restrictions blocked or removed.
What
will we do then? I suspect we will do nothing. Four in ten Americans
want to annex Canada anyway, according to a recent poll. In another
poll, only 57% of British citizens would support action to defend
Canada from US annexation.
Canadians are pacifists at heart.
Most of us no longer believe the war in Afghanistan is worth
continuing, and most of us always opposed the war in Iraq. We have
among the most liberal immigration laws in the world, taking in far
more than our share of refugees and immigrants (though now, under
Harper, American war objectors are no longer accepted, but that will be
a short-lived anomaly). We acknowledge, I guess, that our natural
wealth was a fortune of birth, not something we really earned. It
belongs to the world, to all of us, and if someone wants to steal it
from us, we'll just shrug and say "too bad, it was nice while it
lasted".
Americans, believers in manifest destiny, the private
ownership of everything, might makes right, and the end justifies the
means, can't really understand this. They see it as cowardice, or
complacency, tacit approval for their takeover of everything Canadian,
and for their American worldview. They will turn the rest of Western
Canada into a deforested and toxic wasteland, and Northern Canada into
a melting, oil-slicked military stronghold. And we will let them, while
convincing ourselves that It's not really that bad, There is no other real choice, I don't
know anything about that, or There's nothing we can do about that.
That's what empires do to colonies. And that's what colonies do when they do it.
Subscribe to this blog by
MADE IN CANADA
trust your
instincts
MY GRAVITATIONAL COMMUNITY
People
who have inspired or informed me frequently over the past few months.
For my full blogroll/online reference library, see
here. [* indicates
people I connect with in real time, f2f, via IM, Skype or SL chat.]
- original research,surveys etc.
- original,well-crafted fiction
- great finds: resources,blogs,essays, artistic works
- news not found anywhere else
- category killers: aggregators that capture the best of many blogs/feeds, so they need not be read individually
- clever, concise political opinion consistent with their own views
- benchmarks,quantitative analysis
- personal stories,experiences,lessons learned
- first-hand accounts
- live reports from events
- insight:leading-edge thinking & novel perspectives
- short educational pieces
- relevant "aha" graphics
- great photos
- useful tools and checklists
- précis, summaries, reviews and other time-savers
- fun stuff: quizzes, self-evaluations, other interactive content
Blog writers
want to see more:
- constructive criticism, reaction, feedback
- 'thank you' comments, and why readers liked their post
- requests for future posts on specific subjects
- foundation articles: posts that writers can build on, on their own blogs
- reading lists/aggregations of material on specific, leading-edge subjects that writers can use as resource material
- wonderful examples of writing of a particular genre, that they can learn from
- comments that engender lively discussion
- guidance on how to write in the strange world of weblogs