Post: #51

I don't think secession is gonna happen but at the same time, the gridlock in washington is a function of this polarization. There's something to be said of saying "everyone who thinks this way, move here, and everyone who thinks that way, move there, then draw a big-ass border" similar to dividing an apartment with tape in The Odd Couple. But gridlock has serious ramifications if left to fester.

Post: #52

(03-01-2018 01:07 PM)Stirfry Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 02:24 AM)Dragan Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 02:03 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Sooner or later our loving leaders will want to merge the US with Canada AND MEXICO, so you just wait your time - it will be one happy multicultural family.

Bro they merged us with mexico unwillingly, ie enforced diversity via illegal immigration and "they're poor and need jobs" argument from idiots.

Joining US with Canada would be the opposite of multicultural. It would preserve existing culture, whereby preparing us for a greater conflagration in the future where our culture could be wiped out.

It was only after going to Canada, as a Texan, and speaking with some hard working Western Ontorioans, that I realized we had like the exact same values. And you're going to tell me that just because historically we grew up across the border, we're not the same people...? Hm... same ancestry, same religion, same economic values, same moral values... We're the same... Even if we're not, which is not the case we're so much alike we would get along.

I'm glad that people are seriously considering this, at least as a thought experiment. Of course, it would never work.

One question that hasn't been asked is- what's in it for the Canadians? In order to willingly give up their sovereignty, what are they getting in return (aside from the intangible advantages of "being an American" whatever that means, especially to a Canadian who isn't deprived of freedom, liberty, or a decent standard of living in the first place)?

It would fulfill their fantasies of being more powerful, it would also link American and Canadian culture, which I think they would like a lot, given they feel culturally inferior.. Ever interacted with a Canadian, they make such a huge effort to emphasize what they have that is distinctly Canadian... When I travel, Canadians smugly wear Canadia patches on their stuff (because they're not american, not war-mongering, and beloved humanitarians). Our economies are also already linked and dependent on each other, so there's that. And then there's work, if they want a job in the US, or vice versa, it's a big plus for them. It would also make it a lot easier for Canadians who live on the US-Canada border to live their lives which is a huge issue for them daily. (something like 80 pc of Canadians live within 100 mi of the border). It could also help bring down their consumer goods prices (huge issue) and the price of oil (again, higher there).

They don't have to fully give up their sovereignty if we pursue some sort of equitable agreement, if we have a common borders policy and free movement. In fact, a lot of people would like that I think.

Post: #53

And why wouldn't you propose that Canada annex the United States?

And although we already have similar border policies, ours are more restrictive--and we already have freedom of movement to and from Canada/USA if you're a citizen (passport holder).

Considering the current direction of the Canadian political arena, it would be detrimental (and impossible under our current administration) to embark on such a fools errand.

Post: #54

(03-01-2018 01:29 PM)Dulceácido Wrote:  And why wouldn't you propose that Canada annex the United States?

And although we already have similar border policies, ours are more restrictive--and we already have freedom of movement to and from Canada/USA if you're a citizen (passport holder).

Considering the current direction of the Canadian political arena, it would be detrimental (and impossible under our current administration) to embark on such a fools errand.

It's more of a question of what the arrangement is. Like make them an autonomous province, 51st state, etc. Or create a north american union where they have equal status as us. Or, do you unify our militaries? Do you do something where you have a right for permanent residence, work, etc in the other place without any paperwork? By freedom of movement i mean no hassle at the border (which is the case now), and get rid of all the security on their northern border because it's an impediment to trade and commerce. Get rid of all the tarriffs between the two of us, because we depend on each other.

Trump won here, and I'm not satisfied with the direction we're going in. More wars, more spending, more globalist stuff, our allies are treating us like crap, etc. An argument about the bad political developments there, might as well be made for bad political developments here. A union would promote both countries conservative tendencies, and would be a positive for free trade and our economies. It would also lead to better foreign policy in my opinion, because the Canadians are (rightly) skeptical of military engagements in far away lands.

If canada likes diversity we have plenty of central americans for them!

Post: #55

I don't see how this would benefit the U.S. except maybe in Winter Olympic medal counts.

We already get everything out of Canada we want. Canada is like the U.S.' FWB.

Post: #56

(03-01-2018 01:16 PM)Dragan Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:07 PM)Stirfry Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 02:24 AM)Dragan Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 02:03 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Sooner or later our loving leaders will want to merge the US with Canada AND MEXICO, so you just wait your time - it will be one happy multicultural family.

Bro they merged us with mexico unwillingly, ie enforced diversity via illegal immigration and "they're poor and need jobs" argument from idiots.

Joining US with Canada would be the opposite of multicultural. It would preserve existing culture, whereby preparing us for a greater conflagration in the future where our culture could be wiped out.

It was only after going to Canada, as a Texan, and speaking with some hard working Western Ontorioans, that I realized we had like the exact same values. And you're going to tell me that just because historically we grew up across the border, we're not the same people...? Hm... same ancestry, same religion, same economic values, same moral values... We're the same... Even if we're not, which is not the case we're so much alike we would get along.

I'm glad that people are seriously considering this, at least as a thought experiment. Of course, it would never work.

One question that hasn't been asked is- what's in it for the Canadians? In order to willingly give up their sovereignty, what are they getting in return (aside from the intangible advantages of "being an American" whatever that means, especially to a Canadian who isn't deprived of freedom, liberty, or a decent standard of living in the first place)?

It would fulfill their fantasies of being more powerful, it would also link American and Canadian culture, which I think they would like a lot, given they feel culturally inferior.. Ever interacted with a Canadian, they make such a huge effort to emphasize what they have that is distinctly Canadian... When I travel, Canadians smugly wear Canadia patches on their stuff (because they're not american, not war-mongering, and beloved humanitarians). Our economies are also already linked and dependent on each other, so there's that. And then there's work, if they want a job in the US, or vice versa

The bold text above is mine.

Once again I ask, what's in it for them? Fulfilling their fantasies of power? I would think Canadian politicians, business leaders and other public figures who are in charge and could heavily influence the annexation process would see their power DECREASE by becoming subservient to a different government comprised of people they do not know and over who they hold no leverage. Not to mention that some nebulous 'feeling of power' isn't much of a reason to abandon one government in favor of another (or however this would work).

I agree that our economies are already linked, and as someone who works in academia, I see Canadians working in US universities and at the NIH all the time. So again, there's no advantage here, at least for a Canadian.

I'm imagining myself as a Canadian for a moment- I can see huge advantages to annexation for the US (natural resources being the most obvious) but absolutely none for Canadians.

Post: #57

(03-01-2018 01:49 PM)Stirfry Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:16 PM)Dragan Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:07 PM)Stirfry Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 02:24 AM)Dragan Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 02:03 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  Sooner or later our loving leaders will want to merge the US with Canada AND MEXICO, so you just wait your time - it will be one happy multicultural family.

Bro they merged us with mexico unwillingly, ie enforced diversity via illegal immigration and "they're poor and need jobs" argument from idiots.

Joining US with Canada would be the opposite of multicultural. It would preserve existing culture, whereby preparing us for a greater conflagration in the future where our culture could be wiped out.

It was only after going to Canada, as a Texan, and speaking with some hard working Western Ontorioans, that I realized we had like the exact same values. And you're going to tell me that just because historically we grew up across the border, we're not the same people...? Hm... same ancestry, same religion, same economic values, same moral values... We're the same... Even if we're not, which is not the case we're so much alike we would get along.

I'm glad that people are seriously considering this, at least as a thought experiment. Of course, it would never work.

One question that hasn't been asked is- what's in it for the Canadians? In order to willingly give up their sovereignty, what are they getting in return (aside from the intangible advantages of "being an American" whatever that means, especially to a Canadian who isn't deprived of freedom, liberty, or a decent standard of living in the first place)?

It would fulfill their fantasies of being more powerful, it would also link American and Canadian culture, which I think they would like a lot, given they feel culturally inferior.. Ever interacted with a Canadian, they make such a huge effort to emphasize what they have that is distinctly Canadian... When I travel, Canadians smugly wear Canadia patches on their stuff (because they're not american, not war-mongering, and beloved humanitarians). Our economies are also already linked and dependent on each other, so there's that. And then there's work, if they want a job in the US, or vice versa

The bold text above is mine.

Once again I ask, what's in it for them? Fulfilling their fantasies of power? I would think Canadian politicians, business leaders and other public figures who are in charge and could heavily influence the annexation process would see their power DECREASE by becoming subservient to a different government comprised of people they do not know and over who they hold no leverage. Not to mention that some nebulous 'feeling of power' isn't much of a reason to abandon one government in favor of another (or however this would work).Stronger economy and more influence globally. If we pursue and equitable arrangement, they would keep all their power, save for a common travel agreement and removal of tarrifs at the border and labor being able to move freely.

I agree that our economies are already linked, and as someone who works in academia, I see Canadians working in US universities and at the NIH all the time. So again, there's no advantage here, at least for a Canadian. They have to go through a lengthy process to get a job here, and americans are given preference. Same story the other way. Isn't it better to have an american or canadian take a job than someone from India, or whatever, who drives down wages and exploits the immigration system courtesy of their employer? You perspective on jobs may be skewed too, because the highest educated always get preference over everyone else. So they are immune to a lot of issues related to getting a job across the border.

I'm imagining myself as a Canadian for a moment- I can see huge advantages to annexation for the US (natural resources being the most obvious) but absolutely none for Canadians. Thing is their government can retain control of the resources and use them as they see fit. I've already explained the advantages in detail, so I will not repeat.

Post: #58

(03-01-2018 01:37 PM)Dragan Wrote:  It would also lead to better foreign policy in my opinion, because the Canadians are (rightly) skeptical of military engagements in far away lands.

"The Canadians are overtly skeptical of military engagements in far away lands."

There; I fixed that for you.

Post: #59

(03-01-2018 02:18 PM)Dulceácido Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 01:37 PM)Dragan Wrote:  It would also lead to better foreign policy in my opinion, because the Canadians are (rightly) skeptical of military engagements in far away lands.

"The Canadians are overtly skeptical of military engagements in far away lands."

There; I fixed that for you.

Yep.

Post: #60

(03-01-2018 01:05 PM)Dragan Wrote:  If Canadians don't want to be involved in US-sponsored wars, then well, why are they? Why do they cooperate with us in the Five Eyes alliance? They have a democracy, yet so much of they do is lockstep with what we do.

Because they have no choice. They're America's bitch. If you are part of NATO, you are a vassal state. World politics is not unlike the Cosa Nostra: you have a boss, and then you have capos, soldiers etc.

Post: #61

If I was the president of America I would probably annex the Congo or some resource rich area. Empires have really gone soft. Whatever happened to showing up unannounced, kicking peoples asses and settling the new land?

Post: #62

It has been 206 years since the last major attempt. Maybe you guys will have better luck this time.

Post: #63

(03-02-2018 06:39 AM)NightVale Wrote:  It has been 206 years since the last major attempt. Maybe you guys will have better luck this time.

Correct. And if I remember correctly, we did a little redecorating to the White House to thank you for your effort.

Post: #64

UNITED AMERICAS

Post: #65

(03-01-2018 01:02 PM)birthday cat Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 12:58 AM)Dulceácido Wrote:  First of all, you're insane.

Second of all, one can't annex a sovereign country.

Third of all, have you ever been to Canada? It's a total shit-show of freaks.

We already have that. It's called California, Oregon, and Washington.

If you want to "annex" an entire country that hasn't the population of Los Angeles, you're tripping.

They'd resist us with millions of asians/muslims, plumes of pot smoke, vibrating dildos, and pink/purple hair dyes and facial piercings.

Perhaps America could trade California, Oregon, and Washington for a lifetime supply of Crown Royal Whiskey and a few hockey pucks.

I think this is about as realistic and probably a better deal for the USA.

Thoughts?

Keep California, but throw in Makers Mark and Knob Creek, and you've got a deal.

Post: #66

(03-01-2018 01:05 PM)Dragan Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 10:05 AM)questor70 Wrote:  Sociologically speaking there is a strong urge to fractionalize in the world due to more and more political polarization.

It's only TPTB that favors more and more globalization.

That's why the EU is breaking up, for instance, and why there's always talk about the US splitting into red and blue states or even more demographic/regional divisions.

Trump-election secession movements:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2...con-valley

Obama-election secession movements:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_state..._secession

More discussion:

https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/c...ed_states/

Expect this trend towards ever more division to continue both here and abroad.

Even in Canada you have the Francophiles vs. the rest.

In US, the secession movements are viewed as a joke honestly. They are weak, and the government monitors them and takes steps to limit their reach. Ever hear a pro-secession perspective on MSM? Nope. Lot of anti-Russia propaganda is saying its the Russians orchestrating the secession movements. The Civil War is the precedent, and secession was suppressed by force. The US government is now to powerful to allow one of these movements to succeed. I imagine if one of these movements started to gain traction, it would be suppressed much like the movement in Catalonia. The globalists are fully opposed to secession, so you see a crazy mental aerobics, whereby the ask for Tibetan secession or Kosovo secession, but reject Catalonia secession, Quebec secession, or Crimean/ Eastern Ukraine annexation.

Red state blue state gap grows larger, but secession movement has only had minuscule support, and most americans worship our federal government and it's huge power. As long as states retain control of social issues, which they are, we'll remain together. As I said earlier I think the difference between Texas and California is bigger than the difference between middle America and middle Canada.

(03-01-2018 11:53 AM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  Canadians view America the same way the Baltic states view Russia: as an aggressor. And to be fair, they have a point. I don't know what the stats are but I'd be willing to bet the majority of Canadians do not want to be involved in US-sponsored wars and would rather do their own thing.

That's interesting. If we're an aggressor why are: they hosting our military bases, in NATO with us, sending combat troups to our wars, signing NAFTA with us, so fawning to us, and so eager to please us with new leadership of Trump. They take our culture as their own, that is for example, why Canadian broadcasting started to get pissed, and put quotas on TV to limit American influence, because the Canadians were sucking up our culture because they preferred it to their own. They have Canadian Football but that's american football with some slightly different rules. They are in the NHL, NBA, MLB, MLS, etc... They speak the same language: that's not the case in the baltics, where they actively discourage Russian and treat ethnic Russians as second class citizens (read up on the subject if you're interested, it is really fascinating stuff).

If Canadians don't want to be involved in US-sponsored wars, then well, why are they? Why do they cooperate with us in the Five Eyes alliance? They have a democracy, yet so much of they do is lockstep with what we do.

Canada is run by the same crowd as the US, or more precisely, the local branches of the same gang. Desmarais, Bronfmans etc. The idea that we're really separate entities is a joke that most people on both sides of the 49th Parallel buy into. The Desmarais are teh local branch of the Rockefeller-Rothschild empire. Almost all the Prime Ministers from the last half century were Desmarais' minions, the one PM with a long enough tenure who wasn't one, Harper, was a zio-globalist tool who was also under their thumb.

So you have two somewhat different styles of ruling people from two branches of Oligarchy Inc: Kalergi post-national de-europeanizing socialist taxed to the gills northside, and southside, militarized to the gills, gulag crony capitalism military-industrial-prison complex run amok tilting at the elusive windmills of War On Terror and War On Drugs.

Overall, Canada is a bit better off. I think the decline has been steeper stateside. There is a lot of crap going on up here, but you still have 8-yr old girls walking to school alone, and no real no-go zones. Not now, and not in 20 or 30 years. People on this here site have been freaking out reading about no-go zones popping up in Malmö or Molenbeek, but they've completely internalized the fact that there's been far more violent ghettos in nearly every big American city for the last half century. Canada gets higher quality immigrants overall, though their numbers in many parts are a bit too high.

I love both countries, feel at home in both places and like the fact that they're different, but really wish we could get rid of our rulers, we really could both be so much better. Therein lies the answer to this thread, because the true potential of both countries is very far from being fulfilled, there is no need for either country to look outwards and try to expand when there is so much to fix inside.

Post: #67

(03-02-2018 06:39 AM)NightVale Wrote:  It has been 206 years since the last major attempt. Maybe you guys will have better luck this time.

We took a big chunk of Mexico in 1848, and control of the Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Phillipines in 1898. You can pooh pooh those, but they are strategic assets.

Post: #68

(03-01-2018 09:12 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  If you are part of NATO, you are a vassal state. World politics is not unlike the Cosa Nostra: you have a boss, and then you have capos, soldiers etc.

Or maybe it's mutually beneficial in a dangerous world to have allies...

NATO is starting to seem necessary again thanks to Putin and his so-called "invincible" nukes gunning for Cold War 2.0.

Post: #69

Didn't America already tried to annex Canada in the early 1800s? It failed miserably. I don't know why textbooks don't teach this. It's probably one of the first American defeats in their history.

I think invading Mexico will be a more logical approach. The Southwest is already full of Mexicans and Mexican Americans anyway, so just take over their country before they invade us. Seems logical.

Post: #70

Given that Canadians seem to obsessively spend all their time condescendingly lecturing Americans about our political issues, I had assumed we'd already annexed them.

Post: #71

Canada is not a real country anyway, so it pays to take them over.

We still need the wall with Mexico though!

Post: #72

I couldn't tell if this was a serious question but it seems that it is. Something like annexing or absorbing another nation is the exact opposite of what I think our new omninationalism movement is about which is decentralization.

I know some great Canadians that I would be proud to call my fellow American brothers but I highly doubt that any of them would actually want to turn their backs on their nation.

First and foremost, something like an annexation or absorbing Canada into the Union is completely unnecessary and wouldn't serve any useful purpose. There is already an alliance, mostly free movement of people across the borders, highly integrated trade, and a similar culture and language (save for Quebec). Meaning, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Although we are very very similar in many respects, there are differences which are now glaring and undeniable. Just look at the leaders of our two nations. In one corner, we have the God-Emperor Donald Trump, an archetypal Alpha. In the other, we have sniveling, white-Obama Justine Trudeau, an archetypal Beta. The two are literally opposites in every respect but it is no accident that these two got elected around the same time. Trudeau is the final manifestation of decades upon decades of UNCONTESTED AND UNTHWARTED cultural shitliberalism, feminism, cuckery and mass emasculation. Trump is the final manifestation of CONTESTED AND FINALLY THWARTED shitliberalism, feminism, cuckery, and mass emasculation.

The origin of all of these can ultimately be traced back to the fact that the US has a few things that Canada and the rest of the Anglosphere does not. The most important being the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution (gov shall make no law abridging free of speech). Canada does not have anything like this (nor do Aus, NZ, UK). Years of the problems that I stated above went unthwarted and uncontested in Canada because anything against the problems is labeled as "hate/discriminatory" speech and can be punished by the government, sometimes very severely. I'm not saying that people have not spoken out against the problems in Canada but it never really happened in large enough numbers and at high enough levels to resist the cultural fuggernaught which lead to Trudeau.

Think about it, if we had in the US the same type of speech laws that Canada has the Trump movement would never have come to fruition. Any opposition to the fuggernaught would have been snuffed out early and ruthlessly by the Gov.

How does this relate to your original question regarding anexxation? Although we are similar, there are a few glaring cultural differences in terms of how we believe social norms should be codified into law, what relation should the government have to its people, what function should government ultimately serve. I'll state again, yes there are red-pilled Canadians that would love to have a US type of Constitution and hate SJWism as much as I do. However, we are talking about the populations rather than the individuals. They are very different and would not accept being a part of the same sovereign which is absolutely fine. I would never want to live under Canadian laws or a Canadian government. I'm sure even a right of center or even a Canadian Nationalist would want to stay Canadian just like their forefathers. They want change in their own nation rather than renunciation.

That being said, who knows. There may eventually need to be a complete reorganization of the geopolitical boundaries which would result in the creation of new nations that include present day parts of Canada and the US but we can only go down that road once we come to it.

As it stands now, no the US should not attempt or entertain any idea of annexation of any other nations as it is the complete opposite of what we need to be doing.

Post: #73

(03-04-2018 02:32 PM)Bill Brasky Wrote:  Trump is the final manifestation of CONTESTED AND FINALLY THWARTED shitliberalism, feminism, cuckery, and mass emasculation.

Wrong. I believe that Trump is only the beginning of the push back. For me personally, I believe that the divide in America will only become more extreme rather than pushing more towards an equilibrium point.

I think Trump will be seen as a moderate 100 years from now compared to what's coming.

Post: #74

(03-03-2018 01:35 PM)Pancho Wrote:  Didn't America already tried to annex Canada in the early 1800s? It failed miserably. I don't know why textbooks don't teach this. It's probably one of the first American defeats in their history.

I think invading Mexico will be a more logical approach. The Southwest is already full of Mexicans and Mexican Americans anyway, so just take over their country before they invade us. Seems logical.

Annexing Canada is clearly a silly idea, but a logical argument could be made for moving on portions of Mexico.

There's no debate that the portions of Mexico, especially those closer to the US border, over which the Mexican Federal government has lost control, are a threat to US safety.

Dangerous gangs (which are essentially de facto governments at this point) preside over these regions and engage in crime specifically targeting the USA. If Mexico as a whole has an entity engaged in such activities, it wouldn't be a stretch to call some of these actions acts of war.

I wouldn't actually advise it myself, but I couldn't argue with the justification of US incursions into portions of Mexico that are already failed states. These are a bigger threat to the US than Iraq ever was (Iraq was never a threat).

Post: #75

^I am curious to see what an anlglicized South America would look like.