We are young digital natives reaching out across seemingly impenetrable national, social, political, ethnic, and sectarian barriers, employing the freedom created by media platforms to demand and create our own civil discourse.

The North American Union…

November 6th, 2007Sol (Morocco/UK)

I don’t know how much anyone here already knows about this. Perhaps the information I received was somewhat out dated, but it is alleged, that for some time now, the US government, under Bush, have been trying to implement a mandate that will ultimately ride the US of its constitution, opening the boarder with Canada and Mexico (i.e.: the same model as the European Union.) This, it is alleged, will result in one open boarder state amongst these 3 nations, as well as introducing an NAU currency, named the Amero. Surely this puts at risk the American constitution? Why have such stringent US boarder regulations if you plan on erasing the boarders anyway? And why do very few people seem to know anything substantial about this? I’ve been hearing some quit amazing allegations about this current alliance, things that i’m not sure are either true, or fall into the conspiracy theorist realm. Perhaps someone could shed some light on this new proposed Union?

16 Responses to “The North American Union…”

  1. There’s been talk of a free trade zone, a common market. Conspiracy theorists have gone overboard. The backlash was instrumental in getting the border fence funded.

  2. Before 9/11 as a Canadian I could get into the US with just my drivers license… well you could do that even now but has to deal with too much bullshit. We have the NAFTA that already opened up the way for commerce… NAFTA also applies to Mexico. Military wise… NORAD controls both US and Canaidan skies so… Only thing we lack is a common currency and a name…

  3. In and of itself, I am unsure as to how a North American Union would practically effect each of the countries involved. And that is likely due to the paucity of information made readily and openly available by the mainstream media. Is it to be an economic union? a political union? Would this mean that workers would have equal rights in each of the countries? Would it result in an improvement in the standard of living in Mexico? Or would it just provide an easier, more lenient environment in which mega corporations are able to spread themselves, and increase and further the exploitation of its workers? Would it be possible for the Constitution to be upheld? What about environmental issues and laws, would these things be standardised?

    I do also think we have to at least be open to the possibility that the North American Union is a step towards a larger goal. If only so we can be prepared to defend our rights if the occassion arises. We have to be aware of the facts that the American government, and that of most places for that matter, do not do things for the good of their people, but for the good of their pockets and unchallengable power. Simply labelling the questioning of such a possibility as ‘Conspiracy’ plays into the hands of these powerful, right into their desire for the unquestionale blind support of its people.

    What I find most worrying about this union, is that the people of each of these ‘democratic’ countries have not been consulted or even informed on an issue that would potentially effect their lives directly.

  4. Yeah that’s never going to happen. The US is scared of Mexican immigrants and Canadian terrorists, they’re going to keep their borders as tight as the can.

  5. What I find most worrying about this union, is that the people of each of these ‘democratic’ countries have not been consulted or even informed on an issue that would potentially effect their lives directly.

    You don’t consult the people about conspiracy theories o.O

    And Nadia… SIGH!!!

  6. Jina, I think you need to do a little more research before you dismiss things.

    Nadia, If this is to be soley an economic union, these issues will be little effected, while corporate interests would be primarily cared for.

  7. Oh we have trade agreements that are aiming for that kind of thing, I got the impression that the original poster is also talking about one border around North America which would mean harmonizing our immigration and security policies, and all the crazy minutemen on the borders would go home, which is pretty unlikely. Freedom of trade and the free market and free movement of people are always very separate, yes.

  8. Well I think that is the problem with this ‘union’, there is uncertainty about it because we have not been provided enough information. We know that something is going on, but we do not know the extent of it, nor do we know America’s ultimate intentions in the creation of such a union.

    I just can’t comfortably accept or support anything that Bush says or does, and I would question the morality and legitimacy of anyone who could. Bush and his administration hav caused too much damage and have not been held accountable for any of their actions. Bush only has a year left in office, and he is certainly not going to go out quietly or peacefully.

  9. I haven’t heard anything about this though…and I would be very surprised to so I’m not sure where anybody’s getting their info from.

  10. Actually I think this North American Union is actually a good thing. For starters, the Canadian and Mexican provinces/states, when added to the House and Senate will give the sane states a majority in Congress, thereby neutralizing the hawkish, ultra-religious southern US states (Texas in particular) and the stupid policies they’re trying to implement. Second, the economies of Canada and Mexico are so dependent on the Americans buying their products already that this union is merely formalizing the status quo for the last 10+ years. Remember, the idea of NAFTA started under Bush 41, and got a huge boost from Clinton without which it would never had lasted. And finally, I think this would be an ideal opportunity for the US to invest in Mexico. I think that improving the standard of living in Mexico to levels comparable to the US should be a top American priority. The immigration debate in the US is showing an ugly side of America, and helping Mexico is definitely the best solution for all parties.

  11. Also, despite my opinions about what the policy should be, I am not sure exactly how fast this integration process is proceeding. I expect changes to occur slowly and that only in maybe 10-15 years will we start thinking of how to formalize things.

  12. Well I agree that potentially great things could come out of something like this, especially for Mexico. But the question is why is everything so hush hush? It just makes me question their real incentives.

  13. its hush hush tamara because any integration DEVASTATES the standard of living of low skilled american workers. the minimum wage right now is about 6$/hour depending on which state you live in. in 15 years it could be(considering inflation) 3$/hour.

  14. I’m still really confused about why you think this is happening. This is something that people talk about in theory in first year poli sci classes, it’s like Quebec sovereignty, it’s never going to happen.

  15. well, its the same people behind the Treaty of Maastricht, the African Union and the yet to be created Asian Union.. its always the same few people behind the scenes.. maybe they were right about a new world order.. maybe this does sound like first yr pol IR, but u cant help but think that something bigger might be going on.. something that we have yet to grasp.. who knws..

  16. There is in fact a PLAN to merge Canada and the EU. I have proof that the Supreme Court of Canada “harmonized” the Constitution of Canada illegally for attachment to the European Union system, in the Reference re the Secession of Quebec. They infused the “Copenhagen Criteria” of 1993 into the Canadian Constitution, pretending that these “principles” had always been there, but in fact they were invented by the EU as its ‘admission criteria’ for new states. The Supreme Court of Canada in 1998 was largely a Mulroney (NAFTA) Court, which is only to sneeze at the fact that the rest of the judges were Trudeau and Chretien appointees, and ALL of Trudeau, Chretien and Mulroney are FORMER EMPLOYEES of one Paul Desmarais, Sr., a founding member of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, which is sponsoring the CFR blueprint to merge the three countries under one continental government. The blueprint, entitled “Building a North American Community” is signed by a number of individuals, including Pierre-Marc Johnson, a former so-called ’separatist’ premier of Quebec. The separatists supposedly want Quebec to be an independent state with MORE powers than it now has as a province of Canada. However, under North American Union, not only will the central government of Canada lose all its imperial sovereign powers, the provinces will also lose powers as they are refederated under the new continental Parliament that is being dry-run out of offices here in Montreal. Obviously, they chose Montreal because if it was on US soil and Americans got wind of it, they’re smarter than Canadians, they’d bulldoze it down and charge its operators with treason.

    Read my ‘Statement of Purpose’ :

    http://habeascorpuscanada.webng.com/

    Adding insult to the injury of losing one’s country to treason, we have no concept here in Quebec of individual rights. No freedom of political opinion. A couple of hothead French cops who thought they were having a good laugh, sent me in an ambulance to the looney bin last month because my landlord, apparently, (and by that I mean there’s someone behind him) doesn’t like my legal and political opinions:

    http://crazyforcanada.blogspot.com/2007/11/three-weeks-in-looney-bin-for-political.html

    Basically, if they are spreading the EU to Canada, you can be absolutely sure they plan to spread it to the US and Mexico. And Canada, via the planned breakup (Secession of Quebec), is the bridge across the ocean to plant the EU on this continent. Desmarais operatives who are detaining my government pretended to pass the “Clarity Act” which is an end-run around the Constitution: it supposedly enacts that a question in a Quebec referendum to secede has to be “clear”; but what it does is enact a power to secede by ASSUMPTION that secession is legal, when it isn’t. The Constitution of Canada in 1865 was specifically designed to avoid secession, Canada was intended to be ONE country for the long-term, and a figure of a thousand years was repeatedly mentioned in the Debates on Confederation. The Supreme Court judges know that all this material is in there, they know that the Constitution cannot be broken by secession and that it’s illegal, they just lied about it all to get the job done.

    Wake up, everybody, North American Union IS happening.

Feel free to take part in our discussions and debates. Please be respectful and aware that what you say is only your opinion and may not agree with other points of views. Absolutely no hate speech or defamation will be tolerated. Be smart and comment smart. Read our comment policy to find out how not to annoy us.