In Part 1 of my Deep Dive into Trump’s threat to annex Greenland and Canada, I covered the philosophical war that defines Trump’s era (populist nationalism vs global socialism (a.k.a. globalism)), why the U.S. is dusting off the Monroe Doctrine that once motivated America to aggressively stamp out all foreign toeholds in the Western Hemisphere, and the complex reasons why annexing Greenland has become essential to the future national security of Fortress America as Trump pivots to face the globalist threat.
In Part 2, I’m going to put Canada under the microscope to understand the threat that Canada has come to represent to American national security when viewed from the Trump’s perspective, why the threat to annex Canada is thus far more real than most people think, and why a merger between Canada and the US might be the nation-building exercise that Trump needs in order to purge the global socialist belief system from the North American continent, much as the massive 19th-century mobilization to open up the Wild West to settlement in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. Civil War was the essential ingredient that allowed a bitter and broken America to heal their divided country and build a new cohesive national identity upon the ashes of the Civil War.
Are Canadians to contend now that "rain follows the plow"? Economic success - through new extended plunder throughout the hinterland?
ReplyDeleteThe primary matter is not at all form of government, "socialist" or not. It is the tools of livelihood, the makings now not of modernity but hypermodernity.
["too long" comment to continue below]
Take the example of the most overarching enviro/health threat of all, since the inception of telegraphy remaking the extent of governance the world over. It is electro-pollution that is undermining creaturely health. No government will step in to curb the atrocity. Chinese and Russian science basically mocked the basis for "safety" standards in the West, but both are basically all-in as well so as not to fall behind. At least there is a basis for dissidence and even, if only an outside, chance for some redress, when thinking is closer to the core of governance than is evident in anti/non-intellectual cultures. To slip from non- to anti- though is in its way an exacerbation. As Muskian and others' satellites and infrastructure overwhelm the biosphere, we are supposed in principle to welcome Trumpism?
Trump, Musk and others before are creatures of the deep "blob" state, too. It is unclear how much of a true threat Trump and co. are to original handlers, who can segue to making do with what he & his have become as well, just from a differing angle.
[remainder of "too long" remarks}
DeleteTeevee is - again in the West the political driven by the tech - largely what has distorted parliamentary politics. PM-centric rule has become perverse, but that is arguably a function largely as well of technomanic impossibilities to govern larger polities otherwise. Extend the e-pollution and health example - US states have jurisdiction over health (ditto provinces), but have yielded to the federally-driven insanity in the US, as have provinces in Canada all the while voluntarily going along with federal protocols. A return to lesser polities and reassertion of jurisdiction could be a salutary turn.
In the US scene, or US-cum-Canada one, is it an improvement to have political corporate and financial support openly buy its way unencumbered to powerful influence as it does? With less governance at a higher level, however the minimization is obtained, the greater the damaging role possibilities of the next level down of organization. Governance conjoined to finance and corporate ways is a definition of "fascism", but the damage can come at scale from other means of political organization and has. It's the religion of technomania that is the core issue, hypermodernity itself, much less the forms of governance.
"America would never again be thrown into crisis by hostile Arab oil-producing countries, as happened during the 1970s" - the crisis was deliberately set up, featuring the 1973 war involving Israel temporarily throwing it under the bus for geopolitical but above all financial reasons, to drastically have oil prices jacked up and cement in the USD-oil relationship, now crumbling. From the very different angle of today, it is conceivable that a large part of the motivation in the set up toward the atrocious instigation of war in the same region has been to bait Iran so another drastic oil price hike ensues, but this time to effect a segue to new currency basis altogether. CBDCs or free-wheeling crypto? Former allied to control-minded segue away from declining access to oil & gas; latter to chaos - both heavily reliant on that very enviro/health-endangering e-pollution, which is barred from discussion in hypermodernity!
How much can the US truly decouple from technomanic insanities that covidiana was the recent launch of? Action-orientation vs researched governance does not bode well in hypermodernity. De facto anyway if not de jure anytime soon, the fragmentation of the US itself with state and regional self-assertions is to be expected. What would it mean to join a fragmented "union"?
Canadians would do better to stand back and aside as much as possible.
A lot of what drives political orientation is personality. I can see how there's inclination this way. But it is tough to reconcile with some content from the author of Plunderers.
DeleteThe US is of an anti-intellectual bent. Canada, non-intellectual. The latter's assimilation into a perverse intellectual vein, is in large part good to see undone. But thinking before acting has the benefit of possibly thoughtful brakes on reckless action.