mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn bayles
Ellis to Obama: More Stars In Our Flag!

Nobody can accuse Business Insider political editor John Ellis of thinking small.  His latest plan for Barack Obama: merge the US and Canada.

Via Meadia supports this concept 100% as have all red blooded Americans since 1776.  As Ellis lists them, the advantages are irresistible.

What would a United States of North America (or the United States of America and Canada) accomplish?  Future energy needs: met.  Food supply: 100-year horizon. Brainpower upgrade (for both countries): major. Improved education institutional base: instantly. Financial system stability: increased. Health care coverage: done (from President Obama’s point of view). National security upgrade (for both countries): significant.  Larger territorial presence: obviously. More vigorous trading partnership: on day one. The list goes on (and on).

Downside: Canadian Senators!  Hey! Into every life a little rain must fall.  Plus, we’ll have to regard Canadians as our equals, which is of course preposterous, but again, rain is part of the weather. And the Quebecois? Irritating, I agree. But so what?  It’s all small beer.  In 30 years, everyone will be American anyway. It’s more fun.

Actually, it’s even more attractive than Ellis says.  We could do this without the French: they could join the EU.

Ellis stands in a long line of great American thinkers; from Washington to Teddy Roosevelt getting Canada into the Union was part of the American dream.  Lincoln’s secretary of state figured that an invasion of Canada would head off the Civil War.  (Canada for the North, Cuba for the South: we would conquer the hemisphere arm in arm)

The only trouble is that the Canadians keep rejecting the deal.  Maybe if we threw in a couple of NFL franchises?

Features Icon
show comments
  • If we accepted the Canadians they’d probably add enough leftist votes to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Not good.

  • Luke Lea

    Canada may not be ready for a Mexican invasion. Their immigration policies have been much more sensible than ours.

  • Jordan

    Did anyone mention all of the additional winter Olympic medals we’d rack up?

  • WigWag

    I would take Stephen Harper as head of state over Obama any day of the week.

  • Jacksonian Libertarian

    I don’t like the idea, the government monopoly is too big already, adding a bloated Canadian government to a bloated American government is really a multiplication, as you get bloat squared.

  • kohl haas

    Only part of it. How about we re-draw the boundary up the Mississippi to Hudson’s Bay? That way they get rid of the French and most of their liberals and we get rid of most of our liberals and union members. Great idea. We have to think about what to do with our respective Left Coasts, however.

  • I like this idea a lot but would add one suggestion. When it comes to pass can we move the capitol to Ottawa and do the ecologically responsible thing by turning D.C. back into a swamp.

  • Scott

    We need to decentralize governmental power — push more decision making and responsibility to the states, municipalities, and individuals — not create an even bigger federal monstrosity.

    I’m more sympathetic to the Russian professor who has been predicting for a decade that the U.S. will eventually break up into 5 or 6 different sovereigns than I am to annexing Canada.

  • Howard

    Presumably this is satirical for surely no reasonably sane person would be serious about such a proposal. If not, Ellis stands in a long line of shallow American thinkers who seem to believe Canadians are just Americans with toques, Tim Horton’s, and who say “eh?” However, if you’d like to join us, we might be able to swing a deal for Hawaii, New England, and Florida (mostly Canadians anyway).

  • bob sykes

    Canada practices press censorship and speech censorship. It is just this side of being a fascist police state. Rather than merger, we should build a wall.

  • Jeff77450

    An excellent suggestion. Among my list of historical regrets is that Canada and the U.S. are not one nation. You look at the map and it just makes sense. (I think that Australia and New Zealand should be one nation).

    I’m fond of my Canadian cousins and I understand their resistance to the idea, but the pros far out-weigh the cons. “The United States of Camerica.” Too bad that it’ll never happen

  • Kris

    The U. S. of Eh?

  • Lexington Green

    Terrible idea. We are both better off being different countries. We need the opportunities for regulatory arbitrage. And we need more decentralization, not a bigger federal leviathan. Quebec should pull out of Canada, but stay in NAFTA, NORAD and NATO.

  • Jack

    If the U.S. wants to take Canada, it will have to do so by force. Canada has no interest in joining the U.S. and, indeed, there are a lot of excellent reasons why Canada should not join the U.S.:

    1. Enormous U.S. debt load [public debt is much less of a problem in Canada]

    2. American bureaucratic inertia [Canada’s bureaucracy is smaller and less inert than America’s]

    3. Insolvency of U.S. banks [Bank of America and Citigroup are zombie banks and the American banking system as a whole is among the most unsound in the world; the World Economic Forum consistently ranks Canada as having the world’s most sound banking system]

    4. Rule of Law [Canada does not have elected judges and prosecutors and, as such, the Canadian legal system tends to be less influenced by politics]

    5. Canadian History [Canada actually has a rich history and cherished traditions [of which Americans know nothing and care less] and Canadians will be loathe to give this up

    An American takeover of Canada will be little more than a major shakedown. It will be like the Piedmontese takeover of southern Italy in the 19th century in which the Neapolitan treasury was looted, leading to the massive emigration from the Mezzogiorno.

  • nb

    We’d be lucky if we could adopt most of what’s emerging as a clearly superior politico-economic model: a more effective parliamentary system to replace the clanking hardware left over from 1787; a prudent macro policy and sustainable fiscal position; solvent non-reckless banking system. But naah – some empty, vainglorious, feelgood chest-thumping about “American exceptionalism”, that’ll suit us just fine.

  • Mjz

    Why would Canada want 50 more provinces?

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service