By Rich Lowry
Friday, January 03, 2025
The slogan of James K. Polk’s supporters in the 1844
presidential campaign was “54 40′ or Fight,” referring to their desire to take
a substantial slice of what would eventually become Canadian territory along
the Pacific Northwest coastline.
For his part, Donald Trump isn’t bothering to set out any
latitude lines when he discusses his ambitions on Canada — he wants the whole
thing, or so he says in his trolling of our friendly neighbor to the north and
its embattled progressive prime minister Justin Trudeau.
In recent weeks, Trump has mused about Canada becoming
the 51st state, posted an artificially generated image of himself beside a
Canadian flag atop a mountain, staring heroically into the distance, and
referred to Trudeau, amusingly, as “governor.”
By all accounts, most Canadians have taken this in
stride, but some have expressed consternation or indignation, to which we can
reply, “Don’t worry, Canada — we don’t really want you.”
Even if Trump were inclined to dust off War Plan Red —
the Department of War’s strategy in the early 20th century for how to conduct a
war against the British Empire, featuring Canada as a key battlefield — it
wouldn’t be worth the effort.
The United States doesn’t need another huge, misgoverned
blue state. We already have California, where the climate and the surfing are
better.
Over the last several years, Canada has managed to fall
even further behind the United States economically. “The IMF forecasts that
Canada’s national income per head, equivalent to around 80 percent of America’s
in the decade before the pandemic, will be just 70 percent of its neighbor’s in
2025,” according to The Economist.
Writing on the same theme at the website The Hub,
University of Calgary economics professor Trevor Tombe notes that “the gap
between the Canadian and American economies has now reached its widest point in
nearly a century.” The U.S., he continues, “is on track to produce nearly 50
percent more per person than Canada will.” Canada would be the fourth-poorest
state per capita in the Union, beneath Alabama.
Why would we make Canada’s scuffling economic performance
our problem?
Then, there’s the matter of politics. Canada would be a
blue-state behemoth, matching California in population (roughly 40 million)
and, presumably, in reliably Democratic politics. There are red areas of
Canada, which have the same urban-versus-rural divide as the U.S., yet the
Great White North is overall less conservative.
Polling in Canada before the U.S. presidential election
showed Kamala Harris with a three-to-one lead over Trump and an advantage even
in the more Trump-friendly prairies.
The U.S. and Canada are friendly neighbors with
intertwined histories but have distinct political and economic cultures. We
might think we’d annex Canada and make it more like us, but — with two
Democratic senators and a huge tranche of electoral votes for Democratic
presidential candidates — Canada would surely make us more like it.
In that sense, the joke would definitely be on us.
We’d also be buying ourselves an instant separatist
problem by incorporating Quebec, the French-speaking province that has had a
notoriously troubled relationship with the rest of Canada. If we want to add
French, along with English and Spanish, as yet another obligatory language
option, this would be a great move.
And there’s the matter of Justin Trudeau. After his
irksome, grievous misrule of Canada, it would be even more annoying if the
story ended with his becoming a U.S. citizen. Who knows? Still young, he might
revive his career in Democratic politics. He couldn’t run for president, but
might use his status as a kingmaker in the Ontario caucuses for power and
influence.
All that said, national modesty compels us to admit that
all our prior efforts to take Canada have failed, and our pleasant northerly
neighbor deserves respect amid the ribbing. Let Canada be Canada.
No comments:
Post a Comment