There Isn’t Going to Be A North American Union
“Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union.” — Jerome Corsi on May 19, 2006
“If President Bush had run openly in 2004 on the proposition that a prime objective of his second term was to form the North American Union and to supplant the dollar with the “Amero,” we doubt very much that President Bush would have carried Ohio, let alone half of the Red State majority he needed to win re-election.” — Jerome Corsi on May 22, 2006
“What will happen to the sovereignty of the United States? The model is the European Community. While the United States would supposedly remain as a country, many of our nation-state prerogatives would ultimately be superseded by the authority of a North American court and parliamentary body, just as the U.S. dollar would have to be surrendered for the “Amero,” the envisioned surviving currency of the North American Union.
…What we have underway here with the SPP could arguably be termed a bureaucratic coup d’etat. If that is not the intent, then President Bush should rein in the bureaucracy until the American people have been fully informed of the true nature of our government’s desire to create a North American Union. Otherwise, the North American Union will become a reality in 2010 as planned.” — Jerome Corsi on May 30, 2006
Yesterday, Jerome Corsi was prattling on about the North American Union in Human Events again after Michael Medved deservedly spanked him for spreading conspiracy theories. While I don’t think Corsi is any more worthy of being taken seriously than those who think Jews rule the world or the “Truthers” who think George Bush is responsible for 9/11, I thought I would respond to him one last time (I think that’s about the 4th time I’ve said that).
Now, why respond again? What’s the point? Well unfortunately, a lot of conservatives consider this conspiracy theory to be so preposterous that they believe it’s beneath them to even bother discussing it, and that leaves Corsi and his ilk to dominate the debate. And since there are a lot of conservatives being taken in by this North American Union nonsense, somebody has got to step up to the plate.
Of course, once you decide to respond to a conspiracy theory, you have a very basic problem: the people who believe in this theory didn’t reason their way into it, so it’s extremely difficult to use reason to convince them that there’s nothing to it. In this case, from what I’ve seen, most people who buy into the NAU conspiracy theory have done so because they’re understandably upset about George Bush’s outrageous position on illegal immigration or because they’re heard a few big conservative names like Corsi, Phyllis Schlafly, Michael Savage, Lou Dobbs, or Joseph Farah talk about it as if it were reality. Then, they see that we’re cooperating with our neighbors on certain issues (which is something that we’re always doing) and they leap to the conclusion that we’re in the middle of some far ranging plot when nothing could be further from the truth.
However, not one of the advocates of this conspiracy theory mentioned above has ever produced one single solitary piece of evidence that shows anyone in the Bush Administration is working on an Amero or actually merging the US into Canada or Mexico, because there is no such evidence. In fact, that’s one of the most striking things about this conspiracy: it’s supposedly a grandiose plot that the Bush Administration is engaged in, yet no one from the Bush Administration is ever tied to any of the “evidence,” such as it is, that’s offered. For example,
A think tank called the Council on Foreign Relations had a task force that put out a report called “Building A North American Community.” If you read through the report (.pdf file), contrary to what you’ve heard said time and time again by NAU conspiracy theorists, you’ll find that it does not call for a “North American Union.” Moreover, the CFR itself doesn’t even take official positions on foreign policy issues because its members have a wide variety of different opinions on the issues. So, there’s no cabal of globalists sitting around at the Council on Foreign Relations, rubbing their hands together sinisterly, and plotting to sell us out to Canada or Mexico — but even if there were, so what? Think tanks champion all sorts of ideas, good and bad; it doesn’t necessarily follow that they’re implemented by the government.
Then there’s Robert Pastor, a liberal university professor and globalist, who has talked about an Amero in one of his books and served as a co-chair of the task force that produced the “Building A North American Community” report. Newsflash: I’ve talked to Robert Pastor and he denies talking to the Bush Administration about any sort of North American Union. Furthermore, he says that to the best of his knowledge they’re not working on any such thing. He also noted that the Amero was one of three ideas he floated in one of his books, that he wasn’t married to it, and again, to the best of his knowledge, nobody in the Bush Administration is working on it. Additionally, Robert Pastor has this to say about the idea of a North American Union:
“Each of the proposals I have laid out represent (sic) more than just small steps. But it doesn’t represent a leap to a North American Union or even to some confederation of any kind. I don’t think either is plausible, necessary or even helpful to contemplate at this stage.”
Even if Robert Pastor had said exactly the opposite and called for a North American Union to be formed tomorrow, so what? He doesn’t work for George Bush. It’s like having a Communist professor screaming that Lenin was right and we should become a Communist nation tomorrow and then having people like Jerome Corsi go, “See? George Bush is converting America to Communism!” It makes no sense.
Next up is NASCO and the Trans-Texas corridor. NASCO is a business organization that promotes businesses up and down a certain stretch of highway in the US, Mexico, and Canada and they do support the building of the Trans-Texas Corridor. However, NASCO isn’t affiliated with the Bush Administration, nor were they formed to promote any sort of North American Union. You can like NASCO or not, you can be for or against the Trans-Texas Corridor, but understand that neither project has anything to do with a plot to merge the United States with Mexico or Canada.
Then there’s the Security and Prosperity Partnership. The SPP works under the Commerce Department and they are working on increasing cooperation between the US, Mexico, and Canada on a variety of issues (which is something we’re always doing). However, again, despite what you may have heard, the SPP is not based on the “Building A North American Community” report. Furthermore, they’re not working on an Amero or a North American Union. They say so right on their own website,
“The cooperative efforts under the SPP, which can be found in detail at www.spp.gov, seek to make the United States, Canada and Mexico open to legitimate trade and closed to terrorism and crime. It does not change our courts or legislative processes and respects the sovereignty of the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The SPP in no way, shape or form considers the creation of a European Union-like structure or a common currency. The SPP does not attempt to modify our sovereignty or currency or change the American system of government designed by our Founding Fathers.”
Heck, even Tony Snow has specifically said, “Of course, no. We’re not interested (building a European Union-style superstate in North America). There is not going to be an EU in the U.S.”
So, if the SPP and the Bush Administration are actually working on a North American Union, despite their denials, where’s the hard proof? Not, “Well, look at Bush’s position on illegal immigration.” Not, “This language on the SPP website sounds kind of similar to this language in the CFR report.” Not, “There’s a college professor who thinks this is a good idea.” Where’s the real proof that the Bush Administration is actually working on an Amero or merging the US with Canada or Mexico? There is none and there won’t ever be any offered.
That’s why conspiracy theorists love to try to bog people down in minutiae. Sure, lots of people saw planes hit the Pentagon and the WTC, but let’s ignore that and talk about the temperature that steel melts at and the size of the hole in the building at the Pentagon. That’s how they trick people in missing the big picture. With the North American Union conspiracy theory, nobody ever talks about how this could practically be brought about when it would be almost universally opposed by the American people and would likely require a Constitutional Convention to pull off. Presumably, people like Jerome Corsi believe that there will just be a press conference one day announcing the changeover to an Amero and introducing us to our new Canadian and Mexican overlords — actually, these conspiracy theorists never really think that far ahead and they hope that you don’t either. They don’t want you to consider that there have been no leaks from the Bush Administration about this conspiracy even though thousands of people would have to know about it, that the mainstream media, which would love nothing better than to beat George Bush over the head with something like this if it existed, isn’t discussing this issue, that the citizens of Canada and Mexico wouldn’t go along with a NAU — you could go on and on. The reality is that even if George Bush were a diabolical mastermind who wanted to dump the dollar and form a North American Union, he doesn’t have the authority to do it without the consent of Congress and without it passing muster at the Supreme Court, neither of which would happen.
This is what the conspiracy theorists don’t want you to realize because once you get out of the weeds and stop talking about roads, obscure reports, and professors, it becomes obvious that this conspiracy theory doesn’t hold water. But, people like Corsi have gone too far out on a limb to ever admit that. So, they’ll keep on insisting that the Bush Administration is about to implement a North American Union until Bush is out of office and then they’ll try to take credit for preventing the implementation of a non-existent plot rather than admit that they didn’t have the slightest idea what they were talking about.
But, for just a moment, let’s forget about Corsi and let’s talk about you. Do you think America should jealously guard its sovereignty? Good, so do I. Do you oppose the amnesty plan for illegal aliens that George Bush favors? Good, so do I. Would you oppose any sort of North American Union if it were ever offered up? Good, so would I.
However, that doesn’t translate into accusing the Bush administration of being behind some sort of monstrous plot to sell us out to Mexico and Canada. When you buy into that sort of conspiracy theory, you marginalize yourself, and that’s the biggest concern I have about these wild accusations about a North American Union. When I see important groups like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the Minutemen get entangled in wacky conspiracy theories via their relationship with Corsi, I worry that it will hurt their credibility. When I see people like Joseph Farah, Phyllis Schlafly, and Lou Dobbs promoting a laughable conspiracy theory about as credible as the ones about the Illuminati and the Trilateral commission, it disturbs me to see them damaging their reputations when we may need their influence on issues like illegal immigration over the next couple of years. Last but not least, after making fun of some of our “friends” on the left for the wild conspiracy theories they’ve indulged in over the last few years, “Bush let 9/11 happen on purpose, rigged the elections, and is going to stick us in camps and rule as dictator, etc.,” it troubles me to see a new “black helicopter crowd” being created from scratch on the right that’s just as bad as the worst conspiracy theorists on the left. We’re supposed to be better and smarter than that.