|
The End of America
July 25, 2007
By John W. Whitehead
“The president
of the United States is an internationalist.
He’s going to do what he can to create a place
where the idea of America is just that—it’s an
idea. It’s not an actual place defined by
borders.”—Rep. Tom Tancredo
As technology makes
it possible for us to travel long distances faster,
communicate more easily and cheaply across space and
time and stay informed about events happening in
even the most far-flung parts of the globe, the
world seems to be getting smaller by the minute.
Such globalization,
in effect, does away with national borders, leaving
no one untouched. Just think of the car sitting in
your driveway with parts manufactured in eight
different countries, the food on your table, grown
in far-off places and shipped to your local grocer,
and the customer service representative for your
local phone company, who just happens to be
answering your call from India or Canada.
| |

John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries
are available
for publication to newspapers and web
publications at no charge. Please contact marketing@rutherford.org
to obtain reprint permission.
Click here
to download a
print quality image of
John W. Whitehead.
|
| |
|
While globalization
has certainly proven to be a boon for corporations
and a source of convenience for the consumer, the
geo-political aspects of globalization are more
unnerving and can clearly be seen in the merging of
European nations into a single legal and economic
entity known as the European Union.
Suddenly, the idea
of a North American Union—a merging of the
American, Canadian and Mexican physical, economic
and legal borders, which was once ruminated on only
by conspiracy theorists, no longer seems quite so
far-fetched. In fact, according to some
commentators, academics and political analysts, the
groundwork has already been laid.
In October 2004,
the Council on Foreign Relations brought together
leaders from the United States, Mexico and Canada to
study how the three countries could better
facilitate economic activity across their physical
and legal borders. Building on the groundwork
already established by the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA), this task force published two
documents, Trinational Call for a North American
Economic and Security Community by 2010 and
Building a North American Community, which
chart a drastically different course for the United
States. And a Spring 2005 summit in Waco, Texas,
attended by President Bush, President Vicente Fox of
Mexico and Canada’s Prime Minister set us firmly
on this path. During the summit, the three leaders
agreed to establish the Security and Prosperity
Partnership of North America (SPP), which is
essentially a framework for a North American Union.
So what does a
North American Union mean for the United States?
According to some, this could mean a completely
unified North America—meaning no American
currency, no American borders and, most critically,
no sovereign American law. In fact, proposals have
already been floated for a North American Court of
Justice (with the authority to overrule a decision
of the U.S. Supreme Court), a Trade Tribunal and a
Charter of Fundamental Human Rights
As a result of such
a merger, conservative activist Jerome R. Corsi
foresees an immediate challenge to our First
Amendment free speech laws, as well as our Second
Amendment right to bear arms under such a unified
court structure. As he explains in Human Events,
“citizens of both Canada and Mexico cannot freely
own firearms. Nor can Canadians or Mexicans speak
out freely without worrying about ‘hate crimes’
legislation or other political restrictions on what
they may choose to say.”
Particularly
worrisome is the fact that most of these proposals
are being advanced in secret, behind closed doors.
“President Bush signed a formal agreement that
will end the United States as we know it,” CNN
correspondent Lou Dobbs proclaimed, “and he took
the step without the approval from either the U.S.
Congress or the people of the United States.”
Evidently, as Corsi has noted, the plan is “to
knit together the North American Union completely
under the radar through a process of regulations and
directives issued by various U.S. government
agencies.”
Clearly, the
integration of the North American countries would
facilitate commerce by making it easier for
corporations and immigrants to cross borders.
However, this could drastically alter America’s
constitutional and legal framework and end America
as we know it—not to mention creating a monstrous
bureaucracy that would make the Office of Homeland
Security look like a well-organized machine.
So what can we do
about it?
First, we must
demand that Congress closely analyze this proposed
transnational merger. Second, Americans need to
demand that President Bush be more forthright about
his intentions. Third, “we the people” need to
voice our concerns to our elected representatives
and insist that they protect our rights. Certain
members of Congress have already formed a Coalition
to block the North American Union, while some states
are working on resolutions that would oppose the
implementation of a North American Union as well as
any plans that would lead to the integration of the
United States into a larger international
governmental structure.
However, as with
all things, it all comes down to the bottom line.
For mega-corporations, a North American Union may be
the gateway to more money. But for Americans, the
bottom line must be something more than economic
concerns—it is maintaining our sovereignty as a
nation. That’s what the American Revolution was
all about. And along with sovereignty come the Bill
of Rights and our Constitution. They are, after all,
what have made America unique and a beacon of
democracy to the rest of the world.
WC: 890
|