I'm against any globalization. I think we should go to great lengths to preserve borders the way they are today. We are in a unique time, being able to reach every corner of the world and send real time information. In honor of the people who came the 3 or 4 generations before us, building the industrialized world, and the many lost peoples & cultures throughout history, we should preserve what we have now. & going forward, make sure we don't mix into this one blob of humanity. That should be the true mission of 'diversity', making sure most people have a way to preserve their races and cultures.
No offense ment here, but we kicked Englands ass and kept our guns! If you join us perhaps our 2A will keep you better prepared for the globalist fight. And yea. You do beat our ases in hockey, most of the time!
Not every Canadian lives in Toronto. Here in Newfoundland we own LOTS OF GUNS. Smart people know their rights come from God, not the government of the day.
I get that! But I’m just reaching back to hearing how a one world government would be devised into four regional continental units. See my newest text after I “grok’d” the query.
Regardless of any Globalist agendas. Realistically the eventual outcome of the Classic Liberal Republican/Democratic experiment combined with free market capitalism will eventually be some form of Global Government. Whether it be a Nation State or a Libertarian/Anarcho-Capitalist ‘Free Market’ Corporatocracy.
Cultural Diffusion by virtue of free transit of products and ideas. Economic migration of both the legal and illegal variety. And intermarriage across cultural, ethnic, and religious lines will start blurring cultural lines and National Identities.
For example. The main difference between a Globalist NAU, and one that’s formed naturally. Is precisely the fact it’s formed naturally. Whether out of economic interest, political deals or cultural affinity.
Versus unelected bureaucrats ramming it through without the opportunity for people in either nation to object.
The acquisitions of Greenland is a bit unique in that it’s still a part of Denmark though with heavy autonomy. And is sparsely populated to the point where it’s feasible to buy/Bribe the population who’d resist annexation. To either be in favor or able them to move to Denmark.
Thank you for an excellent reply - you are much smarter in this than I am. I just had a jingle in my brain about a concept of the one world government bringing our governance into four distinct regional/global political organizations. See my newest text for my query about it to Grok. I am not smart enough to really understand, but do appreciate those who can discuss it..
Do you remember that also? Something about this talk about Canada and Greenland reminded me of that discussion way back then. Unfortunately, I wasn’t really paying that much attention then :-/
“ The concept of a "North American Union" (NAU) as part of a broader one-world government plan is largely a subject of conspiracy theories rather than official policy. Here's an overview based on available information:
Conceptual Origins: The idea of a North American Union is often compared to the European Union, suggesting a political and economic union of Canada, the United States, and Mexico. This concept has been discussed in academic circles and by some think tanks, but there is no official governmental plan to establish such a union. Publications like the Council on Foreign Relations' 2005 report titled "Building a North American Community" have been cited by conspiracy theorists as evidence, but these reports discuss increased cooperation rather than a political merger.
Conspiracy Theories: Many conspiracy theories claim that the NAU is part of a "New World Order" or a one-world government agenda. These theories often involve claims of secret agreements to dissolve national borders, introduce a common currency like the "Amero," and centralize governance, essentially eroding national sovereignty. These ideas are propagated through various media, including social media platforms like X, where users discuss fears of losing national identity and autonomy.
Official Stance: Government officials from the United States, Canada, and Mexico have repeatedly stated there are no plans for a North American Union. The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), which was active from 2005 until it was discontinued in 2009, was often misconstrued by conspiracy theorists as a step towards a union, but it was aimed at cooperation in security and economic matters without any intention of forming a political union.
Public and Political Perception: The concept of a NAU has been politically contentious, with some politicians and public figures using it as a rallying cry against globalization or to incite fears of loss of sovereignty. However, these discussions generally remain within the realm of political rhetoric or speculative fiction rather than actual policy implementation.
Economic Integration vs. Political Union: While there is significant economic integration through agreements like NAFTA (now USMCA), this does not equate to plans for a political union. The focus has been on trade liberalization and economic cooperation, not on forming a single government across these nations.
In summary, while the concept of a North American Union exists in theoretical and speculative discussions, there is no concrete, official plan for its creation as part of a one-world government initiative. The narratives around this often stem from conspiracy theories rather than from factual policy announcements or agreements.”
So then my question is why is Trump even joking about annexing Canada? And buying Greenland? Wouldn’t this be remotely construed as unifying for a NAU?
Like I said in a prior post, Trump's erratic flip flopping on H1B Visas has made many question him. Most worrisome was his statement that the annexation of Canada and Greenland was part of a broader plan, which sent fear into many that have known about these plans for decades. This would invariably lead to major changes in our culture, political structure and worse, our treasured freedoms and liberties .
Brexit was the first salvo against globalisation, believe it or not! Their goals were to create blocs and then amalgamate all these blocs! Brexit proves that White Hats have been in control for a long time! Expand your thinking!
I'm against any globalization. I think we should go to great lengths to preserve borders the way they are today. We are in a unique time, being able to reach every corner of the world and send real time information. In honor of the people who came the 3 or 4 generations before us, building the industrialized world, and the many lost peoples & cultures throughout history, we should preserve what we have now. & going forward, make sure we don't mix into this one blob of humanity. That should be the true mission of 'diversity', making sure most people have a way to preserve their races and cultures.
Anything that moves even one hair closer to a UN one world government fantasy can get fucked way the fuck over there far away from the USA.
Seriously... just fuck off! (And that goes for your Bluebeam alien horseshit too!)
Shameless self plug here.
Sorry not sorry..
https://culturalunity.substack.com/p/canada-is-dead
No offense ment here, but we kicked Englands ass and kept our guns! If you join us perhaps our 2A will keep you better prepared for the globalist fight. And yea. You do beat our ases in hockey, most of the time!
Not every Canadian lives in Toronto. Here in Newfoundland we own LOTS OF GUNS. Smart people know their rights come from God, not the government of the day.
I get that! But I’m just reaching back to hearing how a one world government would be devised into four regional continental units. See my newest text after I “grok’d” the query.
Regardless of any Globalist agendas. Realistically the eventual outcome of the Classic Liberal Republican/Democratic experiment combined with free market capitalism will eventually be some form of Global Government. Whether it be a Nation State or a Libertarian/Anarcho-Capitalist ‘Free Market’ Corporatocracy.
Cultural Diffusion by virtue of free transit of products and ideas. Economic migration of both the legal and illegal variety. And intermarriage across cultural, ethnic, and religious lines will start blurring cultural lines and National Identities.
For example. The main difference between a Globalist NAU, and one that’s formed naturally. Is precisely the fact it’s formed naturally. Whether out of economic interest, political deals or cultural affinity.
Versus unelected bureaucrats ramming it through without the opportunity for people in either nation to object.
The acquisitions of Greenland is a bit unique in that it’s still a part of Denmark though with heavy autonomy. And is sparsely populated to the point where it’s feasible to buy/Bribe the population who’d resist annexation. To either be in favor or able them to move to Denmark.
Thank you for an excellent reply - you are much smarter in this than I am. I just had a jingle in my brain about a concept of the one world government bringing our governance into four distinct regional/global political organizations. See my newest text for my query about it to Grok. I am not smart enough to really understand, but do appreciate those who can discuss it..
Back to 2006.....
Do you remember that also? Something about this talk about Canada and Greenland reminded me of that discussion way back then. Unfortunately, I wasn’t really paying that much attention then :-/
I'm not ready to weigh in until I know if Trump is really serious and if so, why.
I decided to Grok it …
“ The concept of a "North American Union" (NAU) as part of a broader one-world government plan is largely a subject of conspiracy theories rather than official policy. Here's an overview based on available information:
Conceptual Origins: The idea of a North American Union is often compared to the European Union, suggesting a political and economic union of Canada, the United States, and Mexico. This concept has been discussed in academic circles and by some think tanks, but there is no official governmental plan to establish such a union. Publications like the Council on Foreign Relations' 2005 report titled "Building a North American Community" have been cited by conspiracy theorists as evidence, but these reports discuss increased cooperation rather than a political merger.
Conspiracy Theories: Many conspiracy theories claim that the NAU is part of a "New World Order" or a one-world government agenda. These theories often involve claims of secret agreements to dissolve national borders, introduce a common currency like the "Amero," and centralize governance, essentially eroding national sovereignty. These ideas are propagated through various media, including social media platforms like X, where users discuss fears of losing national identity and autonomy.
Official Stance: Government officials from the United States, Canada, and Mexico have repeatedly stated there are no plans for a North American Union. The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), which was active from 2005 until it was discontinued in 2009, was often misconstrued by conspiracy theorists as a step towards a union, but it was aimed at cooperation in security and economic matters without any intention of forming a political union.
Public and Political Perception: The concept of a NAU has been politically contentious, with some politicians and public figures using it as a rallying cry against globalization or to incite fears of loss of sovereignty. However, these discussions generally remain within the realm of political rhetoric or speculative fiction rather than actual policy implementation.
Economic Integration vs. Political Union: While there is significant economic integration through agreements like NAFTA (now USMCA), this does not equate to plans for a political union. The focus has been on trade liberalization and economic cooperation, not on forming a single government across these nations.
In summary, while the concept of a North American Union exists in theoretical and speculative discussions, there is no concrete, official plan for its creation as part of a one-world government initiative. The narratives around this often stem from conspiracy theories rather than from factual policy announcements or agreements.”
So then my question is why is Trump even joking about annexing Canada? And buying Greenland? Wouldn’t this be remotely construed as unifying for a NAU?
Like I said in a prior post, Trump's erratic flip flopping on H1B Visas has made many question him. Most worrisome was his statement that the annexation of Canada and Greenland was part of a broader plan, which sent fear into many that have known about these plans for decades. This would invariably lead to major changes in our culture, political structure and worse, our treasured freedoms and liberties .
North American union equals end times prophecy
Brexit was the first salvo against globalisation, believe it or not! Their goals were to create blocs and then amalgamate all these blocs! Brexit proves that White Hats have been in control for a long time! Expand your thinking!