I couldn't tell if this was a serious question but it seems that it is. Something like annexing or absorbing another nation is the exact opposite of what I think our new omninationalism movement is about which is decentralization.
I know some great Canadians that I would be proud to call my fellow American brothers but I highly doubt that any of them would actually want to turn their backs on their nation.
First and foremost, something like an annexation or absorbing Canada into the Union is completely unnecessary and wouldn't serve any useful purpose. There is already an alliance, mostly free movement of people across the borders, highly integrated trade, and a similar culture and language (save for Quebec). Meaning, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Although we are very very similar in many respects, there are differences which are now glaring and undeniable. Just look at the leaders of our two nations. In one corner, we have the God-Emperor Donald Trump, an archetypal Alpha. In the other, we have sniveling, white-Obama Justine Trudeau, an archetypal Beta. The two are literally opposites in every respect but it is no accident that these two got elected around the same time. Trudeau is the final manifestation of decades upon decades of UNCONTESTED AND UNTHWARTED cultural shitliberalism, feminism, cuckery and mass emasculation. Trump is the final manifestation of CONTESTED AND FINALLY THWARTED shitliberalism, feminism, cuckery, and mass emasculation.
The origin of all of these can ultimately be traced back to the fact that the US has a few things that Canada and the rest of the Anglosphere does not. The most important being the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution (gov shall make no law abridging free of speech). Canada does not have anything like this (nor do Aus, NZ, UK). Years of the problems that I stated above went unthwarted and uncontested in Canada because anything against the problems is labeled as "hate/discriminatory" speech and can be punished by the government, sometimes very severely. I'm not saying that people have not spoken out against the problems in Canada but it never really happened in large enough numbers and at high enough levels to resist the cultural fuggernaught which lead to Trudeau.
Think about it, if we had in the US the same type of speech laws that Canada has the Trump movement would never have come to fruition. Any opposition to the fuggernaught would have been snuffed out early and ruthlessly by the Gov.
How does this relate to your original question regarding anexxation? Although we are similar, there are a few glaring cultural differences in terms of how we believe social norms should be codified into law, what relation should the government have to its people, what function should government ultimately serve. I'll state again, yes there are red-pilled Canadians that would love to have a US type of Constitution and hate SJWism as much as I do. However, we are talking about the populations rather than the individuals. They are very different and would not accept being a part of the same sovereign which is absolutely fine. I would never want to live under Canadian laws or a Canadian government. I'm sure even a right of center or even a Canadian Nationalist would want to stay Canadian just like their forefathers. They want change in their own nation rather than renunciation.
That being said, who knows. There may eventually need to be a complete reorganization of the geopolitical boundaries which would result in the creation of new nations that include present day parts of Canada and the US but we can only go down that road once we come to it.
As it stands now, no the US should not attempt or entertain any idea of annexation of any other nations as it is the complete opposite of what we need to be doing.
I know some great Canadians that I would be proud to call my fellow American brothers but I highly doubt that any of them would actually want to turn their backs on their nation.
First and foremost, something like an annexation or absorbing Canada into the Union is completely unnecessary and wouldn't serve any useful purpose. There is already an alliance, mostly free movement of people across the borders, highly integrated trade, and a similar culture and language (save for Quebec). Meaning, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Although we are very very similar in many respects, there are differences which are now glaring and undeniable. Just look at the leaders of our two nations. In one corner, we have the God-Emperor Donald Trump, an archetypal Alpha. In the other, we have sniveling, white-Obama Justine Trudeau, an archetypal Beta. The two are literally opposites in every respect but it is no accident that these two got elected around the same time. Trudeau is the final manifestation of decades upon decades of UNCONTESTED AND UNTHWARTED cultural shitliberalism, feminism, cuckery and mass emasculation. Trump is the final manifestation of CONTESTED AND FINALLY THWARTED shitliberalism, feminism, cuckery, and mass emasculation.
The origin of all of these can ultimately be traced back to the fact that the US has a few things that Canada and the rest of the Anglosphere does not. The most important being the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution (gov shall make no law abridging free of speech). Canada does not have anything like this (nor do Aus, NZ, UK). Years of the problems that I stated above went unthwarted and uncontested in Canada because anything against the problems is labeled as "hate/discriminatory" speech and can be punished by the government, sometimes very severely. I'm not saying that people have not spoken out against the problems in Canada but it never really happened in large enough numbers and at high enough levels to resist the cultural fuggernaught which lead to Trudeau.
Think about it, if we had in the US the same type of speech laws that Canada has the Trump movement would never have come to fruition. Any opposition to the fuggernaught would have been snuffed out early and ruthlessly by the Gov.
How does this relate to your original question regarding anexxation? Although we are similar, there are a few glaring cultural differences in terms of how we believe social norms should be codified into law, what relation should the government have to its people, what function should government ultimately serve. I'll state again, yes there are red-pilled Canadians that would love to have a US type of Constitution and hate SJWism as much as I do. However, we are talking about the populations rather than the individuals. They are very different and would not accept being a part of the same sovereign which is absolutely fine. I would never want to live under Canadian laws or a Canadian government. I'm sure even a right of center or even a Canadian Nationalist would want to stay Canadian just like their forefathers. They want change in their own nation rather than renunciation.
That being said, who knows. There may eventually need to be a complete reorganization of the geopolitical boundaries which would result in the creation of new nations that include present day parts of Canada and the US but we can only go down that road once we come to it.
As it stands now, no the US should not attempt or entertain any idea of annexation of any other nations as it is the complete opposite of what we need to be doing.
The Maximally Pathetic Schema: Xs who labor to convince Ys that “I’m not one of those despicable Zs!,” when in fact it is obvious to the meanest intelligence that the Ys see no difference between Xs and Zs, don’t care anyway, and would love to throw both Xs and Zs into a gulag.
- Adrian Vermeule