>I speculate that libertarianism fails to capture hearts and minds precisely because it is a rare example of a rationally self-consistent ideology, not an aesthetic movement.
Far from being "rationally self-consistent" libertarianism is as swiss-cheesed as any other ideology. It's aesthetics may bear attraction, to a younger mind perhaps, but its logic?
Unsurprisingly, I wrote about this topic about 10 years ago. I think my reflections remain relevant:
Thank you for the comment! I will check these out. I suppose Libertarianism is rational insofar as it is based on rational economic theories, though when applied to real life it has significant flaws, in the same way as Marxism is purely rational in theory but disastrous in practice.
While I agree to an extent that "Americanism" is present all over Canada, it is quite clearly concentrated in the West more than any other region. The Leger report I cited showed that approximately 20% of Albertans view the possibility of becoming the 51st state as desirable, whereas around 10% of Ontarians think so. My experience convinces me beyond a doubt that Albertans want to join the United States much more than any other region, and that they are particularly vocal and forceful about this. The reason for this is Alberta's tie of economic dependency upon the United States, which other provinces do not have to the same degree. This tie facilitates the transmission of culture and images.
Note that I never said joining the United States was against the interests of Alberta. I said that it is a well-documented fact that political ideology is seldom a pure expression of self-interest. As an example, white liberals are often the most ardent proponents of anti-white discrimination. The irrationality of Americanism manifests in ways that I noted, namely calls for a Canadian Second Amendment.
You are right that there is certainly an element of self-interest which motivates calls for annexation. Whether or not Alberta is better off as a state is something I purposefully did not touch on. But if you do want me to weigh in on this, I believe the advantages of remaining in Canada outweigh the costs.
First, Alberta has much more power in trade negotiations with the United States because it has the weight of the federal government behind it. Energy was a focus of the USMCA trade deal, and Alberta benefits greatly from it. Of course, this is contingent upon the federal government supporting the oil and gas sector, but the federal government, both Liberal and Conservative, has generally been very supportive of oil and gas, with the exception of the two Trudeaus. As much as the Trudeau government postures itself as environmentalist, it knows that crude oil is Canada's single largest export and would not jeopardize this. If Alberta were merely a state, it would not have as much leverage to negotiate a beneficial energy deal. If Trump is eager to have the resource wealth that Canada has, we must consider that there must be some benefit to America. What is more, Alberta has proportionately more wealth from energy as compared with other provinces than the oil-producing states do as compared with other states.
Currency differences also currently benefit Canadian natural resource producers, as exports are sold to America in USD, which is valued as much higher than the CAD. Aside from the two reaching parity under Harper, the CAD has generally been lower in value than the USD, which is highly beneficial.
Alberta is very much shackled because of draconic environmental regulations. You are right that these need to be done away with. America, however, has NEPA, which is arguably worse. While in Canada, the biggest enemies of resource extraction projects are the current federal government and Indigenous groups, in the United States, projects are subject to much more legal scrutiny and can be sued into oblivion. Hardly an improvement. Beneficial change is more than possible within Canada. I am somewhat optimistic that this can happen with an incipient regime change.
This is, however, a highly nuanced issue and I think it's very difficult to say anything with certainty.
With respect to equalization payments, you are correct. Equalization is an unequivocal evil that embodies everything wrong with this country and I am not optimistic about this program being abolished, as Québec is the main beneficiary.
Furthermore, there are many benefits within Canada. Canadian cities are far safer than American cities, and it isn't even close. We are protected from the mass influx of illegal immigrants coming to America, with this contributing to crime rates there. While we have had to suffer through a needless mass-migration program in the past few years, our immigration system is still mostly meritocratic. Canadian healthcare, even when it is falling apart at the seams, is still infinitely preferable to the American system. Alberta has a split public/private system anyways.
>I speculate that libertarianism fails to capture hearts and minds precisely because it is a rare example of a rationally self-consistent ideology, not an aesthetic movement.
Far from being "rationally self-consistent" libertarianism is as swiss-cheesed as any other ideology. It's aesthetics may bear attraction, to a younger mind perhaps, but its logic?
Unsurprisingly, I wrote about this topic about 10 years ago. I think my reflections remain relevant:
https://contravex.com/2016/09/26/the-thing-libertarians-get-wrong-about-property-rights-or-why-im-not-a-libertarian/
https://contravex.com/2016/10/02/on-the-ultimate-justification-of-the-ethics-of-private-property-by-hans-hermann-hoppe-adnotated-part-3/
Thank you for the comment! I will check these out. I suppose Libertarianism is rational insofar as it is based on rational economic theories, though when applied to real life it has significant flaws, in the same way as Marxism is purely rational in theory but disastrous in practice.
Good article. I've been thinking about aesthetics as it relates to Canadian nationalism lately myself.
Very insightful and well written!
What kind of aesthetics were being communicated at this gab-fest.
http://www.cpac.org/us/events-dc2025
Or by the Steve Bannon full length movie titled The Torch Bearer!
I appreciate the thoughtful comment.
While I agree to an extent that "Americanism" is present all over Canada, it is quite clearly concentrated in the West more than any other region. The Leger report I cited showed that approximately 20% of Albertans view the possibility of becoming the 51st state as desirable, whereas around 10% of Ontarians think so. My experience convinces me beyond a doubt that Albertans want to join the United States much more than any other region, and that they are particularly vocal and forceful about this. The reason for this is Alberta's tie of economic dependency upon the United States, which other provinces do not have to the same degree. This tie facilitates the transmission of culture and images.
Note that I never said joining the United States was against the interests of Alberta. I said that it is a well-documented fact that political ideology is seldom a pure expression of self-interest. As an example, white liberals are often the most ardent proponents of anti-white discrimination. The irrationality of Americanism manifests in ways that I noted, namely calls for a Canadian Second Amendment.
You are right that there is certainly an element of self-interest which motivates calls for annexation. Whether or not Alberta is better off as a state is something I purposefully did not touch on. But if you do want me to weigh in on this, I believe the advantages of remaining in Canada outweigh the costs.
First, Alberta has much more power in trade negotiations with the United States because it has the weight of the federal government behind it. Energy was a focus of the USMCA trade deal, and Alberta benefits greatly from it. Of course, this is contingent upon the federal government supporting the oil and gas sector, but the federal government, both Liberal and Conservative, has generally been very supportive of oil and gas, with the exception of the two Trudeaus. As much as the Trudeau government postures itself as environmentalist, it knows that crude oil is Canada's single largest export and would not jeopardize this. If Alberta were merely a state, it would not have as much leverage to negotiate a beneficial energy deal. If Trump is eager to have the resource wealth that Canada has, we must consider that there must be some benefit to America. What is more, Alberta has proportionately more wealth from energy as compared with other provinces than the oil-producing states do as compared with other states.
Currency differences also currently benefit Canadian natural resource producers, as exports are sold to America in USD, which is valued as much higher than the CAD. Aside from the two reaching parity under Harper, the CAD has generally been lower in value than the USD, which is highly beneficial.
Alberta is very much shackled because of draconic environmental regulations. You are right that these need to be done away with. America, however, has NEPA, which is arguably worse. While in Canada, the biggest enemies of resource extraction projects are the current federal government and Indigenous groups, in the United States, projects are subject to much more legal scrutiny and can be sued into oblivion. Hardly an improvement. Beneficial change is more than possible within Canada. I am somewhat optimistic that this can happen with an incipient regime change.
This is, however, a highly nuanced issue and I think it's very difficult to say anything with certainty.
With respect to equalization payments, you are correct. Equalization is an unequivocal evil that embodies everything wrong with this country and I am not optimistic about this program being abolished, as Québec is the main beneficiary.
Furthermore, there are many benefits within Canada. Canadian cities are far safer than American cities, and it isn't even close. We are protected from the mass influx of illegal immigrants coming to America, with this contributing to crime rates there. While we have had to suffer through a needless mass-migration program in the past few years, our immigration system is still mostly meritocratic. Canadian healthcare, even when it is falling apart at the seams, is still infinitely preferable to the American system. Alberta has a split public/private system anyways.