Interchangeable Parts
By Thomas Brewton on Oct 14, 2006

Modern mass production with interchangeable parts was a good idea in the automobile industry a century ago. But is it a good idea to homogenize national cultures, either in the interests of economic prosperity, or to further the socialist ideal of a one-world government?

Carol Derbis drew my attention to the potential dangers of the proposed North American Union, which aims at making NAFTA into an analog of the European Union, eventually uniting Mexico, Canada, and the United States on political and cultural grounds, as well as on economic policies.


As she writes, we must have full and public Congressional hearings before the proposal goes much further.


Chris Adamo addressed the issue last year, as did Jerome R. Corsi in this article earlier this year.


Those who fear the worst say that President Bush intends to abrogate United States sovereignty. That seems unlikely, but any surrender of our own Constitutional rights to a supranational agency, however limited the surrender, is a very bad policy. Our experience with the UN makes that abundantly clear.


Apart from the huge controversy over illegal immigration from Mexico, there are plenty of other negatives to consider.


Foremost among them is spotlighted by this website’s Statement of Purpose:


The View from 1776 presents a framework to understand present-day issues from the viewpoint of the colonists who fought for American independence in 1776 and wrote the Constitution in 1787. Knowing and preserving those understandings, what might be called the unwritten constitution of our nation, is vital to preserving constitutional government. Without them, the bare words of the Constitution are just a Rorschach ink-blot that politicians, educators, and judges can interpret to mean anything they wish.


As relatively little has been elaborated about the North American Union concept in the media, one can only conjecture about the exact intentions and methods. Whatever the specifics of the proposed North American Union, it can be said that it has the potential to promote further cultural disintegration in our nation, which is as lethal a danger as Islamic jihad.


Liberals (and it has to be said that most Republicans as well as Democrats have evident left-leanings) have been educated in our colleges and universities to accept the social sciences view that human beings respond only to material factors. Thirst, hunger, the need for clothing and shelter, and the sexual urges are said to be the ultimately controlling factors in human society.


One has to be oblivious to history, however, to believe that the list of social influences is limited to the atheistic materialism of socialism. Our colonial ancestors were definitely motivated by the economic issues of taxation to issue the Declaration of Independence. But there was a far deeper ethos underlying their action: the centuries old English tradition of inalienable natural-law rights of individuals to be free from the arbitrary exercise of power by the sovereign. Those conceptions grew out of the Judeo-Christian moral traditions that constituted Western Civilization.


Moving in the direction of a political and cultural North American Union is to unwind the very substance of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

Thomas E. Brewton is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc.

His weblog is THE VIEW FROM 1776 http://www.thomasbrewton.com/

ω ω ω ω ω ω ω ω

By Thomas Brewton on Oct 14, 2006 | Email | Profile Permalink

Email This Article to someone.

The items below only apply to non-columnist opeds:

Author: Email:

Editor: Views are those of individual authors and not necessarily those of NewsByUs.

http://newsbyus.com/more.php?id=5722_0_1_0_M