Also I sort of made that point in my opening post, Invictus. :]

Well, more of a doppelgänger, really...

Who's the Doppelganger in this situation?

hahah I'm really not sure...

You have still not made a compelling point as to why the PEOPLE of these countries would actually want this. I can possibly see an argument about why elites would get on board but why would a Mexican peasant or an American blue collar worker or a Canadian moose catcher want the NAU? Why why why?

Hahhahahaa abgemacht.
Also "But what really matters is making sure that the economic benefits of such a union would be spread equally on a per capita basis." - Saffron if history teaches us anything it's that even though political arrangements and national formalities change, power structures and economic distribution do not. The poor stay poor, the rich and powerful stay rich and powerful. All you're really talking about doing is erasing what few formal impediments there are for the rich and powerful in America to completely dominate the entire continent. (Which they pretty much already do anyway.)

Exactly, Mafialligator. It's not as if Warsaw is the new Paris in the EU.

>Unions of countries with disparate regions has worked before -- aren't the proposed constituents, a word I use very sparingly in my vision of a NAU, proof of that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_reunification

Summary: Yeah, good luck with that.

Point taken. I still believe it would be beneficial after some initial hurdles but I definitely need to put some more thought into it.

Yes, put thought into it. I'm sure the three governments would each be delighted to hear your plans. All hail Senor Prime President Saffron.

Talk about a class A asshole Invict. I actually poked some fun at the fact that we were discussing this on a Diplomacy forum a few posts back, apparently agreeing that this is a complicated topic with a lot of facets to figure out is a bad thing. Fuck off.

And for what it's worth I did write a personalized letter to Harper, Obama and Calderon. I'm sure a Presidential helicopter will be coming for me at any moment. When I'm Supreme Dictator of North America Invict, your house will be the first to be nuked. :)

@Saffron

If you wish for your ideas to be taken seriously, you should consider the concerns that have been brought up in this thread. The fact that you think something is a great idea is rarely enough to make other people think it's a great idea. In fact, when you spend time understanding why others don't think highly of the idea, you often realize where the issues lie.

@abgemacht That would be fun to watch. Can we do it? Can we? Can we? Please!!!

NAFTA anyone? No thanks. A union with Canada fine, but Mexico with it's deplorable living and working conditions and rampant corruption? Not likely.

NAU is ideal for the current situation, however it just won't work. This idea can't be passed. The difference in economic power is just too large between the countries of North America. Because of that, I don't think it will be possible to creating a common currency between countries. Also I don't think that political union can be achieved there because of the vast difference in economic power. I think the reason why your "fellow" americans think that this is stuff for radicals or vast conspiracy, is because it can't work. And it can't work that is why. If this idea of NAU passes, than, well. There it is, a huge conspiracy.
The EU has developed for about a 50 years, with a goal to recover from the extreme forms of nationalism which devastated the european continent at first. It started small, but eventually became a global influence. That is why EU is classified as a whole different entity in the world today.

Call me crazy, but I'd be happier if the USA and Canada could just join with the EU...maybe call it the Western Union or something...

Western Union? So Brussels would send Congress its fiats by telegram?

You're crazy.

I think in the future such bodies like the EU, will be created but probably in global scales. The EU was possible because of the mutual relations they had in working together. The reason why G20 is not so productive is because members of it aren't.
In such times of crisis, it is I think necessary that nations cooperate together, creating multilateral efforts. Either this, or war.

I wouldn't be against a Western Union.

War as in terms of Hegemony theory.

What have canada and mexico done to deserve this?

Forget a North American Union, imagine how difficult it will be to reunite Korea.

Saffron: "Quebec is the exception to what I said and something I thought about including. But even then it's largely a language difference rather than an extremely cultural difference."

I'll go back to Mafialligator's remark and suggest that you clearly haven't been to Quebec. The differences go way deeper than just language. It's hard enough to keep Quebec in Canada, where they already feel marginalized. (Although our constant efforts to placate them actually give them a disproportionate amount of power/influence, IMO...but that's a whole other flamewar.) You actually think they'd go along with a merger with the US, where they'd feel even *more* so?

One more drawback: No more USA-Canada international hockey matches. That would be a sad thing. :(

Yeah as far as an NAU goes I think it would just be straight up stupid for America (or even Canada) to unite with Mexico. That would be about as stupid as Germany being in some sort of union with Greece, oh wait, they are.....
So yeah, USA-Candana might not be so bad, but there still would be quite a bit of economic difference as well as the Quebec issue. I definitely do not see Quebec being willing to jump in on something like that as ajohnson said.

@ajohnson : sport doesn't reflect with political union. Look at the UK, they have 4 different football teams (England, Scotland...)

@jman - I was going to mention the Greece/EU issue, but was being nice so as not to set off hellalt. :-)

oh shoot yeah I forgot about that. Please don't take offence helalt. :/

Forget unions, I'd like for the world to realize that national borders and identities are arbitrary, abstract, historical relics. Of course, that ain't going to happen. Maybe if everyone could see Earth from space...

But then, I'm not even sure if "us" has any significance without "them".