Counter-Currents
2,142 words
While Trump 2.0 may have put the idea of red state secession in the United States somewhat on hold for at least the next four years, it has implanted the very same idea in Canada. Using the massive US-Canada trade imbalance as a starting point, Trump is putting his America-first policies into play by tariffing Canada as much as Canada has been tariffing the United States. Case in point, Trump has threatened to impose a 25 percent tariff on all Canadian imports in part as a response to how Canada currently imposes tariffs of over 200 percent on US dairy products. Since the United States imports more from Canada then it exports (to the tune of $63 billion in 2024), these tariffs are going to hurt Canada a lot more than they are going to hurt the United States. Trump knows this and is willing to turn the screws on Canada until it—or parts of it—gives up its charade of statehood and simply join the United States.
A couple things to address before moving forward. First, could this move by Trump amount to imperialism? I would say not. Anything short of coercion by arms or threat of arms falls short of imperialism, in my opinion. When the people occupying land being acquired are ethnically and culturally similar to the people acquiring the land, and then join the expanding state voluntarily because it makes economic sense to do so, it should hardly be considered empire in which one ethnic group lawfully dominates all the others. Presumably, if parts of Canada were to switch allegiance to the United States, those former Canadians would have all the rights and privileges that US citizens have.
Secondly, is it harsh to call Canadian statehood a charade? Again, I would say no. If a country’s viability depends upon the indulgent attitude of a larger, neighboring country, which they then abuse or take for granted, then that state’s legitimacy is called into question. And tariffing the US more than the US tariffed Canada as of 2024, while relying significantly on the United States for its military defense and airspace integrity, does count as abuse. If anything, Trump is putting Canadian nationhood to the test. If Canadian identity means so much to Canadians that they would put up with higher prices, lower wages, and higher unemployment not to become US citizens, good for them. By acting within his rights as president to dictate favorable economic terms for his country, Trump is gambling that this won’t happen. And he’s probably correct. Remember, this is not nineteenth-century Europe in which nations were split by distinct, centuries-old ethnic, linguistic, geographic, and religious lines, which, if blurred, would constitute a real loss in cultural value and identity. In today’s North America, whites are whites, and their exact point of ancestry in Europe doesn’t really matter. The difference between being a Canadian and being an American is mostly political, as in a matter of civil law rather than of blood and soil. People can switch out the maple leaf for the stars and stripes easily enough and do just fine.
So how could Trump’s tariffs result in red-state secession in Canada? Well, it may all boil down to the upcoming Canadian elections in April. If the left-wing globalist Mark Carney defeats the conservative Pierre Poilievre to remain prime minister, as the polls suggest he will, then we could expect Canadian escalation rather than capitulation in the current US-Canadian trade war. It seems that the Left in Canada hates Trump as much as it does in America, but with greater nationalistic umbrage. Take, for example, the following quote from the totally not fake Canadian Jardeep Singh:
I have a message for Donald Trump. Our country is not for sale, not now, not ever.
I lived across the country and I can tell you Canadians are a proud people. We’re proud of our country, and we’re ready to fight like hell to defend it. Right now, with the forest fires, ravaging homes, Canadian firefighters showed up. That’s who we are, we show up and help our neighbors.
If Donald Trump thinks he can pick a fight with us, there would be a price to pay. I have committed that if Donald Trump imposes tariffs on us, we should respond with retaliatory tariffs in kind. I think anyone running as PM should do the same.
According to The Gateway Pundit, Mark Carney feels the same way:
On March 27, after a cabinet meeting in Ottawa, Prime Minister Mark Carney declared, “The old relationship based on economic integration and military cooperation is over,” citing President Donald Trump’s steep tariff threats—including a 25% levy on Canadian cars and parts—as a “direct attack” violating the USMCA [United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement]. With Trump hinting at even harsher measures on Truth Social, Carney warned that the U.S. is no longer reliable, vowing to “dramatically reduce” Canada’s dependence and pivot toward allies like France and the UK. Promising forceful retaliatory trade actions as Canada now braces for a trade war, marking the end of decades of trust and a urgent push for new global alliances.
It seems that red state secessionists on either side of the 49th parallel should now be in the counter-intuitive position of rooting for a leftist victory in April. Should Carney win and remain true to his hardline rhetoric, he will only exacerbate the pain ordinary Canadians will feel when having to deal with the United States on an equal economic footing.
Again, according to Gateway:
Nearly every Canadian province directs at least 55% of its exports to the US, with some seeing trade account for 17% to 40% of their GDP. Nationally, exports to the US made up 16.8% if Canada’s GDP in 2023, with critical commodities like oil, natural gas, and minerals—such as uranium and potash—flowing south.
Throw in the reduction of foreign investments, that Canadian manufacturers are likely to move production to the US, and the fact that the Europeans are not really in a position to replace the United States as Canada’s prime trading partner, and one can quickly see that Canada is not going to win this trade war. Yet its liberal leadership insists on waging it, purportedly for the sake of highfalutin ideals such as nationalism. In some ways, Canada resembles the WNBA in its delusional overestimation of its own value and importance. Carney, Singh, and Ontario Premier Doug Ford are about as obnoxious as well. These are some of the same people who opposed the trucker convoy in 2022, enforced COVID lockdowns, and flooded Canada with non-white immigration for the past decade.
As the more conservative Canadian provinces begin to bear the brunt of Trump’s tariffs, they are not going to blame Trump, who is only giving as good as he is getting economically. Rather, they are going to blame their own egotistical leadership who could have avoided this absurd standoff with sober governance all along.
The tariffs have barely even started and the Western Canadian secessionist movement (known as “Wexit”) is already gaining steam. While a mere 10 percent of Canadians support becoming the 51st state, according to a January 2025 poll by the Angus Reid Institute, that number jumps to 15 percent in Saskatchewan and 18 percent in Alberta, two reliably conservative provinces. An Ipsos poll from the same month reports that one in three Canadians between 35 and 54 support joining the US if it meant a full conversion of their assets to the dollar. 43 percent of Canadians between 18 and 34 feel the same way. This month a poll by independent journalist Rachel Parker suggested that 36 percent of Albertans support independence, and 20 percent support the idea of joining the United States. According to Parker, “support for the Wexit movement has never been higher, even while there hasn’t been a sustained campaign, pushing for Alberta independence or Alberta statehood.”
What’s getting people chattering is imagining how Canadian secession-fever will balloon once the pain of the trade war kicks in, which the Canadian globalist leadership will be helpless to stop. Then there very well could be such a sustained campaign. Conservatives in Alberta and other places in Canada have plenty of beef as it is with Ottowa. Much of it concerns the $3 billion Alberta pays each year in “equalization payments,” as well as an imminent 21 percent carbon tax increase, and an emissions cap the Canadian federal government wishes to impose upon Alberta’s energy industry, effectively crippling it. According to Jeffrey Rath, leader of a steering committee looking into the prospects of Albertan statehood in America:
People in Alberta are fed up with being governed by idiotic politicians from Quebec and Ontario, that do not understand our province and do not understand that culturally, we’re far more closely affiliated with our friends to the south in Montana, than we are with all of the people in Ottawa, wringing their hands of the smell of diesel exhaust when people from Alberta come to protest how badly we’re being treated by Ottowa.
Rath badly wants Alberta to hold a referendum to become the 51st state. Furthermore, it now seems as if this might happen after the election, as Alberta’s premier Danielle Smith has recently announced that she will form a panel to look into the matter.
And if Alberta goes, the similarly conservative Saskatchewan would likely follow, which would then lead the way for the US to purchase the sparsely populated northern provinces of Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut. At this point, the United States would have complete Arctic dominance in the Western Hemisphere, not to mention access to untold natural resources. This is why Trump’s trade war with Canada is such a big deal. It is a big deal for white identitarians for additional reasons as well.
White identitarians should support at the very least the annexation of Alberta and Saskatchewan because this will not only make the United States proportionally more white, it will likely grant an additional 10-12 electoral votes to the GOP, which will make it even more difficult for the already fractured Democratic Party to overturn the America-first MAGA agenda in federal elections. We should remember that this agenda includes mass deportations, border protection, and taking in white South African refugees—all good things.
Alberta is estimated today to have a population of just under 5 million. According to these two Wikipedia articles, anywhere between 65 and 72 percent of Albertans are white. Of the non-whites, most are either East Asian (Filipino or Chinese) or indigenous. For its part, Saskatchewan is estimated today to have 1.25 million people, approximately 88 percent of whom are white according to Wikipedia. If these provinces became states today (and assuming they would elect conservative majorities in their own elections), Alberta, which is slightly less populous than Alabama, would bring in perhaps 8 electoral votes, and Saskatchewan, which is slightly more populous than Montana, would bring in perhaps 4. Together, they have about the population of Maryland, which currently brings in 10 electoral votes. Turning these provinces into states would be a boon for North American whites, not least because left-leaning American states might realize the futility in effecting their radical agenda in such a conservative environment and push for secession themselves. Remember, blue-state secession is the same as red-state secession. After this, the remaining United States might eventually become white and conservative enough to shift the Overton Window so far to the right that Greg Johnson would have to consider removing the word “Counter” from his website. By that point, white identity and race realism may very well be mainstream once again. And when that happens, whites can start demanding their majorities in perpetuity.
I understand all this is still a long shot. A majority of Canadians still oppose joining the United States, Carney could lose to Poilievre in April, and I am sure there would be a host of thorny political hurdles to overcome for Wexit to succeed. Nothing in life is ever so simple as what I have laid out so far in this essay. Further complicating things is Trump himself, who seems intent on making all of Canada the 51st state.
This is on its face a terrible idea since including Canada’s liberal eastern provinces as well as left-leaning British Columbia into America will give the Left, not the Right, an insurmountable electoral edge. Trump must know this. All I can hope for is that Trump really only wants Alberta, Saskatchewan, and the northern territories, but is employing the 51st state troll in order to goad the Canadians into either being better trading partners or engaging in a trade war they cannot possibly win, thus giving Wexit supporters even more reason to secede.
Who knows?
But what I do know is that for the first time since I began writing on Dissident Right matters nine years ago I can see a path forward to a white ethnostate in North America. And it begins with red state secession in Canada.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
25 comments
I agree that annexation of Alberta and Saskatchewan makes good sense.
When I lived in Alberta back in the 2000s for four year on a work assignment, there was already very much division between East and West Canada. Alberta is the Texas of Canada and Saskatchewan is like one of our prairie states. White conservatives for the most part.
We do NOT want or need eastern Canada. Way more trouble than it is worth.
I really don’t know how to take all this ‘Canada as US state’ talk but isn’t Canada very liberal and wouldn’t making it a state just provide the Democrats with another California during Presidential elections? Or am I wrong and this would be a red California to offset the blue one??
Yes, even their conservatives are more cucked than ours, and they have masses of Third Worlders flooding in. Why import more of the cancer?
Trying to annex Canada and talk of seizing Greenland (all within the first few months of a presidency) don’t strike me as moves coming from a position of strength. They seem like the acts of a fading superpower that is flailing around as it tries to reinvigorate itself.
…And if I was a conspiracy theorist, then I’d say that Trump is likely either:
1) Genuinely compromised by Russian blackmail or propaganda and is engaging in acts on Russia’s wishlist (talk of seizing foreign territory justifies Russia’s claims in Ukraine, pulling out of NATO is an obvious boost to Russia, starting a trade war with the EU and Canada will also benefit Russia).
2. Being used as a patsy by a faction of the global elite. Their goal is presumably to stop the rise of China as the Chinese never liberalized in the way these elites expected (as a side note, there are dozens of papers from groups like the Council on Foreign Relations which openly say that they resent China for its lack of liberalization). They are also using Trump as a tool to distract White Americans while the country continues to become more Brown. Finally, Trump is playing the villain and radicalizing the Left.
Consider that they are currently no more deportation flights than under Biden:
Most recently, there were military deportation flights on March 20 and on Friday, a U.S. official confirmed.
“They’re not doing more deportation flights than they were under Biden, and certainly not doing more than peak times in the past,” Cartwright told Military.com. “They just want to basically strengthen their position that we’re under an invasion by having this kind of theatrical use of the military. It’s a very, very expensive public relations campaign, in my view.”
Source:
https://www.military.com/daily-news/investigations-and-features/2025/03/28/how-trump-leaning-military-fulfill-his-hopes-of-mass-deportations-and-immigration-freeze.html
Something is very wrong here, and I personally do not think this will end well.
I lived in Ontario from 1973-1991. Kept an eye on the country since I returned to the US.
We do not want Canada.
It was once a wonderful White nation. Its own French-English problem, among others, created endless mischief. But the demographic disfigurement since then has been catastrophic. It would be like importing more cancer.
As well, the Canadian nation (ie the Europeans who created the country) is not America. We may look alike, but I know from those years that they are not us. Nor should they be. They are their own ethnos. They deserve their own ethnostate.
“Take, for example, the following quote from the totally not fake Canadian Jardeep Singh:” Jardeep Singh is not Canadian. A Canadian is French, English, Irish, Scottish as seen on the Red Ensign at top of this article, plus the European diaspora. Canada’s Founding Fathers were implicit ethnic Nationalists primarily at the very least & pro European aka White at the very most.
“It was once a wonderful White nation.” Texts being received from Canada reads that Canadians are a minority now in all the major cities, if not, by next year.
Spencer: Should Carney win and remain true to his hardline rhetoric, he will only exacerbate the pain ordinary Canadians will feel when having to deal with the United States on an equal economic footing…
—
BC is correct about relatively White Alberta and Saskatchewan being more suitable for annexation than Canada’s liberal eastern provinces, but is a Trump pipedream.
Pro-White Paul Fromm, Canada’s foremost free speech champion, sent me this the other day about Trudeau’s replacement as PM, so don’t expect much to change with him:
…Mark Carney, a Globalist a member of the World Economic Forum, a man with three passports and a totalitarian bent. He often identifies himself as a “European”, not a Canadian! Carney was a wild enthusiast of anti-White Diversity, Equity and Inclusion when he was Governor of the Bank of England…
I’m afraid that you’re opening observation that ” Trump 2.0 may have put the idea of red state secession in the United States somewhat on hold for at least the next four years” is accurate. This is a shame, as the idea ought to be promoted now more than ever. Trump’s re- election offers Whites a temporary break in the form of increased deportations and reduced border crossings, but it’s temporary. It’s not a question of if the Left-wingers get back in power, but when, and they will undoubtably resume their old tricks the moment they do.
We cannot afford another four years like 2020-24. Like you wrote earlier this year, we must “always be seceding.”
Sadly, there hasn’t been much talk of blue-state secession. My hope was that the day after Trump won that Democrat governors would begin discussing it publicly.
I’m not all that familiar with Canada, but I do wonder if the Canadian provinces considering secession actually want to join the United States, or if they’d prefer to be independent. If they do want to join, I say Trump should work out a trade: the US gets Alberta and Saskatchewan, but Canada has to take New England and California.
No.
Truly disturbing that a supposedly pro-white author could write something like this. The ethnocide of Canadians would be a disaster. Canadians are not the same ethnic group as white Americans, they have a far purer British ancestry.
Trump is not a pro-white leader. His policies would do nothing to stop Canada’s current problems with immigration and only add the new problem of mixing that already killed the WASP ethnicity in America. Why should we cheer the death of fellow white ethnicities? And all over something as petty and irrelevant as money.
“Why should we cheer the death of fellow white ethnicities?”
Are we cheering the death of fellow white ethnicities when inviting white South Africans to apply for citizenship in the United States? I see Alberta and Saskatchewan joining the US similarly. Red state secession is action on the part of whites to get closer to other whites regardless of point of origin in Europe. Never have we seen it go in the opposite direction. It is safer that way considering the threats from immigration and the Left. Bringing these two provinces into the US makes us more white, and will encourage other white Canadians to join the US as well. Thus the Canadian left will be left to fester with all the nonwhite immigration they have encouraged. It will also further enrage the American left and encourage them to secede. I know this is all unlikely at this point, but it is more likely than ever before.
Not seeing a downside here.
What you’re proposing IS a threat from immigration. Besides the giant glaring fact that republicanism is not remotely the same as white nationalism, even if it worked out the way you suggest you would be harming a white ethnicity. The left are no longer a serious threat, conservatives are.
As to your South African example, yes that kills that ethnicity. South Africans need their own home and their own ethnic integrity. American imperialism destroys both.
I think Canadian is as much an ethnicity as American is, which is not much at all, especially these days. For all the bad we would get with Alberta and Saskatchewan, the net would be positive for whites there and here.
Further I fail to see how inviting South African whites to emigrate to the United States because they are being murdered and terrorized by blacks and oppressed by their government counts as “American imperialism.” If we were to send them arms and urge them to protect themselves and fight for their rights, would that be less imperialistic?
I don’t know why you want to deny that Canadian and American ethnicities are real and distinct, but try watching this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISB48ZxHfLI
Apologies for not reading closely enough, I thought you referred to taking South African land too. Yes sending arms would be less imperialistic, and probably the best move that could be done for them. Allowing immigration is fine because it is based on freedom of choice and still allows the ethnicity to remain distinct outside of America, but in that case why take Canadian land? You already have immigration options for Canadians.
“Allowing immigration is fine because it is based on freedom of choice and still allows the ethnicity to remain distinct outside of America, but in that case why take Canadian land?”
If Alberta has a referendum on secession as they are legally allowed to do, and then vote to secede from Canada, and then petition to join the US, how is that taking Canadian land? For this to work we would need majority support from Albertans first. I would oppose Trump unilaterally trying to annex Alberta. That would be bald imperialism.
As for the ethnicity question, in the diaspora we don’t have the luxury to make firm ethnic distinctions among whites as they do in Europe. Out here we’re white and we need to get each other’s backs. And if that means changing borders and political realignments, so be it. But if a certain white ethnicity wishes maintain itself in the diaspora I’m fine with that too.
I’m also skeptical of Trump’s desire to annex Canada. Aside from the fact that he isn’t doing it to promote White interests; he has made it clear that he wants to incorporate the entirety of the country. This would give the Democrats an electoral advantage due to the large liberal provinces. It is a self-defeating plan.
Regarding British-Canadians and ethnic differences; when I was in Canada I found that the locals reminded me a bit of Americans from the Southern states. While the WASPs were largely replaced in the North, there is still a lot of Anglo-Saxon and Ulster ancestry in ‘Dixieland.’ I have also noticed that an extremely disproportionate number of America’s leading racialists (Taylor, Duke, Sam Dickson, etc.) come from the South and have British surnames.
https://albertaprosperityproject.com/
I thought I’d add this website into the discussion, it’s about Alberta Independence. I think its a good metapolitical project that could be copied in other majority European areas. Implicitly pro-white. The vast majority of people engaging with such a project would be Europeans close to understanding our worldview.
There is precedence. The Western Canada Concept, formed in 1980, had a platform for independence that capitalized in alienation from the political and cultural dominance of the central provinces, Quebec and Ontario.
http://canada.politics1.com/WCC-Alberta.htm. They won seats in Alberta and Saskatchewan legislatures and in Alberta in 1982 took 11.8% of the vote, but failed to take AA seat in that election in the provinces first past the post electoral system.
the following quote from the totally not fake Canadian Jardeep Singh:
Who is Jardeep Singh? I don’t suppose you mean Jagmeet Singh, leader of the New Democratic party of Canada?
“Jagmeet Singh Jimmy Dhaliwal is a Canadian politician who has served as the leader of the New Democratic Party since 2017, and as the member of Parliament for Burnaby South since 2019.” (wikipedia)
Edmonton’s mayor, amarjeet sohi, is a convicted terrorist and the Calgary one is also a jeet. We’ll just be importing the khalistani killzone and diplomatic row and who’s to say those provinces won’t follow the path of Texas and color-flop to democrat hands irreversibly over time?
USA + Canada: two economic zones becoming one giant economic zone = more white soldiers going to the middle east to die, or return, half-mad, with limbs missing. Why would you want that.
Didn’t they do that with NAFTA? 🧐
Hi, Peter. NAFTA was updated (done during O’DonnyBoy’s first term; it is now called USMCA.) Who cares about agreements; he just ends up doing what he’s told to do and the magatards can’t tell the difference.
Both countries are not nations; they have been de facto multicultural economic zones even before any major trade treaties were signed. It is easy enough to make trade pacts which then morph into one entity trying to take over the other completely, in a devious “hostile takeover”. That’s our Donald! Business as usual.
First, could this move by Trump amount to imperialism? I would say not. Anything short of coercion by arms or threat of arms falls short of imperialism, in my opinion
There doesn’t have to be threat of arms. Haven’t you ever heard of hostile takeovers in the business world? This would not be different in any substantial way – just another one of Donny’s endless business deals.
True to form, Trump lifted the 51st state moniker from opponents of the pre-NAFTA Canada-US free trade agreement of 1988. At the time, the leftist parties, the New Democrats and Liberals, were bitterly opposed to the trade proposal and fought, but lost the 1988 electiown. Their claim is that we would become a defacto 51st state. Old timers, especially leftists, would remember this. Trump purposely goaded using the term perhaps remembering that during his last term, some Canadian cities, under control of such leftists, had his buildings remove the label Trump.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.