The coming obsolescence of North American borders
United States and Canada might be at crossroads as political entities
In February 1994 Robert D. Kaplan, foreign affairs specialist and correspondent for The Atlantic Monthly wrote an essay titled The Coming Anarchy in which he stated:
“ Indeed, it is not clear that the United States will survive the next century exactly in its present form. Because America is a multi ethnic society, the nation-state has always been more fragile here than it is in more homogeneous societies like Germany and Japan. (…)
This and many other factors will make the United States less of a nation than it is today, even as it gains territory following the peaceful dissolution of Canada. Quebec, based on the bedrock of Roman Catholicism and Francophone ethnicity, could yet turn out to be North America’s most cohesive and crime-free nation-state. (…)
“Patriotism” will become increasingly regional as people in Alberta and Montana discover that they have far more in common with each other than they do with Ottawa or Washington.”
Robert D. Kaplan, The Coming Anarchy, 1994
You might think that Kaplan’s assertions were an hyperbolic forecast of the political landscape to come in North America as none of its political prophecy materialized so far; Quebec rejected independence in a referendum a year later in 1995 and the United States have survived harsher political turmoil in their past, are still one of the strongest nations economically and a prominent superpower on the world stage.
True enough but I would encourage the reader to think again. Kaplan’s assessment must be taken in a longer time scale. He is a seasoned foreign affairs specialist that extensively traveled the world, and with this particular essay, he was setting the table for the decades and the century ahead, not making short term predictions for the immediate years following his article for The Atlantic. His focus remains on long term trends.
When observing demographic, political and societal trends, one must elevate its vision to look further (both in the past and the future), try to gain an helicopter view on any situation and extract the essence of historical patterns. For those who have read most of my work so far will recognize the angle I continuously strive to take when trying to make sense of current events.
If the study of history is to be useful in analyzing and forecasting the turns our societies are likely to take, it must be studied with a wide angle, not a narrow one. Just like making climate projections based only on a couple of decades of data makes no scientific sense, the same applies when interpreting the evolution of societal trends.
Political tug of war
For all the talks in recent decades on the necessity to establish a supra-national political entity in order to curtail world issues and 21st century problems such as terrorism, climate change, tax heavens, income inequality and the like, the political elites from western democracies, pressuring their populations to create such mega structures, have triggered and fomented among them grassroots oppositions as a side effect.
Centralizing federal governments around the western world have seen their authority challenged in recent decades and more of the same will most likely occur in the 2020’s and beyond (at least until a new sustainable political realignment occurs) with a strong anchor in historical regionalism.
On the surface, the political power of federations looks strong, fueled by large bureaucratic structures attending G20 summits or COP conferences for climate action, but behind this facade aided by mainstream media coverage, their power is wavering and gradually losing ground in large pockets of their respective populations.
The European union already went through Brexit in 2020 following a referendum in the UK in 2016, the French state faced mass protests in 2018 from the Gilets Jaunes and are about to witness a presidential election like no other in 2022 with the rise of overtly nationalist Eric Zemmour. A former journalist and essayist that some might be tempted to call the Victor Orban of France for his particularly strong stance on immigration and being openly against EU interference in national domains.
Among multiple other political tensions on the old continent, we must not forget the still active nationalist movements in Scotland and Catalunya regardless of recent failed referenda on independence. In any event, in a future scenario without France nor the UK in the mix, the European Union would not stand long term with the same structure as today.
Closer to home in North America, besides the traditional push back from Québec towards the Canadian federal government (currently governed by an “autonomist” party in the Coalition Avenir Québec with antagonistic cultural and linguistic positions) and Texas (who regularly had pockets of militants keeping alive the dream of an independent state), both countries are witnessing the rise of new secessionists.
Contemporary secessionists
In the midst of this new crisis era, North America is observing a resurgence of these grassroots movements promoting peaceful secession from federal entities. Many regions / states / provinces are at odds with the political vision promoted in the capital.
Multiple examples already abound in the US and Canada:
Alberta: Wexit
Quebec: Parti Québécois
Texas: Texas Nationalist Movement
New Hampshire: Free State Project
West coast states: Cascadia
California: Calexit
Even if most of these movements are fairly marginal at the moment, the explosive political context and the current tensions experienced in multiple regions of the continent constitute the perfect recipe for a possible reshaping of the political landscape in the decades ahead.
Central governments are gradually loosing credibility to the eyes of many, especially the citizens living outside large urban areas (more on this in the last part of this article).
A quote from a book that was too easily cast aside back in the 1990’s, but that has gained in popularity since as its prophetic forecast of the current crisis era is unfolding before our eyes, sheds some light on the current cycle we are living through. It comes from The Fourth Turning by William Strauss and Neil Howe; two historians that focused heavily on the study of generations for decades and who published a history book like no other in 1997.
A book that did not obtain the praise it deserved at the time, especially from the academic world, as most historians will not approach a cyclical view of history with a ten foot pole as they focus on a linear evolution of world events. The Fourth Turning premise is perceived as a predestined vision of the world where “free will” does not constitute an acting force, thus not taken seriously by many thinkers. This cyclical paradigm, though being the primary analytical lens for most of civilized human history, has been gradually disregarded in the study of history since the enlightenment years.
In any case, in anticipation of the next crisis era to unfold roughly between the years 2005-2025, the authors wrote the following in 1997:
“ The prospect for great civic achievement - or disintegration - will be high. New secessionist movements could spring from nowhere and achieve their ends with surprising speed. Even if the nation stays together, its geography could be fundamentally changed, its party structure altered, its Constitution and Bill of Rights amended beyond recognition.
History offers even more sobering warnings: armed confrontation usually occurs around the climax of Crisis.”
William Strauss and Neil Howe, The Fourth Turning, 1997
The basic premise argued in The Fourth Turning goes as follows:
History unfolds in a cyclical pattern similar to the seasons in a year
Every saeculum (siècle, century) - or the equivalent length of a human life (around 80-90 years) - a new cycle begins as the oldest cohort in the population passes away thus bringing no living memory of the last crisis.
The Anglo-American world has witnessed a crisis every saeculum stretching back many centuries (WWII - Civil War - American Revolution - etc.)
The four phases (or turnings) of a saeculum are:
High (spring) - “upbeat era of strengthening institutions”
Awakening (summer) - “passionate era of spiritual upheaval”
Unraveling (autumn) - “downcast era of strengthening individualism”
Crisis (winter) - “decisive era of secular upheaval; replacement of the old civic order”
Each generation born in different phases of the cycle will develop a group archetype with common characteristics stemming from the dominant societal mood of their early years. These generations will thus impact society differently with the passing of time as they progress through life.
The current cycle corresponds to:
High = American High (1946-1964)
Awakening = Consciousness Revolution (1964-1984)
Unraveling = Culture Wars (1984-2008)
Crisis = Millennial Crisis (2008-2026 ??)
“History creates generations, generations create history”
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Nomad Historian to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.