Hillary Clinton’s ‘dream’ is a dystopian nightmare

Your local public library’s fiction shelves are likely stocked with many dystopian novels whose settings include a massive North American super-state comprised of the remnants of what use to be the United States, Canada, Mexico, and other nations.

Authors frequently use this common setting as a character of sorts, something like a giant bureaucratic monster who gobbles up the boundaries, culture, and even history of once sovereign nations.

Suzanne Collins (a graduate of the Alabama School of Fine Arts, by the way) called the nation “Panem” in her bestselling Hunger Games series.

The late David Foster Wallace dubbed the continental union the “Organization of North American Nations” in his Infinite Jest.

It was known as “Oceania” in George Orwell’s landmark novel 1984, although he expanded its territory a bit.

And the current Democratic nominee for President of the United States calls this hemispheric super-state her “dream.”

Wait … what?

Indeed.

While our nation was preoccupied with the vulgar things some reprehensible men say when they think nobody is listening, Wikileaks released the secret transcripts of a speech Hillary Clinton delivered to a bunch of Brazilian bankers a few years ago when she described this rather dystopian vision.

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere,” Clinton told the bankers.

A hemisphere without borders?

Such talk use to be relegated to fiction writers or the “Black Helicopter” crowd because most people believed it was just that – make-believe or downright crazy.

And yet here we have Clinton telling a group of international bankers that such an arrangement is a her “dream.”

It’s more like a nightmare in which life imitates art. Just as in those dystopian books, such collectivist ambitions always begin with sovereignty – and rights – being surrendered in the name of “growth” and “opportunity.” They also always end with later generations struggling against to regain their lost liberties. I’m sure Coriolanus Snow, Johnny Gentle, and Big Brother (the antagonist leaders in the above-mentioned dystopian novels) would all applaud Clinton’s nod to the super-state, but the rest of us should be quite alarmed.

Clinton’s usual defenders have claimed that the speech is nothing more than a speculative discussion of global economic policies, and has nothing to do with surrendering our nation’s sovereignty.

Don’t you believe it; her talk has everything to do with surrendering our sovereignty, along with our wealth, our resources, our culture, and eventually our liberty.

Think about what’s already happened.

This crowd tells us that we cannot have a distinct American culture and that requiring immigrants to assimilate is nothing more than racism or neo-colonialism. Multiculturalism is their watchword, just so long as it doesn’t include anything Anglo-Saxon or Judeo-Christian in origin.

They’ve also said that we cannot have a national language. English is only one of many tongues to be spoken in our land, and in many communities it isn’t preferred or even welcomed.

So if Clinton’s “dream” wouldn’t seriously threaten our sovereignty, then I ask you: if a nation doesn’t have a distinct culture, doesn’t have a common language, doesn’t have a separate economy, and doesn’t even have a definable border, is it a nation at all?

No, it isn’t.

Sure, even though the United States isn’t about to be rolled into something like Oceania (although television news seems to resemble Ingsoc propaganda more each day), we’d be foolish not to listen closely to the left’s “dreams” about erasing our borders in favor of some larger economic jurisdiction. It all fits too nicely into their ideological goals of leveling the field for everyone – and I mean everyone – and their preference for large governments and massive regulatory schemes.

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders,” she says.

If we finally start listening, there’s still time to ensure that Clinton’s “dream” of a borderless hemisphere remains relegated to the nightmares of dystopian fiction … where it belongs.