Donald Trump’s Davos speech touted America’s economic revival—12,000 new factories, record-low unemployment across demographics, and wage growth for low earners—while dismissing climate concerns as "not pollution," urging Europe to buy U.S. energy for security. Contrasting Trudeau’s UN-focused globalism with his nationalist stance, Trump highlighted judicial appointments (190 federal judges, two Supreme Court justices) to enforce "constitutional rule of law." Professor Frank Buckley warned secessionist movements like Brexit or hypothetical U.S. state splits could impose a "10% tax" on unity, citing Quebec’s costly 50-year struggle, but proposed "secession light" as a compromise. Trump’s reelection may accelerate leftist secessionist talk amid culture wars and policy clashes, with Buckley betting on his victory due to Democratic divisions and the left’s frustration over domestic failures. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey there, today I've got a podcast I think you're going to like, mainly because I don't do most of the talking.
Donald Trump does.
I want to show you his speech that he gave at the Davos World Economic Forum the other day.
And I bet you have not heard this speech anywhere because why on earth would the media want to show it to you?
I mean, it's actually a great speech, which is why they don't want to show it to you.
I give you my thoughts in between various segments.
I'd encourage you to become a premium subscriber.
You get the video version.
Just go to premium.rebelnews.com and it's basically this podcast with me and visual elements, clips, audio, charts, stuff like that.
And of course, I interview a guest every day, as you know.
You also get Sheila Gunread's show and David Menzie's show.
So I think it's well worth the eight bucks a month.
That's premium.rebelnews.com.
Okay, here's the podcast.
Tonight, Donald Trump goes to Davos and does his job talking about America's economy, not about his socks.
It's January 23rd, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
Economic Boom Declared00:15:02
The only thing I have to say is government.
But why publish them?
It's because it's my bloody right to do so.
Every January, the world's business elites gather in the town of Davos, Switzerland, for a giant jamboree of wealth and power called the World Economic Forum.
Billionaires go there, corporate tycoons, but also politicians and other grifters, schemers, charlatans, of course.
They smell the wealth and the power and want to get in on it.
Just months after Trudeau was elected in late 2015, he went to Davos.
Here's a picture of that meeting with George Soros there.
It's a Soros kind of place.
Look at how Trudeau was sitting and how Soros was sitting.
You know who the boss in that picture is.
I remember that super gross trip.
The CBC was even worse than Trudeau himself.
They assigned Aaron Warry to do stories about Justin Trudeau's socks.
I'm not kidding.
Look at this.
Imagine going to journalism school, getting hired by a media company, and being assigned to cover the prime minister's socks.
That's North Korea-style state broadcaster cult behavior.
That's super gross.
I don't know if there's a connection between Jeffrey Epstein and Davos, but it's that kind of place.
Kevin Spacey, the accused molester, loves to go to Davos.
He was with Trudeau and Aaron Warry at a party, and Aaron Warry was so excited to see him.
Prince Andrew, who was fired by the Queen for his activities with Epstein, he used to go to Davos.
It's that kind of place.
It's Trudeau's kind of place.
He's a head of government, but there's no there there.
Normally, it's the empty celebrities like Kevin Spacey who have to impress with things like socks.
The heads of government, the heads of business, actually go to talk government and business.
But Trudeau has so little to say, so little to say, but he says it so smugly.
But you need to take as much effort to talk to your sons, my eight-year-old boy, and my two-year-old's still a little young still, about how he treats women and how he is going to be growing up to be a feminist just like that.
Imagine having the world's investors in a room and talking about what a feminist you are.
This from the groper, the firer of Jody Wilson-Raybold and any other woman who got in his way.
What a loser he is.
What a room full of posers.
It's not really Donald Trump's kind of place.
I don't think.
I mean, in a way, they are.
Before Donald Trump ran for president, he was a celebrity too.
He had a hit TV show.
He hosted Miss America.
He was a tycoon.
He was over the top in his style.
They'd all have loved him before, but they all hate him now.
But still, he went this week and he gave a speech.
And it was completely opposite the hollow, vain, narcissistic, woke emptiness of Trudeau's feminist speech.
I want to play some clips of Trump's speech for you because I am completely certain the CBC did not show you any of this and you'll see why.
When I spoke at this forum two years ago, I told you that we had launched the great American comeback.
Today I'm proud to declare that the United States is in the midst of an economic boom, the likes of which the world has never seen before.
We've regained our stride, rediscovered our spirit, and reawakened the powerful machinery of American enterprise.
America is thriving, America is flourishing, and yes, America is winning again like never before.
Now, it's a room full of arrogant, vain narcissists, true, but in some cases, I guess they have good reason to be arrogant and vain.
I mean, if you're a billionaire, if you're a head of state, if you're royalty, if you're a superstar, you have some reason to be proud, even too proud.
But the thing about Davos is that they all fake being woke and selfless and righteous.
They all flew there on their private jets, but they're all nodding along piously to St. Greta, scolding them about using energy.
So yeah, they're all rich and powerful and proud, but unlike Trump, they don't dare say who they are, either because they're too politically correct or they lack the courage to be who they are, or they support Greta and the other woke ideologies simply because those are great ways to increase your power over people through laws or regulations or taxes.
Don't think Greta isn't being used by various power.
Okay, back to Trump's speech.
Just last week alone, the United States concluded two extraordinary trade deals, the agreement with China and the United States-Mexico-Canada agreement, the two biggest trade deals ever made.
They just happened to get done in the same week.
These agreements represent a new model of trade for the 21st century, agreements that are fair, reciprocal, and that prioritize the needs of workers and families.
America's economic turnaround has been nothing short of spectacular work.
How can you disagree?
Who would have imagined that Apple would be building computer factories in America?
And though I wish Trump drove a harder bargain on China, he got more from them than anyone else ever has.
I think he's the first one to even try by staring them down, by tariffing them, by speaking truth to power, and by showing that he isn't scared of them.
He literally warned China about getting too tough with Hong Kong right in the middle of their trade negotiations.
That's noble to begin with, but it also showed China that Trump simply didn't care if they pouted or if they quit the trucks.
Trump didn't just make America win.
He made China lose.
He's pushed China's economic growth to its lowest in a generation.
He scared them.
He stressed them.
Good.
Good.
And it's a good message for Trump to take to the blue-collar Rust Belt states in 2020 that unlike the Democrats, Trump actually went to fight China and he won.
Here's some more.
When I took office three years ago, America's economy was in a rather dismal state.
Under the previous administration, nearly 200,000 manufacturing jobs had vanished.
Wages were flat or falling.
Almost 5 million more Americans had left the labor force than had gotten jobs, and more than 10 million people had been added to the food stamp rolls.
The experts predicted a decade of very, very slow growth or maybe even negative growth, high unemployment and a dwindling workforce, and very much a shrinking middle class.
Millions of hardworking, ordinary citizens felt neglected, betrayed, forgotten.
They were rapidly losing faith in the system.
Before my presidency began, the outlook for many nations was bleak.
Top economists warned of a protracted worldwide recession.
The World Bank lowered its projections for global growth to a number that nobody wanted to even think about.
Pessimism had taken root deep in the minds of leading thinkers, business leaders, and policymakers.
He goes on like that, but let me stop for a moment.
It's true.
I don't know if you remember, but Barack Obama was asked why he doesn't have growth in factories and jobs, and he said it was impossible to do.
You needed a magic wand.
He's going to bring all these jobs back.
Well, how exactly are you going to do that?
What are you going to do?
There's no answer to it.
He just says, well, I'm going to negotiate a better deal.
Well, how exactly are you going to negotiate that?
What magic wand do you have?
Yeah, magic wand just happened, I guess.
I wish we had someone in Canada who cared about jobs the same way Trump does.
Canada should be like that.
We would be if we were building $100 billion worth of oil and gas and pipeline projects that Trudeau has killed.
And get this.
For the first time in decades, we are no longer simply concentrating wealth in the hands of a few.
We're concentrating and creating the most inclusive economy ever to exist.
We are lifting up Americans of every race, color, religion, and creed.
Unemployment rates among African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans have all reached record lows.
African American youth unemployment has reached the lowest it's ever been in the history of our country.
African American poverty has plummeted to the lowest rate ever recorded.
The unemployment rate for women reached the lowest level since 1953, and women now comprise a majority of the American workforce.
That's for the first time.
The unemployment rate for veterans has dropped to a record low.
The unemployment rate for disabled Americans has reached an all-time record low.
Workers without a high school diploma have achieved the lowest unemployment rate recorded in U.S. history.
Wages are rising across the board, and those at the bottom of the income ladder are enjoying the percentage by far largest gains.
Workers' wages are now growing faster than management wages.
Earnings growth for the bottom 10% is outpacing the top 10%, something that has not happened.
Paychecks for high school graduates are rising faster than for college graduates.
When was the last time that any politician on the left spoke that way?
You can't if you prefer the environmentalist set to the working class.
If you're for a carbon tax, you hate coal miners.
It's just a fact.
I like that phrase Trump used at the beginning of that clip.
You know, Jeremy Corbyn's UK Labor Party had the slogan, for the many, not the few.
Trump actually lives it.
Here's some more.
For the first time in decades, we are no longer simply concentrating wealth in the hands of a few.
We're concentrating and creating the most inclusive economy ever to exist.
We are lifting up Americans of every race, color, religion, and creed.
Unemployment rates among African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans have all reached record lows.
African American youth unemployment has reached the lowest it's ever been in the history of our country.
African American poverty has plummeted to the lowest rate ever recorded.
The unemployment rate for women reached the lowest level since 1953, and women now comprise a majority of the American workforce.
That's for the first time.
The unemployment rate for veterans has dropped to a record low.
The unemployment rate for disabled Americans has reached an all-time record low.
Workers without a high school diploma have achieved the lowest unemployment rate recorded in U.S. history.
Wages are rising across the board, and those at the bottom of the income ladder are enjoying the percentage by far largest gains.
Workers' wages are now growing faster than management wages.
Earnings growth for the bottom 10% is outpacing the top 10%, something that has not happened.
Paychecks for high school graduates are rising faster than for college graduates.
I didn't actually know all those facts.
The media didn't.
The CBC sure doesn't.
They prefer the myth that America is about rapacious capitalists in top hats, the 1%.
They like historically illiterate leftists better, like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calling for socialism, even though capitalism is what's actually lifting up poor people.
Here's more.
We have created 1.2 million manufacturing and construction jobs, a number also unthinkable.
After losing 60,000 factories under the previous two administrations, hard to believe when you hear 60,000 factories, America has now gained, in a very short period of time, 12,000 new factories under my administration, and the numbers going up rapidly.
We'll be beating the 60,000 number that we lost, except these will be bigger, newer, and the latest.
Must be nice to have a country that lets you build things without a gender analysis first.
Gender impact?
How does that fit into a pipeline approval process?
So I'm really glad you asked that, because I think people are like, well, what is this gender thing?
Well, imagine that you have a huge number of people going to a remote community, many men.
What is the impact on the community?
What is the impact on women in the community?
And actually, once again, smart proponents understand this, so they're going to put measures in place.
That's all it is.
It's just taking a smart approach to thinking about, okay, what's going to be the impact of a major development in a particular area.
Yeah.
Trump goes on about the economy for a while.
I'm not going to play any more of it.
It's great, but I just don't have time.
But then he talks about nationalism as opposed to globalism.
And this is what surely bothered the George Soros set the most.
A nation's highest duty is to its own citizens.
Honoring this truth is the only way to build faith and confidence in the market system.
Only when governments put their own citizens first will people be fully invested in their national futures.
In the United States, we are building an economy that works for everyone, restoring the bonds of love and loyalty that unites citizens and powers nations.
Today, I hold up the American model as an example to the world of a working system of free enterprise that will produce the most benefits for the most people in the 21st century and beyond.
A pro-worker, pro-citizen, pro-family agenda demonstrates how a nation can thrive when its communities, its companies, its government, and its people work together for the good of the whole nation.
How opposite to Trudeau, who cares for foreign countries more than he cares for entire provinces and demographics in his own country?
Trudeau loves the UN, certainly more than he loves Alberta.
Don't you think?
American Energy Independence00:06:09
Can you doubt it?
Trump is doing one thing Stephen Harper didn't do.
He's making American courts conservative.
Harper could have completely remade the judiciary in Canada over his nine years, but he didn't.
Some of that blame goes to Peter McKay, his former justice minister, who's now running for the Tory leader in Canada.
Get this.
We are also restoring the constitutional rule of law in America, which is essential to our economy, our liberty, and our future.
And that's why we've appointed over 190 federal judges, a record, to interpret the law as written.
190 federal judges, think of that, and two Supreme Court judges.
Hey, could you imagine Trudeau even saying the following words?
To every business looking for a place where they are free to invest, build, thrive, innovate, and succeed.
There is no better place on earth than the United States.
Yeah, no, yeah.
Trudeau preferred to talk about his own feminism.
You got a room full of billionaires, and you talk about your own feminism.
All right, here's Trump.
Listen to this.
Before I was elected, China's predatory practices were undermining trade for everyone.
But no one did anything about it except allow it to keep getting worse and worse and worse.
Under my leadership, America confronted the problem head-on.
Under our new phase one agreement, phase two is starting negotiations very shortly.
China has agreed to substantially do things that they would not have done, measures to protect intellectual property, stop forced technology transfers, remove trade barriers and agricultural goods and on agricultural goods where we were treated so badly, open its financial sector totally, that's done, and maintain a stable currency,
all backed by very, very strong enforcement.
Our relationship with China right now has probably never been better.
We went through a very rough patch, but it's never, ever been better.
My relationship with President Xi is an extraordinary one.
He's for China, I'm for the U.S., but other than that, we love each other.
I think that is not true, actually.
I think Xi Jinping hates Trump very much.
And I think Trump loves beating up on Xi Jinping.
I mean, he's doing it right here, right now in this speech.
It's Trump's way of saying he'll fight you and he'll keep fighting you even as he's negotiating with you.
That shows you who's boss.
That's a man who's negotiated a thousand deals, tiny and huge, in his career.
In one of the toughest industries in the world, New York City real estate.
I mean, if you're not dealing with the unions, you're dealing with the mob, you're dealing with government regulators, you're dealing with competitors.
Imagine how tough it is to do business in Manhattan.
Trump knows how to fight, he knows how to deal.
No one has ever taken on China that way, certainly not Justin Trudeau, the coward.
And get this on oil and gas.
To protect our security and our economy, we are also boldly embracing American energy independence.
The United States is now by far the number one producer of oil and natural gas anywhere in the world, by far.
It's not even close.
While many European countries struggle with crippling energy costs, the American energy revolution is saving American families $2,500 every year in lowering electric bills and numbers that people said couldn't happen.
And also, very importantly, prices at the pump.
We've been so successful that the United States no longer needs to import energy from hostile nations.
With an abundance of American natural gas now available, our European allies no longer have to be vulnerable to unfriendly energy suppliers either.
We urge our friends in Europe to use America's vast supply and achieve true energy security.
With U.S. companies and researchers leading the way, we are on the threshold of virtually unlimited reserves of energy, including from traditional fuels, LNG, clean coal, next generation nuclear power, and gas hydrate technologies.
You wouldn't know it, but Canada actually has about five times the oil reserves of the United States.
We have more oil in Canada than any other country besides Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, but we produce a fraction of what America does.
We should be saying those things.
Instead, we're bringing in carbon taxes, calling for gender analysis of projects, and importing oil from Saudi Arabia and from America by rail, if you can believe it.
And you know, when Trump talks about the environment, and he does, he doesn't talk about made-up problems like a puff of carbon dioxide, which is not a real problem.
It's not pollution, it's natural.
Donald Trump talks about, you know, the environment.
At the same time, I'm proud to report the United States as among the cleanest air and drinking water on earth, and we're going to keep it that way.
And we just came out with a report that at this moment, it's the cleanest it's been in the last 40 years.
We're committed to conserving the majesty of God's creation and the natural beauty of our world.
Today, I'm pleased to announce the United States will join One Trillion Trees Initiative being launched here at the World Economic Forum.
One Trillion Trees.
And in doing so, we will continue to show strong leadership in restoring, growing, and better managing our trees and our forests.
Now, we don't need to plant trees in Canada.
We have a trillion trees in our northern forests already.
We don't actually have to plant any more trees at all ever in our future.
A Global Warming Cult Leader00:02:19
We have more trees than we ever need, ever will need, but at least if Trudeau were planting trees, he wouldn't be destroying the country, killing jobs, and I suppose we'd have some pretty parks in the cities.
Instead, we've got a global warming cult leader who believes that oil is actually evil.
Listen to this.
This is the opposite of Trudeau's climate cult.
This is the opposite of Greta Thunberg shouting at everyone.
This is not a time for pessimism.
This is a time for optimism.
Fear and doubt is not a good thought process because this is a time for tremendous hope and joy and optimism and action.
But to embrace the possibilities of tomorrow, we must reject the perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse.
They are the heirs of yesterday's foolish fortune tellers, and I have them and you have them and we all have them.
And they want to see us do badly, but we don't let that happen.
They predicted an overpopulation crisis in the 1960s, mass starvation in the 70s, and an end of oil in the 1990s.
These alarmists always demand the same thing, absolute power to dominate, transform, and control every aspect of our lives.
We will never let radical socialists destroy our economy, wreck our country, or eradicate our liberty.
America will always be the proud, strong, and unyielding bastion of freedom.
In America, we understand what the pessimists refuse to see, that a growing and vibrant market economy focused on the future lifts the human spirit and excites creativity strong enough to overcome any challenge, any challenge by far.
This guy knows.
That's a positive message, isn't it?
And he's not mean most of the time in this speech.
Listen to him praise Europe.
And I think he really means that.
Centuries ago, at the time of the Renaissance, skilled craftsmen and laborers looked upwards and built the structures that still touch the human heart.
Quebec's Secession Referendum00:15:15
To this day, some of the greatest structures in the world have been built hundreds of years ago.
In Italy, the citizens once started construction on what would be a 140-year project, the Duomo of Florence, credible, credible place.
While the technology did not yet exist to complete their design, city fathers forged ahead anyway, certain that they would figure it out someday.
These citizens of Florence did not accept limits to their high aspirations.
And so the great dome was finally built.
In France, another century-long project continues to hold such a grip on our hearts and our souls that even 800 years after its construction, when the cathedral of Notre Dame was engulfed in flames last year, such a sad sight to watch.
Unbelievable sight, especially for those of us that considered it one of the great, great monuments and representing so many different things.
The whole world grieved.
Through her sanctuary now stands scorched and charred and a sight that's hard to believe.
When you got used to it, to look at it now, hard to believe.
But we know that Notre Dame will be restored, will be restored magnificently.
The great bells will once again ring out for all to hear, giving glory to God and filling millions with wonder and awe.
He's a builder.
He loves buildings.
What are you going to do?
All right, I've shown you a lot, but I wanted to because I know no other media in Canada and precious few in the U.S. media party would show you.
Here's how Trump ended.
Above all else, we will forever be loyal to our workers, our citizens, and our families, the men and women who are the backbone of our economies, the heart of our communities, and the soul of our countries.
Let us bring light to their lives one by one and empower them to light up the world.
Thank you very much.
God bless you.
God bless your countries and God bless America.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, that's what a world leader sounds like, America's leader, but also the leader of the free world.
He praises himself, sure, but mainly he praises his country and its workers and builders and citizens.
What a difference from our fancy socks, boy.
I'll say it.
I'm jealous.
Stay with us for more.
Well, in nine days, the United Kingdom will formally leave the European Union.
It was an It was a referendum that passed in 2016, even before Donald Trump was elected.
But finally, Brexit will happen at 11 p.m. on January 31st.
Wrexit is being discussed seriously in Alberta and Western Canada in reaction to Eastern Canada's hostility towards the oil and gas sector.
And of course, for decades, Quebec has talked about secession.
Well, is anyone talking about the United States?
Clearly, there's two Americas.
Anyone who compares the politics of, say, Silicon Valley with that of the heartland can see there are multitudes within.
Well, now a new book suggests that perhaps there's a time to break up the United States.
It's a shocking thesis, and it's in a book called American Secession, The Looming Threat of a National Breakup.
The author is a guest who's appeared on our show several times before to great audience reception.
I'm talking about Professor Frank Buckley, a professor at George Mason University's Scalia School of Law.
We've talked to him in the past about his book, The Republican Workers' Party, fascinating thesis.
And I'm delighted that he joins us now via Skype.
Professor, it's so good to have you back on.
American secession, it would not have come to mind.
I mean, America, by so many measures, is a great success.
Why do you think American secession is something that needs to be considered?
Well, maybe it's because I'm here, Ezra, as a refugee from Quebec.
Secession, and I'm originally from Saskatchewan, so secession seems perfectly natural.
I mean, it's the history of pretty much the whole world.
The whole world is pretty much staring down a secession movement.
And we've been immune from that.
But on the other hand, we've never been so divided.
I mean, we were frankly, I think, less divided in 1860 in many ways.
But we've got the wokiest parts of the country in places like Oregon and California.
And then you've got some more traditional states like my own used to be that way in Virginia.
And yet we think we can have one set of laws for the whole darn country.
And it's not working terribly well.
And so I think for a lot of reasons, we should expect to see something like a secession movement.
And the great thing is this time it'll be politically correct because we'll see it from the left-wing progressive states.
I mean, as you're aware, politics in America have become crazy.
And I have a simple explanation for that.
Back in 1992, Irving Crystal said the culture wars are over, the left won.
Then Donald Trump got elected in 2016.
And at that point, it became clear that the left had not quite won the war and may indeed be losing the war.
And as that happens, I think the left is going to start wondering: do we really want to be a part of a country when we think half of its members are deplorable?
And the divisions are geographic, right?
I mean, they weren't totally geographic here in 1860.
Virginia took three votes on secession in 1861, and the first two failed.
And it was only when Lincoln called up the troops that the third one passed.
And as for us, take a look at that 2016 map of how we voted.
And it's not just that there are reds and blues that are very geographic, but the reds are deep reds, and the blues are deep blues.
And the sense of alienation from the other part of America is very strong.
Well, listen, I get what you're saying.
And if you look at a county-level map of red and blue, and we'll put that on the screen now.
I mean, Donald Trump enjoys looking at this map because if you just measure county by county, almost the entire map is red.
But those blue counties in the big cities in New York, Chicago, California's cities, especially San Francisco, but also L.A., they are geographically small, but like you say, they're extremely liberal.
Like I don't know what the math was in Manhattan, but I'd be shocked if the Republicans got 10% there.
And that's Donald Trump's home borough.
So, I mean, really, aren't you talking about a separation of some cities?
I have not had a chance to tuck into your book yet, but it's very interesting.
I mean, Singapore is a city-state.
Hong Kong used to be a city-state.
Is that really the answer?
Get Manhattan out of things, get San Francisco and LA and Chicago out of things, maybe Miami and the rest is one big right-wing country?
Well, you're right.
The states themselves are very divided.
If secession were to happen, however, it would be on a statewide basis.
You'd see a referendum in some place like California.
And obviously, there'd be a lot of people who disagree, but nevertheless, it would be a state-led initiative.
On the other hand, as you note, there are pockets of unionists in California, for example.
So, another possibility here would be if California actually proceeded with it, you'll see movements for breakups within a state as well.
New York upstate would be totally unionist on my scenario, and New York City itself would be separatists.
Staten Island would be totally unionist.
So, you'd get the kind of divisions where people in San Diego County would be asked, Do you really want to be part of the same state as Los Angeles?
And I think we know what the answer is.
So, you know, the jigsaw puzzle can break up that way.
Well, let me ask you this.
I mean, I admire America, but I am not American.
I don't have a deep knowledge of the Civil War.
I know two things about it.
First of all, it was by far the bloodiest of all of America's wars.
In fact, if I'm not mistaken, more Americans died in the Civil War than all other wars combined.
Correct me if I'm wrong on that, Professor.
And it's the pain of that and the legacy of that continues to this day.
So, to propose secession, I'm not sure if you're quite proposing it as much as observing it.
Let me start by asking a basic question: is it even legal?
I mean, I don't think Abraham Lincoln thought it was legal.
Is it legal for a state to leave the Union?
Well, two questions there.
One is: would it be bloody as the Civil War was bloody?
And my answer is no.
And, you know, here I am channeling my experience in Quebec.
There was violence in Quebec in the 1960s and early 70s, but the violence completely stopped when the hothead realized they could get their way through legal means through secession, right?
So there's no violence in Quebec after 1976 and the election of the PQ government.
The other thing is: well, what about the Anglos in Quebec?
Well, you know the story well, so do all Canadians, right?
We English Montrealers spoke of Bill 101 and how it suppressed English rights, but we also called it Bill 401, right?
Because we thought, you know, what's going to happen is we'll take the 401 of Toronto, which about 300,000 English Montrealers did.
You know, so my advice, my suggestion is don't worry about violence, but buy stock in U-Haul.
The next question is: is this illegal?
You know, and the Supreme Court in 1868, once the Civil War was good and over, said secession is illegal.
But if you had to look at this perspective, right, before there was a conflict, I think the Supreme Court might well hesitate before empowering the president to send in the troops and invade the way they invaded my Alexandria in April 1861.
Virginia was unionist until it saw itself under attack.
So I don't think anybody would want to create an Abraham Lincoln again.
We'd be more likely to see a James Buchanan.
But the other thing here is, this would inevitably end up before the Supreme Court.
And I think two things would happen.
Number one, the originalists on the Supreme Court would recall that the framers of the Constitution believed that the country could split apart.
They didn't believe that there was an indissoluble union.
They actively contemplated a breakup of the country.
That was very much on the table.
The other thing that might, that the U.S. Supreme Court might look to, frankly, is the Canadian Supreme Court on the clarity reference.
And what the Canadian Supreme Court said, I thought made a heck of a lot of sense.
It said, number one, there's no absolute right of secession.
On the other hand, a secession referendum is not a nullity.
But rather, it's a sort of thing that should get people talking.
And if people started talking, once there was a secession referendum, well, you know, at that point, a number of things would be on the table, like how do you split up the federal debt?
But, you know, also, you know, a kind of renewed federalism of a kind we used to enjoy before the federal government thought it could rule everything and before the U.S. Supreme Court, you know, armed with the idea of an expansionary imperialistic liberalism, saw fit to dictate what our laws as to abortion and the like should be.
So, you know, we're not going to want to do the civil rights revolution in any state.
But, you know, if Alabama wants to tighten laws as to abortion, I don't see why California should have a voice in that question.
In Canada, the secession movement in Quebec, which is now 50 years old, or older, actually, drained so much energy and attention and morale and focus.
And it hijacked so much of the national conversation.
And I sense that Wexit, Western Canada, seeking an independent status, if unchecked, will do the same.
It just seemed, I mean, there may have been legitimate grievances in Quebec.
I believe there are legitimate grievances in Western Canada, but I know that the secession conversation had such a cost to it, and it dominated other issues.
And I look at America now, and I can see for myself cultural divides.
We saw that huge rally of gun owners in Virginia versus gun grabbers.
So yeah, there are issues, but I just can't imagine America being so strong, economically, strong, militarily, strong on huge things that matter if it were fighting a five, 10, 20-year internal fight over breaking up.
I mean, I accept that there are great differences between San Francisco and, let's say, Wyoming or West Virginia.
But I don't know, it just seems like this would be a 10% tax on the economy and morale and conversation of America.
I'm just brainstorming here.
Secession Risks Morale00:11:23
Well, you're right about one thing.
Secession is a bit of a tough sell for Canadians because Canadians went through that experience for a 50-year period, and it was profitless.
It diverted attention from things that needed to be done.
But it's a little different here.
Number one, we don't have the historic memory of how messy it was in Canada.
And number two, we've got a different constitutional structure where things just don't get done.
I mean, we have permanent grid law under the separation of powers in America, which one doesn't have in a parliamentary system.
So, you know, if you're worried about things not getting done, believe me, they won't get done under any circumstances.
The only way of getting things done, actually, would be probably to secede, right?
And, you know, at that point, the Iring sisters might depart in peace and pass whatever kind of woke legislation they want.
So it's the separation of powers in this country that creates an incentive for secession.
And then you have those great divisions.
I mean, here I am in Alexandria across the river from DC, and every morning the Washington Post arrives in my doorstep, and it's one more argument for secession, right?
It's just dripping with contempt for the kind of people who might disagree with its stance.
And, you know, and the thing is, the left doesn't have a stop instinct.
So they won the gay marriage debate and they instantly shifted to transgender rights, right?
So there is not almost no paper, almost no edition of the post that won't have something on transgender people.
I mean, I don't know where they go.
If they won that one, which they are, I don't know where they'd go next.
I don't know what's left, basically.
Well, in your blurb, which I've reviewed, I haven't read the whole book yet, but boy, you've tantalized me.
You talk about a secession light, and I first saw, well, that sounds like sovereignty association that was pitched by the Quebecers.
And that seems to suggest that you think that maybe there's a baby step or a halfway step, maybe to let out some of the pressure that's short of breaking up the Union.
I have to tell you, it would make me very sad if the United States were to break up.
Sentimentality is no reason to stop doing something, but I like the fact that America is mighty.
As you point out, it's one of the largest countries in the world, both geographically and population-wise.
I like that because I want a strong counterweight to China and Russia.
And I don't know, it would make me sad if America were to be lessened in some way.
Is there some halfway house?
What do you mean by secession light?
Well, you got a couple of questions there.
First of all, secession light would be, yes, something like sovereignty association.
It would, in fact, be a form of devolution where we'd reverse federal encroachments on state rights over the last 50 or 80 years, particularly through the Supreme Court.
And I think that would be great.
I mean, here I am in Virginia.
I couldn't care less what the gun laws in Massachusetts are.
If they want to live in an unsafe state, that's their business.
But don't tell me what our laws have to be here with respect to same-sex marriage and the like.
So that would be by way of calling a truce in the culture wars.
The other thing you talk about is how you're happy with America being strong.
And living here, trying to get a feel as somebody who's moved to the country about how Americans feel about their country, I believe that for many of them, the great attachment is to the glory of belonging to the country that owns all the guns in the room, that is, its military might.
But there's such a thing as too much of a good thing.
And Americans voted against the military might or the military expansionism in the 2006 congressional elections that gave the House to the Dems.
And in 2016, I mean, Donald Trump, and I, you know, I advise Trump on policy matters.
Donald Trump explicitly rejected the neocon desire to wage war in foreign countries.
I mean, he wanted to bring us back to Washington's farewell address where he said, look, you know, here we are in North America.
We don't have to worry about being invaded by neighboring countries.
We're not in Europe, thank God, and let's profit from that.
And yet, we spend more on the military than the next 21 countries put together, right?
Military budget about $680 billion a year.
So if we split into two countries and have that, I mean, would that be such a bad thing?
Nobody'd invade us.
We wouldn't have to worry about things.
And a lot of Americans are beginning to think we don't have to be the world's policemen.
And as for those woke states like California, if you told the Californian, on secession, you don't have to put the bill for the country's military budget, and that'll save you enough money to have a form of national health for Californians.
I think a lot of Californians would like that.
Well, it's very interesting.
I have not heard these ideas before.
And I wonder if the real impact of this book and these ideas will simply be to get Americans thinking about how they can solve some of the problems you outline in less dramatic ways than full secession.
You're talking about devolving powers, respecting the original intent of the Constitution, getting out of foreign adventurism, as Washington suggested.
Those would all be happy outcomes.
I don't know.
I'm a foreigner, so I don't have a direct stake in America, but I think many people around the world see it, see its strength and its glory as a form of protection and as a form of a role model.
I tell you, I look at those protesters in Hong Kong flying American flags, playing the American anthem, talking about American ideas.
And I think that greatness, I wouldn't want it to be diminished.
I wonder what Hong Kongers think is the essence of America.
I've been thinking a lot about them because I think in some ways they are the most outstanding freedom-oriented people in the world right now.
I just am endlessly impressed by that.
I don't know where my question is going here, other than I just, as a foreigner, I'm grateful that America is great.
Last word to you, Professor.
Well, I agree with everything you said, but the crucial point to understand here is that only Americans get to vote on American policy, not people in Hong Kong and not people in Canada.
And that's been the Trump message.
The Trump message has been, let's be self-interested.
We're not out there to do anything other than to protect our own, not to protect people in other countries.
Yeah, you know, we have concerns about the sealings in the South China Seas.
That's about our trade.
We have concerns about protecting Americans abroad.
And we can launch drone attacks on murderers who do that.
But there's been a fundamental shift in American foreign policy under Trump where your kinds of arguments are found to be less pressing.
No, I'm not saying it's an I agree with you.
I mean, I don't think America should be the world policeman.
I spent a fair bit of time reading the Afghanistan papers.
What an unmitigated disaster that unplanned fire hose of trillions of dollars with, I mean, it's just absolutely, I'm against American adventurism and the globo cop approach.
I guess I just don't want America to be diminished.
And that's as an outside friend and ally.
I did say last word to you, and then I felt like I had to jam in another word.
Tell me what you, let me switch gears because I got you on the Skype.
I know that you've had the president's ear on a few matters.
We're less than a year away until the election in November.
I can't say that any of the Democrat contenders are impressive to me.
Who knows if Hillary will throw her hat in in a late entry?
It looks to me like the cards are lining up well for Trump to have a success in his reelection.
Give me your thoughts on 2020.
Well, first of all, 2020 includes the impeachment.
That's obviously going to fizzle, right?
It's going to be a tremendous embarrassment.
And then you get people on the left running on the most left-wing policies that you could possibly imagine, right?
I mean, you know, of course they're socialists, right?
I mean, they're running on socialism, and they're not going to win on that.
And that, you know, so I think I don't want to say anything is assured in American politics, but I'm very confident Trump would be reelected.
And at that point, the left is going to have to decide, you know, do we lower our guns a little bit and try to get along a little better with people we despise, or do we look for some out, some way of getting out of all of this stuff?
And that's when I think they'll start looking at secession.
I mean, we already have massive interposition.
We have states who have declared themselves sanctuary states who don't enforce federal immigration laws.
Portland, Oregon, they permitted a mob to threaten ICE workers, federal immigration workers, to forbid them from leaving their buildings.
Finally, the federal government had to send in federal marshals to protect its own employees.
That's not Fort Sumter, but something wasn't all that far either.
So we have massive interposition, even attempts at nullification of federal laws.
That's tantamount to secession.
So it's a smaller step than you might think.
And the animosities here are so deep, it's not so hard to imagine.
Indeed, it's easy to imagine.
And that's my book.
You know what?
Hearing it that way, perhaps the book is more a hand book or a manual for upset Democrats the day after Trump wins again, more so than for Republicans.
Maybe that's your point.
I look forward to reading the book.
Interposition and Nullification00:01:52
Professor, you've been very generous with your time today, and I look forward to when we next speak.
Hey, Ezra, great as always to talk to you.
Right on.
Well, there you have it.
Professor Frank Buckley.
He's at George Mason University's Scalia School of Law.
And he joined us today via Skype from Alexandria, Virginia.
Stay with us.
More ahead on The Rebel.
Hey there, final thoughts today.
What do you think of Donald Trump's speech at Davos?
In a way, it was boring.
And what I mean by that is it wasn't a dramatic new initiative.
It wasn't trying to be fashionable.
It wasn't like it was just exactly what you would expect the leader of the United States to say to a gathering of the world's investors and billionaires and political leaders.
Like it wasn't exciting or dramatic or innovative.
It was just good.
It was great.
But on terms that fancy Justin Trudeau would say, oh, that's so obsolete.
We're about climate feminism or social justice or transgender pride or whatever.
Stuff that actually has nothing to do with the World Economic Forum.
I remember when Justin Trudeau was giving the floor at Davos, I think it was last year, and he went on and on and on about gender quotas for boards.
And look, give that speech at the Pussy Hat March.
give that speech to a high school class or something to a teachers federation, you've got the world's billionaires in a room and you're not wooing them with economic arguments.
In fact, you're scaring them with gender and transgender regulations.