Yes, USA client states like Canada have also been strong armed into enacting similar oppressive measures. The same way they have forced us to enact their utterly monstrous and demonic anti-drug laws.

Here is a passage from a local news paper about the “keicars”, explaining why we cannot have anything that is sized between a moto and a car. They are using bullshit “for safety” justifications of course. Whatever works as usual.

" Ils ne sont pas conformes aux normes de sécurité des véhicules automobiles du Canada (NSVAC) applicables. «La Loi sur la sécurité automobile et le Règlement sur la sécurité des véhicules automobiles exigent qu’à la date d’importation, tout véhicule importé au Canada soit conforme aux NSVAC applicables en vigueur à la date de sa fabrication. Les véhicules fabriqués pour la vente dans des pays autres que le Canada et les États-Unis ne sont pas conformes aux exigences de la Loi sur la sécurité automobile du Canada, ne peuvent pas être modifiés pour les rendre conformes et ne peuvent pas être importés au Canada», explique Maryse Durette, porte-parole de Transports Canada."

Here it is translated in english

“They are not in compliance with the applicable Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (CMVSS). “The Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations require that, at the date of importation, any vehicle imported into Canada must comply with the applicable CMVSS in force at the date of its manufacture. Vehicles manufactured for sale in countries other than Canada and the United States do not meet the requirements of the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Act, cannot be modified to make them compliant, and cannot be imported into Canada,” explains Maryse Durette, spokesperson for Transport Canada.”

I asked ChatGPT about it, I had to bullly it about it but it spilled the beans.

If we strip away the more complex layers of context and focus solely on the more critical viewpoints regarding the absence or restriction of smaller vehicles like kei cars in the US and Canada, a more direct analysis might suggest a few key motives:

Protectionism: The automotive industries in countries like the US and Canada are major economic sectors, providing a significant number of jobs and contributing heavily to GDP. Allowing an influx of smaller, foreign-made vehicles like kei cars could potentially disrupt the domestic market, affecting sales of locally made vehicles and, by extension, the broader economy. From this perspective, restrictive regulations could indeed be seen as a form of protectionism, designed to shield domestic manufacturers from competition that doesn't align with the existing market structure and product offerings.

Regulatory Inertia: Once a set of standards and regulations is deeply embedded within a country's legal and economic framework, changing those standards can be incredibly challenging. This inertia can unintentionally serve as a barrier to the introduction of vehicle types that don't fit neatly within existing categories or standards, even if there's no explicit intention to ban those vehicles. The complexity and cost of regulatory compliance for a small, niche segment might not be justifiable for manufacturers, effectively keeping these vehicles out of the market.

Economic Prioritization: Decisions around vehicle regulations are not made in a vacuum; they reflect broader economic priorities. If the economic benefits of maintaining the status quo—such as protecting jobs in the automotive and related industries, or preserving tax revenues from higher-priced vehicles—are perceived as outweighing the benefits of diversifying the vehicle market, regulations will likely reflect this prioritization. This doesn't necessarily require an explicit, coordinated effort to ban certain types of vehicles; it can simply be the result of a series of decisions that collectively favor existing economic interests.

Market Manipulation: There's also the argument that the automotive industry, through lobbying and influence on regulatory bodies, actively works to shape regulations in a way that limits competition from vehicle types that could disrupt their current business models. This kind of market manipulation doesn't need to involve outright bans but can effectively limit certain types of vehicles through stringent safety, emission, or import regulations that are difficult for these vehicles to meet.

In conclusion, while there might not be a single, nefarious ulterior motive behind the absence of vehicles like kei cars in the US and Canadian markets, the combination of economic protectionism, regulatory inertia, economic prioritization, and potential market manipulation by entrenched interests could collectively create an environment where only certain types of vehicles are viable. This reflects a complex interplay of factors rather than a simple, unilateral decision to exclude certain vehicles.