JEAN CHRÉTIEN AND FRENCH CHAUVINISM (SPECIAL EDITION)
Christopher Richard Wade Dettling (2017)
But blood–stained is the mire of December;
But the fog of Brumaire is perfidious;
In that air trees grow not, are barren,
Or bear fruits filled with poison and ashes.
Giosuè Carducci¹
I opposed Québec nationalism because I thought separation would destroy the French fact in North America, not build it up. Jean Chrétien²
Most Canadians like myself and the present generation, oppose separation or separatism because “Québec nationalism” will destroy Canada and plunge the Canadian people into a firestorm of unreason which will flood the streets of our North American paradise with rivers of blood: As in the days of FLQ terrorism, when gangs of murderous psychopaths slaughtered women, children (Jean Corbo) and the elderly, as well as political and law enforcement officials, — in the name of Vive le Québec Libre! This bloodbath brought the Canadian Military out of their barracks: Soldiers marched through our streets, armed to the teeth, while tanks and armored cars patrolled our cities. From finance, commerce and industry, the lifeblood of our great and prosperous North American civilization, we turned our attention to fratricide and mass–murder, the political and economic satanism of bloodletting cultivated by the modern European irrationalists of the 20th century.
This bloody experiment did not last very long, thank heavens, since alien to the very nature of the Canadian people, who mostly live alongside of the US border, and whose souls are daily nurtured by the powerful beacon of American Liberty: The nationalistic terrorists in Québec suddenly became federalistic terrorists in Ottawa, at least the cynical ones (hard terrorism became soft terrorism), with the sudden death of General Charles de Gaulle, who ran afoul of the Monroe doctrine, and whose untimely demise therefore greatly assisted in the decline of Québec anti–federalism and terrorism as a viable political and economic force in Canada.
Henry Kissinger: “The wars of the French Revolution marked the transition to the nation–state defined by common language and culture … [The United States] have never been nation–states in the European sense. America has succeeded in forming a distinct culture from a polyglot national composition.”³
The Napoléonic and French Revolutionary delusions of Wilfrid Laurier, his so–called “Political Liberalism,” ultimately derived from Louis–Joseph Papineau (in his senile period),⁴ therefore hold no sway upon the vast majority of Canadians, excluding the flabby minds of the Québécocracy, who mask their mortal corruption behind the Canadian flag, — while singing the tunes of the national anthem, they stab the treasury of Canada in the back:
“Now we know, after the last Budget Speech, this year (1968) Québec will get $362,740,000.00 in various federal equalization payments, compared to the $66 million in 1962. Québec has therefore won the taxation war in Ottawa.”⁵
In response to rabid Québécocentrics like Pierre Trudeau, Brian Mulroney, Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin Junior, themselves deeply infatuated at an early age with modern European irrationalism, we do well to ask ourselves: Under the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais 1968–2006, was Canada really a federation or rather a pseudo–federation? Pseudo–federalism in Canada is politique fonctionelle, namely Québec Régime fédéralisme asymétrique (modèle Québécois), and is profoundly asymmetrical: The Lion’s Share of all federal employment, public works and infrastructure contracts, and equalization is pocketed by Québec Régimers and the Québec Inc.⁶ We must not forget to mention the many provincial, as well as federal, crown corporations controlled by Québec Régimers, that have invested over the decades the Lion’s Share of vast amounts of resources from the treasuries of anglophone and francophone Canada in the backwards cartels, outdated monopolies and corrupt trusts of the Québécocracy at home and abroad.
Unlike Jean Chrétien and his generation, therefore, Canadians really do not care very much about modern France and its political and economic grandeur in the New World. That is why Canadians support the free–trade agreement between Canada and the European Union. At one time, however, Jean Chrétien was such a French Chauvinist that he named his only daughter after the modern republic of France.
Of course, Jean Chrétien betrays himself (and his followers) in the first edition of Straight From the Heart, where he confesses that after twenty years in Ottawa, he really wants “to be where the cash is.”⁷ Once the French Chauvinists of the Québec Régime had looted the last remnants of the British Empire in Canada, they discovered Uncle Sam in the bowels of the treasure chest, upon whom their French Chauvinism does not work. At the end of the day, we understand, therefore, that Jean Chrétien is neither interested in “the French fact in North America,” nor does he care much about France and its political and economic ambitions in the New World: What Jean Chrétien really wants is the political and economic support of the French chauvinists in Canada and Europe, but especially in Québec and also in Ontario, Manitoba, and the Maritimes, in order to elevate himself and his family to the heights of power:
“My family has always been rouge [red], Liberal in the free–thinking, anti–clerical, anti–establishment tradition of the nineteenth century … I had become a lawyer in order to become a politician … I was quite left wing when I began in politics. I wasn’t obsessed with making money … My pitch has always been to the working class because the Liberal Party in my riding is supported by the unions and the workers. We were the party that fought Duplessis, and I was an authentic descendant of those gutsy rouges who had fought against the bishops … Politics is a game of friends.”⁸
Politics is a game of friends? Again, at the end of the day what Jean Chrétien really wants is the political and economic support of the French chauvinists in Canada and Europe, but especially in Québec and also in Ontario, Manitoba, and the Maritimes, in order to elevate himself and his family to the heights of power: Unless francophone Canada is divided into Québec federalist and anti–federalist camps, this will not happen:
“The truth is that without Jean Chrétien’s low and despicable actions, on the 23rd of June, Québec would have returned into the arms of the great Canadian family. Today, we Québéckers are profoundly shocked and humiliated: Jean Chrétien stabbed Canada in the back.”⁹
Jean Chrétien stabbed Canada in the back: The strife between fédéralisme and anti–fédéralisme in Québec over the decades (the Quiet Revolution) has greatly enriched the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais, the political and economic arm of the Québec Inc. (Of course they deny the fact.) The proof however is in the pudding of their organized crime and political corruption:
“Desmarais purchased 2.8 million shares, about 2.1 million class A common shares and 700,000 second preferred shares. He said he bought all the Power shares held by the Caisse de Dépôt du Québec, amounting to 2,001,300 common shares and 333,000 preferred, with the rest coming from Peter Nesbitt Thomson, deputy chairman of Power and ‘other persons associated with him.’ The shares were bought by an unspecified private holding company belonging to Desmarais.”¹⁰
Jean Chrétien and his family want the political and economic support of the French chauvinists, in order to elevate themselves to the heights of financial, commercial and industrial power:
“At the time, the government of René Lévesque held large economic summits in order to integrate the big players of the Québec economy: The first of these massive summits was held at the Richelieu Manor, at the Malbaie, in the Charlevoix region of Québec, from the 24th until the 27th of May 1977, and gathered around the same table such high–flyers as Louis Laberge, Paul Desmarais, Yvon Charbonneau and Brian Mulroney, to name but a few.”¹¹
The proof of the mortal corruption of the Québécocracy is in the pudding of their organized crime:
“During my time there at the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ), we became very big players in the economy of Québec, resultant from the many $millions in contributions from Québéckers. That is when I perceived that political influence, especially after 1978, played an increasingly important role at the Caisse [Québec Pension Plan]: Our investments were then very much determined by political considerations … The Caisse de dépôt secretly followed in the footsteps of Paul Desmarais, and we utterly failed the Québec taxpayers. Sadly enough, the losers are not the wealthy investors, rather Québéckers themselves are impoverished.”¹²
The flabby minds of French chauvinists like Jean Chrétien, the modern European political and economic irrationalists in Canada, harbor the delusion that they alone should wield all the power, and live as in France (French Canada) or as in French North America, because (as their actions prove) the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right in their esteem is far better than the conception of right found in the Magna Carta and the Constitution of the United States of America. Otherwise, in order to save face among their ever–decreasing number of followers, when push comes to Uncle Sam’s shove in the food line, the Québécocrats readily admit that both conceptions of right are roughly the very same thing (in order to avoid the charge of anti–Americanism and the wrath of Washington). How exactly do the French Chauvinists in Canada accomplish this amazing feat of the imagination? As the modern European revolutionists, they rush headlong into the arms of the sophistical philosophy of Immanuel Kant:
“Kant and other philosophers teach us our rationality … Every society establishes order, whether the Mafia or Christendom.”¹³
Immanuel Kant is a philosopher and not a sophist?
“The conception of a noumenon is problematical … the conception of a noumenon is therefore not the conception of an object, but merely a problematical conception … my existence cannot be considered as an inference from the proposition, ‘I think,’ as Descartes maintained.”¹⁴
Why the deep attraction of the Québécocracy to the philosophical sophistry of Kant?
“The publication of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason marks one of the two key events after which we may take nineteenth–century philosophy to begin. The other event is the French Revolution, of which many people saw Kant’s philosophy, with its emphasis on autonomy, as the theoretical correlate. ‘Nineteenth–century’ philosophy … thus actually begins in the later 1780s and the 1790s, in response to Kant’s Critical philosophy and the French Revolution.”¹⁵
Indeed, the philosophical sophistry of Kant follows directly in the footsteps of Locke, Leibniz and Hume, the modern European political and economic irrationalists:
“The Republican Constitution is, thus, the only one which arises out of the idea of the Original Compact upon which all the rightful legislation of a people is founded … the Republican Constitution is the only one which perfectly corresponds to the Rights of Man.”¹⁶
The modern European political and economic irrationalism of Kant is no friend of democracy:
“The Republican Constitution is not to be confounded with the Democratic Constitution … of the three forms of the State, a Democracy, in the proper sense of the word, is necessarily a despotism; because it establishes an Executive power in which All resolve about, and, it may be, also against, any One who is not in accord with it; and consequently the All who thus resolve are really not all; which is a contradiction of the Universal Will with itself and with liberty.”¹⁷
Democracy is always despotism, and the republican constitution is not a democratic constitution, while the conception of a noumenon is problematical, since the conception of a noumenon is not the conception of an object, but merely a problematical conception: The Kantian conception of rational political and economic order is therefore problematical. As the genuine Hegel of Pure Hegelianism has foretold, the grandeur and decadence of Western civilization is the result of the struggle between superior and inferior ruling classes, as the Dialectic of Finitude: The aggrandizement of Western civilization is the work of the superior ruling classes, while the decline of civilization into barbarism is the work of the inferior ruling classes. The rise of Western civilization in world history is therefore the result of superior ruling classes, whether aristocratic, monarchical or democratic.
For the Bonapartists of France, under the profound spell of modern unreason, the French Revolution is Kantianism in the arena of politics and economics:
“The awakening of the new age, namely, the ‘kingdom of the realized spirit,’ is the age of the Critical Philosophy of Kant and the French Revolution. A free will, albeit formal, whose content is created as it touches the real, is the Kantian principle: The Critical Philosophy is the basis of the French Revolution. The Kantian principle brings practical results to the French Revolution. Kantian reason legislates for the collective will as well as for the individual will … The French Revolution made the bold attempt to begin with individual wills, with the atoms of will: The revolutionary philosophy of Kant attacks the collective will of the Ancien Régime for its abusive privileges.”¹⁸
Of course the Bonapartists of France are not alone in their French Chauvinist delirium over Immanuel Kant and the French Revolution:
“The spirit of Emmanuel Mounier will fill all the pages of Cité Libre … Long live the French Republic!”¹⁹
What is the so–called “philosophy” of Emmanuel Mounier about?
“Our existence is always sinful, and it might almost be claimed that existence in this world is just as impossible as the act of pure good will is for Kant. We are sinful by the very fact that we exist.”²⁰
Emmanuel Mounier’s existentialism, his Personalism, is a brand of modern European subjectivism, relativism and irrationalism inherited from Immanuel Kant:
“We ought not to forget how much personalism owes to Leibnitz and to Kant, or what the dialectic of personality owes to the whole reflective effort of idealist thought.”²¹
What else is French existentialism, but first and foremost the 20th century phantasm of modern European subjectivism, relativism and irrationalism?
“Jean–Paul Sartre and myself have always been perfectly clear on this point: It is not because there is a desire to exist that this desire corresponds to reality as such. This is proved beyond doubt in Kant’s intellectual philosophy: The belief in causation is no basis for the belief in a Supreme Cause. Man desires to exist, which does not mean therefore that he could ever reach existence, or even that existence is a possible notion: Of course, we speak of being and existence as reflection. We refer to the synthesis between being and existence which is impossible. Sartre and I, we have always taught this doctrine, which is the very foundation of our philosophy: Out of timber so crooked as that from which man is made nothing entirely straight can be built.”²²
We are not surprised therefore when Jean Chrétien espouses the same nonsense, albeit in his own vernacular:
“Intellect doesn’t make a good leader, nor does it make a good country.”²³
In Ottawa, the tradition of modern European unreason, the basis of the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right, namely Bonapartism in politics and economics, or autocracy founded on popular consent, leads back to Wilfrid Laurier:
“You will see together those who are attracted by the charm of novelty, and you will see together those who are attracted by the charm of habit. You will see on one side those who attach themselves to everything that is ancient, and on the other side those who are always ready to reform … We unceasingly approach toward an ideal which we never reach. We dream of the highest good.”²⁴
We dream of the highest good? Intellect doesn’t make a good leader, nor does it make a good country? Out of timber so crooked as that from which man is made nothing entirely straight can be built? The Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception or right is far better than the conception of right found in the Magna Carta and the Constitution of the United States of America, otherwise both conceptions of right are roughly the very same thing? How very backwards and outdated the flabby minds of the Québécocracy really are, is readily evidenced in the sphere of Canadian jurisprudence, at both the provincial and federal levels:
“In 1977, the Parti Québécois government of Mr. Lévesque enacted Bill 101, which included a provision regarding language of signage. This provision was challenged and, ultimately, struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada. In response to this decision, Premier Bourassa enacted Bill 178 … When Bill 178 was introduced, Premier Bourassa invoked the notwithstanding clause, a pernicious provision of the 1982 Constitution accepted and introduced by Prime Minister Trudeau. This provision unique in constitutions of the world―has been branded as ‘evil’ and ‘iniquitous’ by scholars to the point that Mr. Trudeau himself has acknowledged his grave error in consenting to its inclusion in a document designed to protect individual rights and freedoms.”²⁵
These are the words of Brian Mulroney, Québécocrat extraordinaire, who at the height of his power used to prey upon legions of lovely girls: “Very few women who were young and pretty escaped him.”²⁶
The 1982 Chrétien–Trudeau Constitution, in the tradition of the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right, unlike the Magna Carta and the Constitution of the United States of America, is not “designed to protect individual rights and freedoms.” The flabby minds of French chauvinists like Jean Chrétien, the modern European political and economic irrationalists in Canada, therefore harbor the delusion that they alone should wield all the power, and live as in France (French Canada) or as in French North America, because (as their actions prove) the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right in their esteem is far better than the conception of right found in the Magna Carta and the Constitution of the United States of America.
Incidentally, Jean Chrétien claims to have come down the very hardest against Charles de Gaulle: “I was absolutely the strongest of them all.”²⁷ Alas, Ti–Jean is not a very honest and trustworthy historical witness, especially so many decades after the fact. We do not say that he is an historical liar, but he most certainly is an inveterate political demagogue: “Chrétien has always maintained that he and other francophones were barred from playing at the Grand’Mère golf course. Others who lived in Shawinigan said the club had no such discriminatory policy.”²⁸
From whence comes the French Chauvinism of the Québécocracy, the White Gold (Hydro–Québec) ruling class?
General Charles de Gaulle: “France is present in Canada not only through its representatives, but also because many Canadians are of French blood, French language, French culture and French mind. In short they are French except in matters concerning the realm of sovereignty … French Canada will inevitably become a state and it is in that perspective that we must act.”²⁹
Under the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais 1968–2006 (the Québécocracy), Gaullism is the fountainhead of French Chauvinism and Bonapartism in Canada:
“[4] Careful investigation leads to the discovery of more and more French diplomats, politicians, and state officials active in the cause of Québec separatism during the past thirty–five years … [5] By 1967, when de Gaulle made his notorious fourth visit to Québec on 23–26 July, he had already worked out a general plan of attack … Having launched a cold war campaign in Québec, de Gaulle then turned his attention to the smaller French–speaking community of Acadians in the Maritime provinces … there was no mistaking his [General de Gaulle’s] hostility to the Canadian confederation … [6] the two world wars of this century had the strongest influence [7] on the Gaullist mind. But behind their impact lies the imperial tradition established by Napoléon, and followed by his nephew, Napoléon III who ruled the Second Empire … [11] Political movements for the independence, or sovereignty, of Québec can be traced back into the 1950s, but the first with any permanence and influence was the Rassemblement pour l’Indépendence Nationale (RIN), established in September 1960. Its founders were Raymond Barbeau, who in 1957 had launched a similar but short–lived movement called the Alliance Laurentienne … they worked to spread the idea that Québec ought to become an independent republic, ‘free, French and democratic’ … [13] By 1960, when de Gaulle made his visit to Canada, the Lesage liberals, the RIN, and other nationalists were forming a neo–nationalist movement … [14] The neo–nationalist were typical of what has become known as the Quiet Revolution … in its narrowest meaning the term applies to a series of reforms carried out by the Lesage government … when Duplessis died, Québec was seized with an outburst of liberal and national sentiments that led to changes so profound that they may justly be described as revolutionary. Educated Frenchmen, such as Charles de Gaulle and his staff, were immediately at home amid the liberal and national aspirations of the Quiet Revolution in Québec. Every French republic, even the Fifth, is founded on liberal and nationalist ideas that are an ideological legacy of the French Revolution … [18] De Gaulle’s regime in France and Jean Lesage’s neo–nationalist government in Québec had a common desire to use the social revolution of their time to transform their societies … both were investing or planning — or hoping — to invest in regional development, new factories, electrical and nuclear power plants, airports and seaports, aircraft industries, railway and telephone systems, highways, mass housing projects … De Gaulle for his part saw collaboration as a means for promoting the power and influence of his country and expanding French civilization in the world … the ruling élites in France and Québec found it easy to collaborate in economic development because they were both prepared to act via powerful government leadership.”³⁰
How did Gaullism become the fountainhead of French Chauvinism and Bonapartism in Canada?
“In 1956, Trudeau helped organize the Rassemblement pour l’Indépendence Nationale (Assembly for National Independence). The group’s 600 members worked to explain democracy [Québec separatism] to the people of Québec and to persuade them to use it. Trudeau served as vice–president, then director, and finally president.”³¹
How exactly did French Chauvinism become politically and economically dominant (i.e., become Bonapartism) in Canada?
“Claude Frenette, the right hand man of Paul Desmarais … was elected as president of the Québec wing of the Liberal Party of Canada in virtue of the upcoming leadership race: Frenette and Pierre Trudeau elaborated a scheme at the Power Corporation whereby the latter would become the new leader of the Liberal Party and then the Prime Minister of Canada.”³²
Paul Desmarais and his backers (Jean–Louis Lévesque & company, namely, Jean Lesage and Louis St. Laurent)³³ brought Bonapartism first to Québec City and then to Ottawa:
“Among titans, Desmarais is in a class of his own. He is the only major establishment figure whose hold on power has bridged all of my books, having been featured in my first volume, published nearly a quarter of a century ago, just as prominently as he is in this one … One of Desmarais’ favorite collectibles is Pierre Trudeau, who remains on Power Corp.’s international advisory board … plans for Trudeau’s candidacy had first been hatched in early 1968 at the offices of Power Corporation, at Friday–night meetings presided over by then–Power vice–president Claude Frenette. In August of that year, two months after Trudeau swept the country, the new PM flew to visit Desmarais at Murray Bay.”³⁴
Jean–Louis Lévesque was the main backer of Paul Desmarais:
“Jean–Louis Lévesque, the Montréal financier from far–away Gaspé, ‘knew first–hand the difficulties that awaited a French–Canadian in business, and therefore he took the young Paul Desmarais under his wing, and led him into the realm of French–Canadian high finance … the Lévesque which most Canadians have heard about is the great orator, René, the Minister of Natural Resources of the Province of Québec. Jean–Louis Lévesque is his wealthy distant cousin, who owns the largest financial empire in Québec.’”³⁵
Why exactly did Paul Desmarais empower Bonapartism in Québec City and Ottawa?
“An expert on Napoléon Bonaparte, Desmarais is in many ways himself a driven man who cannot stop looking for new ways to expand his power.”³⁶
Paul Desmarais used French Chauvinism and Bonapartism to greatly enrich himself and his family: French Chauvinism and Bonapartism therefore greatly enriched Jean Chrétien and his children.
“[Paul Desmarais] was very much at the centre of Québec’s Quiet Revolution.”³⁷
In Canada, the world historical movement which encircles the collapse of the British Empire, as the demise of European modernity and the rise of Global civilization, is named the Quiet Revolution:
“We Québéckers have lived through the Quiet Revolution and the Empire of Paul Desmarais, which is our Quiet Dispossession.”³⁸
With these ideas firmly in our minds, we are now in a very good position to ask the following question, which is not rhetorical: What exactly is Gaullism in 20th century world history?
“All de Gaulle’s acts were directed not toward war, but toward politics and the seizure of power for his own purposes … Gaullism is a phenomenon originating in fascism. It is a political movement born at a time when Nazi ideology was victorious in France and in the rest of Europe … Gaullism is a form of fascism that placed its stakes on the winning side. It is a fascism that glibly uses the language of Democracy, while despising and hating it. It is a fascism that digs into the structure of the Republic as Italian fascism, at an earlier date, dug into the Monarchy.”³⁹
Why is Gaullism a “form of fascism”?
“There is no mystery about the origins of Bonapartism. It is the child of Napoléon Bonaparte and the French Revolution … the strong executive founded upon the plebiscite which was to be the pillar of Bonapartism; and [Napoléon] had come to the conclusion that legislative assemblies should be merely supervisory, that they should have no power to change the constitution or to interfere with the executive … This is not the place for a detailed examination of the principles of Napoléonic law … The French nation, being consulted for the third time, for the third time by an overwhelming majority ratified its belief in Bonapartism … The guiding principle of Bonapartism was autocracy founded on popular consent.”⁴⁰
What is the result of Bonapartism in 19th century European history?
“The statesmen of the French Revolution roused their fellow countrymen to the most astounding military efforts by announcing that France would compel all other nations to be free in the same sense as herself. Under Napoléon I, and more obscurely under his nephew, Napoléon III, France aspired to impose her suzerainty by force of arms upon the whole of Western Europe.”⁴¹
In Canada, Gaullism is Bonapartism (French Chauvinism in politics and economics), namely autocracy founded on popular consent: The sovereignty of the Québécocracy (their control of White Gold), as inscribed within the 1982 Chrétien–Trudeau Constitution, is autocracy founded on popular consent, because the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, unlike the Magna Carta and the Constitution of the United States of America, is not “designed to protect individual rights and freedoms” (Mulroney), since the Canadian Constitution is based upon the outdated Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right.
From whence comes autocracy founded on popular consent, the origin of the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right?
“Law is not the work of mortals. Human legislators do not create the law: It is an earlier and pre–existent principle, general, absolute, immutable and invariable, because it comes from the very essence of man, which never changes. This is our definition of right: The fountainhead of justice, the foundation of the rationality of human action, from the point of view of the just and the unjust. This definition, as the complete and exact description of what right is, would itself have to be defined: It is necessary to elucidate the rationality governing human actions, as the fountainhead of justice. This problem we shall avoid by saying the solution is philosophical and therefore beyond the purview of jurisprudence. According to Victor Cousin, the necessity (raison première) of justice consists in upholding the liberation of mankind.”⁴²
Indeed, it is necessary to elucidate that which the modern irrationalists name, in their various terminological disguises, the rationality governing human actions, the fountainhead of all justice according to the dispensers of modern freedom, and the origin of the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right, the bastion of autocracy founded on popular consent, as the liberation of mankind:
“We propose a comparison between the doctrine of Machiavelli, as it emerges from the Prince, and the doctrine of absolutism, which we shall endeavor to discern, not from one or another of the theorists who were its champions, but from all of them … the absolutist doctrines, in their application, lead rulers to the same results as the doctrines of Machiavelli … Machiavellism and absolutism are derived from analogous historical situations. This is the first essential point of our parallel. The historical situation inspires Machiavelli with the idea of the legitimacy of every means aimed at the achievement of public interest and the salvation of the State … those who were able to study Napoléon Bonaparte very closely tell us that he was a very powerful ruler who saw the spilling of blood [sang des hommes répandu] as perhaps the greatest remedy of political medicine … The Prince of Machiavelli and the doctrines of absolutism were born of the same sentiment of profound patriotism, at times and in countries where a powerful sovereign was necessary to put an end to the disorder and turmoil of the day, the causes of national distress … Machiavelli reveals himself as an immoral patriot who wants to save the State, even though his conception of government appears as a policy that is respectful of political freedoms and that is aimed at the happiness of the people.”⁴³
Machiavellism and absolutism (autocracy not founded on popular consent) are derived from analogous historical situations; The Prince of Machiavelli and the doctrines of absolutism were born of the same sentiment of profound patriotism, at times and in countries where a powerful sovereign was necessary to put an end to the disorder and turmoil of the day, the causes of national distress; Machiavelli reveals himself as an immoral patriot who wants to save the State, even though his conception of government appears as a policy that is respectful of political freedoms and that is aimed at the happiness of the people; the absolutist doctrines, in their application, lead rulers to the same results as the doctrines of Machiavelli: The spilling of blood is the greatest remedy of political medicine.
Autocracy founded on popular consent, the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right, is Machiavellism?
“[Rulers] cannot observe all those things which are considered good in men, being often obliged, in order to maintain the state, to act against faith, against charity, against humanity, and against religion … [rulers] must have a mind disposed to adapt itself according to the wind, and as the variations of fortune dictate, and, as I said before, not deviate from what is good, if possible, but be able to do evil if necessitated.”⁴⁴
What is Machiavellism? “Empiricism began its career with a great bound of energy, starting with Machiavelli.”⁴⁵ Rulers and lawmakers must have a mind disposed to adapt itself according to the wind, and as the variations of fortune dictate, and not deviate from what is good, if possible, but be able to do evil if necessitated. Wherefore?
“Many have been and are of opinion that worldly events are so governed by fortune and by God, that men cannot by their prudence change them, and that on the contrary there is no remedy whatever, and for this they may judge it to be useless to toil much about them, but let things be ruled by chance … Our freewill may not be altogether extinguished, I think it may be true that fortune is the ruler of half our actions, but that she allows the other half or a little less to be governed by us. I would compare her to an impetuous river that, when turbulent, inundates the plains, ruins trees and buildings, removes earth from this side and places it on the other; every one flies before it, and everything yields to its fury without being able to oppose it.”⁴⁶
In other words, intelligent rulers and lawmakers are very savvy political and economic rapists:
“Fortune is a woman, and it is necessary, if you wish to master her, to conquer her by force; and it can be seen that she lets herself be overcome by these rather than by those who proceed coldly. And therefore, like a woman, she is a friend to the young, because they are less cautious, fiercer, and master her with greater audacity.”⁴⁷
Machiavellism: Intelligent rulers and lawmakers are very savvy political and economic rapists; they cannot observe all those things which are considered good in men, being often obliged, in order to maintain the state, to act against faith, against charity, against humanity, and against religion; they must have a mind disposed to adapt itself according to the wind, and as the variations of fortune dictate, and not deviate from what is good, if possible, but be able to do evil if necessitated; the arena of politics and economics is a woman, and it is necessary, if you wish to master her, to conquer her by force, and to master her with great audacity.
Is this not the modus operandi of Napoléon Bonaparte? Napoléon was a very powerful ruler who saw the spilling of blood as perhaps the greatest remedy of political medicine: The Napoléonic and French revolutionary conception of right was born of the same sentiment as Machiavellism, at a time and in a country where a powerful sovereign was necessary to put an end to the disorder and turmoil of the day, the causes of national distress. Wherefore? The Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right is Machiavellism.
From whence comes autocracy founded on popular consent, the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right, namely Machiavellism?
“These principalities … are upheld by higher causes, which the human mind cannot attain to, I will abstain from speaking of them; for being exalted and maintained by God, it would be the work of a presumptuous and foolish man to discuss them … if one could change one’s nature with time and circumstances, fortune would never change … God will not do everything, in order not to deprive us of freewill.”⁴⁸
Higher causes, which the human mind cannot attain to, are exalted and maintained by God, the very highest power. Higher causation and rationality is the realm of the highest power, and is beyond the reach of humanity, civilization, and the rationality of political and economic order. What are the rational determinations of the highest power? We must abstain from speaking of them, for being exalted and maintained by God, it would be the work of a presumptuous and foolish man to discuss them: The highest power of Machiavellism is the Absolute of Kant and the modern irrationalists. The highest power governing human actions, the fountainhead of all justice according to the Machiavellians, the dispensers of modern freedom, is Unknowable: The fountainhead of the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right is modern unreason.
The “rationality governing human actions, the fountainhead of justice,” according to Machiavelli, his delusion of rationality and human reason, is modern unreason, the basis of the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right: Autocracy founded on popular consent, the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right, therefore comes from the modern sophistry of Kant, Hume, Leibniz and Locke and then ultimately from Machiavelli. Machiavellism, autocracy founded on popular consent, the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right, is modern unreason in the world historical arena of European politics and economics.
In fact, Québécocrats are really francophone Canadians who have succumbed to the morbid spell of Cité Libre and other such scatology as La Presse.⁴⁹ The abstraction of French Canada has been very useful in making Pierre Beaudoin, Paul Desmarais and Lino Saputo into very rich men, indeed, not to mention the families of Trudeau, Mulroney, Chrétien and Martin. But today, thanks to their delusions of the “French Fact in North America,” some four million Canadians in Québec live in poverty, while some two million of them barely manage to survive:
“According to information from the Québec Government, 6.47 million taxpayers, otherwise 36%, earned less than $20,000 in 2013 while 14% earned between $20,000 and $29,999 … in the same year, 50% of the taxpayers in Québec earned less than $30,000 while 73% earned less than $50,000.”⁵⁰
In Québec little more than 4 million Canadians actually pay any income tax, and therefore mutatis mutandis the same holds good at the federal level: Since little more than 4 million Canadians in Québec actually pay any income tax to the Government of Québec, a fortiori, little more than 4 million Canadians in Québec actually pay any federal income tax to Ottawa. In other words, nearly half the population of Québec is so poor that some 4 million Canadians in Québec pay no federal income tax:
“The number of taxpayers who have declared their fiscal situation is nearly 6.5 million Québéckers. Attention: Of these ‘taxpayers,’ only 4.1 million are actually taxable. Many declare their fiscal situation but pay no tax … little more than 4 million Québéckers actually pay tax in Québec, about half of the population.”⁵¹
This profound financial, commercial and industrial retardation is the result of the political and economic irrationalism of the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais: The main culprits of this mortal corruption (la décadence) are the backwards cartels, outdated monopolies and corrupt trusts of Paul Desmarais, Laurent Beaudoin, Lino Saputo and Paul Martin Junior, as well as many other Québec Régimers.
As Chrétien admitted in 1985, the fabulous wealth of his family comes from his political work: “I owe to Canada all the privileges I have received.”⁵² And his family has certainly received many privileges over the decades from federal and provincial governments under the Québec Regime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais: In 1963 Jean Chrétien went to Ottawa with empty pockets, his father used to work in the lumber yards of Shawinigan, but when Chrétien retired from politics after many years his family had amassed a fortune worth more than $4–Billion dollars, and an international financial and media empire some say is worth upwards of $100–Billion.⁵³ Today, the family of Jean Chrétien is something like the 4th or 5th richest in Canada, and the richest in Québec, alongside Lino Saputo, according to Forbes Magazine.⁵⁴
In the history of Canada since Confederation, never were our rulers and their families so enriched, as under the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais, when Canada was ruled for nearly a half century by Québec Régimers, except for one year under Joe Clark, John Turner and Kim Campbell.⁵⁵ In other words, the many political and economic divisions created by the Québécocracy over the last half century have greatly retarded finance, commerce and industry in Canada, especially in the Heartland, but Trudeau, Mulroney, Chrétien, Martin and their families were themselves greatly enriched over the years:
“[Jean Chrétien] gave his niece a job in the PMO and appointed his nephew Raymond as ambassador to Washington … His son–in–law, André Desmarais (married to Chrétien’s daughter, France), was awarded a billion–dollar contract to operate a satellite–TV network over the objections of federal regulators … [Jean Chrétien] cut welfare and social service payments to 1950s levels and reneged on his election promises to increase immigration, support cultural sovereignty or allow more free votes in the Commons.”⁵⁶
According to the biography, Jean Chrétien and Paul Desmarais first “met in the late 1960’s through a mutual acquaintance, the lawyer Pierre Genest.”⁵⁷ Indeed, Jean Chrétien always maintained “cozy connections with the Power Corporation” over the decades.⁵⁸ The Power Corporation was even the backer of Chrétien’s first leadership campaign against John Turner.⁵⁹ Chrétien used to handle the “major negotiations” for the Desmarais family because of “his tight personal and professional relations with the Power Corporation.”⁶⁰ Chrétien probably first met Paul Desmarais through Paul Martin Senior, whom Chrétien ardently supported for the party leadership very early in his budding career back in 1958.⁶¹ Chrétien used to visit the family home of Paul Martin Senior in Windsor.⁶² Later on in his career Chrétien and Martin’s son, Paul Martin Junior, used to get together and hold meetings in the offices of the Power Corporaton “during the 1970s and 1980s.”⁶³
Jean Chrétien’s daughter, France Chrétien, is married to André Desmarais, son of the late Paul Desmarais, who now owns the Power Corporation (along with his brother Paul Desmarais Junior), and who was recently engaged in a bitter family dispute with the late Big Paul’s brother, the elderly Louis Desmarais, over the ownership of some 60,000 shares in the Power Corporation.⁶⁴ Old Louis made a deal with Big Paul back in the day, and in turn was promised a portion of shares in the Power Corporation. Big Paul did not uphold his end of the bargain. The elderly gentleman was making claims upon his rightful possession. The daughter of André and France Chrétien–Desmarais, the beautiful Jacqueline–Ariadne Desmarais, is married to the Belgian prince Hadrien de Croÿ–Roeulx.⁶⁵ Unfortunately, some of the newer generation have rebuffed the claim of old Louis Desmarais: The Chrétien–Desmarais family rivalry has become manifest. Evidently, nothing in the world will satiate the pathological greed of Jean Chrétien:
“Louis R. Desmarais the brother of the late multi–billionaire Paul Desmarais Senior is dead, and his $75–million lawsuit over an alleged promise made by Big Paul back in 1979 is now on hold.”⁶⁶
Family means nothing to the worshipers of modern political and economic satanism, the disciples of Machiavelli.
Under the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais, in the name of fédéralisme asymétrique, the Lion’s Share of all federal infrastructure projects goes to Québec Régimers and the Québec Inc (as well as all federal equalization and employment), but the vast kickbacks and massive influence peddling requires the assistance of organized crime:
“The strategies of collusion and corruption as well as the infiltration activities of organized crime which the Charbonneau Commission has uncovered are not without grave consequences: The overcoming of the safeguards which protect public works in the construction industry and also protect the financial governance of political parties, combined with the infiltration of organized crime in the construction industry, has not only created economic burdens for the ensemble of Québec society, but has also undermined our most cherished democratic ideals and perverted the fundamental principle of the Rule of Law. The faith of Québéckers in their public institutions is deeply convulsed.”⁶⁷
Unfortunately, the organized crime of the Québécocracy has its hands on another highly profitable sector: The international drug trade. Together they constitute what is here named soft terrorism. Thus, Jean Chrétien, far from being a strong leader, was one of the weakest, most degenerate of all Canadian Prime Ministers. The biggest crime family in the history of Canada (Rizzuto), which caused the destruction of millions of Canadian and American youngsters and their families, was finally put down by Stephen Harper and the Western conservatives, after nearly a half century of political and economic satanism under the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais:
“[Nicolò Rizzuto] the late patriarch of one of the world’s most powerful Mafia clans was a municipal contractor 50 years before the authorities decided to investigate whether organized crime had a hold on the construction industry and public contracts in the province … Rizzuto’s resume included in his company’s bidding documents at the time claims he even participated in the construction of Montréal’s cherished Expo 67, the Universal and International Exposition of 1967 that put the city on the world map … Rizzuto’s career in the construction sector starting almost immediately after he arrived in Canada from Sicily in the 1950s to be the standard–bearer of his father–in–law’s Sicilian Mafia clan … Rizzuto also hooked up with the Caruanas and Cuntreras, who were based in Montréal before relocating to Venezuela and who went on to build an international drug–smuggling and money–laundering empire … Testimony at the Charbonneau Commission over the past 16 months has presented the phenomenon of a cartel of companies rigging the outcome of public tender bids and paying a cut of their inflated contract prices to political organizers and the Mafia as something that took hold in the mid–2000s. Now it appears Nicolò Rizzuto himself was part of the foundation, so to speak, more than half a century ago … Project Colisée and the Charbonneau Commission have depicted Nicolò Rizzuto’s role in the construction industry as merely being on the receiving end of the Mafia’s share of kickbacks from rigged and overinflated public contracts. Yet just as Rizzuto’s role in the underworld was underestimated in official accounts decades ago, it appears his role in the underside of the construction industry and public contracts that’s now being exposed has been understated.”⁶⁸
Nicolò Rizzuto himself was part of the foundation of the political and economic corruption that begins with the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais: Rizzuto’s role in the underworld was underestimated in official accounts decades ago and his role in the underside of the construction industry and public contracts that is exposed in the Charbonneau Commission has been understated. This at least is the verdict of those whose mental power places them in the ranks of the superior ruling class. We know that the Québec Régime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais, the political and economic arm of the Québec Inc., is a criminal ruling class:
“It was Jean Chrétien’s opposition to Meech Lake that ultimately secured his first–round victory in the [leadership] race … Chrétien organizer Senator Pietro Rizzuto delivered the 800 Québec votes he had promised.”⁶⁹
And who exactly, pray tell, is Senator Pietro Rizzuto?
“Liborio Milioto, Nicolò Rizzuto’s half–brother, had a daughter, named Maria in keeping with the tradition. She in turn married Filippo Rizzuto, a brother of future senator Pietro Rizzuto.”⁷⁰
We come to the end of the dialectical circle of Jean Chrétien’s political and economic life, inscribed within the notion of French Chauvinism and the world historical collapse of European modernity, as the rise of Global civilization and American Liberty. One last point must be squared away.
Without the collusion of the Montréal mafia there are no kickbacks from the $Billions in federal and provincial infrastructure and public works projects paid for with the burdensome taxation upon the economic Heartland of Canada (some four million Québéckers are so poor they pay no income tax). Without organized crime in the construction industry therefore the Québec Régime and Empire of Paul Desmarais must collapse: For this reason the Québec Régime in Ottawa 1968–2006 is a criminal ruling class. For nearly a half century, under various guises, first starting with Trudeau, and then continuing with Mulroney, Chrétien and Martin, the Québécocracy had its filthy hands upon the Port of Montréal:
“Among the reappointments to Canada Ports Corp., was Québec business mogul Paul Desmarais, chairman and chief executive officer of Montréal’s Power Corp., the man who Ian MacDonald called ‘Mulroney’s mentor in the business world,’ his former boss, financial backer, and a frequent host to Mulroney at his Palm Beach home.”⁷¹
French Chauvinism, at least in the writings of the Québec Régimers and the Québécocentric media (Cité Libre, Canadian Press, La Presse and so forth) is therefore another name for modern European political and economic irrationalism in Canada, namely Canadian Culture. French Chauvinism also has a history in La Communauté and La Francophonie as Bonapartism, especially in Europe but also in Africa, the Middle East and Asia: The last political and economic form of Bonapartism was forged by Charles de Gaulle, before it was finally submerged under the floodtide of Americanism in world history, as the European Union.
In the world of today, French Chauvinism, especially as found in the Kantian and Hegelian “free–thinking, anti–clerical, anti–establishment tradition of the nineteenth century,” is therefore nothing more than an inert idea: Liberalism and conservatism in modern European world history, which lead to Bonapartism, the political and economic result of the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right derived from Machiavelli, are nothing more than inert ideas.⁷² In the supremacy of the American superpower, modern European raison d’état is swept into the dustbin of history: Ottawa is now the first sphere of Americanism, thanks to the rational political economy of the American Idealists in Washington and on Wall Street.
The modern European political and economic struggles unchained by the Industrial and French revolutions ended in the 20th century with the rise of world civilization, the fountainhead of which is Americanism: The world historical clash between Global freedom, the rational conception of right found in The Magna Carta and The Constitution of the United States of America, versus the last vestiges of European modernity (unchained in the political and economic strife between the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right and the conception of right found in The Magna Carta and Industrial revolution), as the strife between superior and inferior ruling classes, begins in the New World with the victories of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln in the Civil Wars, as the rise of American Liberty in universal history and the collapse of the British Empire.
The bloodstained chapters of American Idealism in the Civil Wars are the birth pangs of Global freedom from out of the womb of world history,―as the sublation of modern freedom from out of the ashes of the Holy Roman Empire and the clash between old and new Christendom, in the strife of ruling classes unchained by the Industrial and French revolutions. The notion of the Global world, the highest conception of humanity, is therefore clothed in the immediacy of the flesh and blood of universal history: Henceforth the conception of universal freedom as the sublation of subjective and objective freedom in world history is no longer an abstraction: Absolute Liberty in the world of today is Americanism, the rise of Global rational political and economic order, as the supremacy of Washington in the 21st century.
In the realm of political and economic ideas, the 20th century world historical struggle between modern and Global freedom is advanced in the warfare between Kant and Hegel: This almighty clash between sophistry and philosophy plays out in the realm of modern European politics and economics in the power struggles between political parties, as the Left versus the Right. The world historical clash between Kantianism and Hegelianism in 20th century politics and economics separated modern Europeans into hostile camps. This clash of ideas, which exists even today in the mindset of European humanity, but without any Global historical political and economic significance whatsoever, is withering away under the floodtide of Americanism in the world: The substance of the conception vanishes as a stage of world history, and what remains is merely the empty husk, as the twilight of modernity. What exactly does this mean in the philosophy of American Idealism? The World Wars and collapse of European modernity is the result of the political and economic warfare between the Left and Right in the 20th century world historical struggle between modern and Global freedom, as advanced in the Kantian and Hegelian clash between superior and inferior ruling classes:
“The philosophy of Globalism is the doctrine that there is a center of gravity in the world, a foundation of the universe, wherein all particular problems are especially resolved, such as the evils that plague humanity.”⁷³
In North America these political and economic movements follow a less intense path, especially in Canada and Mexico: The disintegration of the British Empire and collapse of modern Europe as the center of world power entails the decline of British and European influence in the New World. The historical struggle for world supremacy does not end in the ruins of Berlin, but continues into the Cold War: Therefore the last remnants of European modernity linger for another half century, until the collapse of Soviet Communism. In Canada and Mexico, the late 20th century world historical struggle between modern and Global freedom is also advanced in the clash between Kant and Hegel: This almighty clash between sophistry and philosophy plays out in the realm of modern Canadian and Mexican politics and economics in the power struggles between political parties, as the Left versus the Right. In the New World, the 20th century world historical struggle between modern and Global freedom is therefore also advanced in the warfare of Kantians and Hegelians:
“Hegel was too much of a critical philosopher to want to undo Kant’s Copernican Revolution … the speculative theologians have never grasped the crucial significance of Kant in Hegel’s development.”⁷⁴
In Canada the 20th century modern European power struggles involve the political and economic strife between the Conservative and Liberal parties, which also means the strife between English and French Canada, which begins in earnest with the Government of Wilfrid Laurier and ends with the Empire of Paul Desmarais, the Québec Régime in Ottawa, 1968–2006. Henceforth the financial, commercial and industrial development of Canada follows the path of Absolute freedom as Americanism, the rise of Global rational political and economic order in the world, the supremacy of Washington in the 21st century.
The rational conception of Canada (seeing Canada whole) arises from the downfall of Canadian Liberalism and European modernity: The rise and fall of the Québec Régime in Ottawa as the birth of the Canadocentric Polity, as the political and economic realm of American finance, commerce and industry in Canada, is therefore of some interest with regards to the rise of Americanism in world history. Americanism is the world historical refutation of Wilfrid Laurier’s Political Liberalism, among other things, because Global rational political and economic order overcomes modern European Machiavellism in universal history.
The Canadosphere, as the political and economic realm of American finance, commerce and industry in Canada, is rising upwards in the developmental unification of the coaxial integration of the American world.
American Idealism is the fountainhead of Global civilization. The teaching of the concept is the inescapable lesson of history: As the historical unfolding of the conceptual rationality of the notion of universal freedom, Americanism is rising upwards in the world of today.⁷⁵
ENDNOTES
1. Giosuè Carducci (1835–1907), “On the Death of Eugène Napoléon,” A Selection From the Poems of Giosuè Carducci: Translated and Annotated With a Biographical Introduction, Emily A. Tribe, editor and translator, London, 1921, 92:
“Ma di dicembre, ma di brumaio
Cruento è il fango, la nebbia è perfida:
Non crescono arbusti a quell’ aure,
O dan frutti di cenere e Tòsco.” [Italics added]
See: Giosuè Carducci, Odi barbare, Bologna, Zanichelli Editore, “Collezione Elzeviriana,” 1877.
See also: “I have always regarded Immanuel Kant not only as a very powerful thinker, but as the metaphysical father of the philosophy of positivism … undoubtedly the greatest and most positive advance that I have made following in the footsteps of Kant is the discovery of the evolution of human ideas according to the law of three stages, namely the theological, metaphysical and scientific phases: The Kantian philosophy in my opinion is the very basis of the three stages of positivism.”
Auguste Comte (10 December 1824) in Friedrich Maximilian Müller, translator, “Translator’s Preface,” Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Commemoration of the Centenary of Its First Publication, Immanuel Kant, vol. 1, London, 1881, xxi: “J’avais toujours regardé Kant non–seulement comme une très–forte tête, mais comme le métaphysicien le plus rapproché de la philosophie positive … le pas le plus positif et le plus distinct que j’ai fait après lui, me semble seulement d’avoir découverte la loi du passage des idées humaines par les trois états théologique, métaphysique, et scientifique, loi qui me semble être la base dont Kant a conseillé l’exécution.”
See also: “‘J’ai lu et relu avec un plaisir infini le petit traité de Kant (Idee zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte in weltbürgerlicher Absicht, 1784); il est prodigieux pour l’époque, et même, si je l’avais connu six ou sept ans plus tot, il m’aurait épargné de la peine. Je suis charmé que vous l’ayez traduit, il peut très–efficacement contribuer à préparer les esprits à la philosophie positive. La conception générale ou au moins la méthode y est encore métaphysique, mais les détails montrent à chaque instant l’esprit positif. J’avais toujours regardé Kant non–seulement comme une très–forte tête, mais comme le métaphysicien le plus rapproché de la philosophie positive … Pour moi, je ne me trouve jusqu’à present, après cette lecture, d’autre valeur que celle d’avoir systématisé et arrêté la conception ébauchée par Kant à mon insu, ce que je dois surtout à l’éducation scientifique; et même le pas le plus positif et le plus distinct que j’ai fait après lui, me semble seulement d’avoir découverte la loi du passage des idées humaines par les trois états théologique, métaphysique, et scientifique, loi qui me semble être la base dont Kant à conseillé l’exécution. Je rends grâce aujourd’hui à mon défaut d’érudition; car si mon travail, tel qu’il est maintenant, avait été précédé chez moi par l’étude du traité de Kant, il aurait, à mes propres yeux, beaucoup perdu de sa valeur.’ See Auguste Comte, par É. Littré, Paris, 1864, p. 154; Lettre de Comte à M. d’Eichthal, 10 Déc. 1824.”
Auguste Comte (10 December 1824) in Friedrich Maximilian Müller, Ibidem.
See finally: “French Canada is in dire need of a positivist philosophy of action … the [positivist] notion of autonomy is the very basis of our French Canadian politics.”
Joseph Philippe Pierre Yves Elliott Trudeau, “Politique fonctionnelle,” Cité Libre, 1.1(juin, 1950): 21 & Ibidem, “Politique fonctionnelle II,” Cité Libre, 1.2(février, 1951): 27: “Ce qui manque le plus au Canada français, c’est une philosophie positive de l’action … l’autonomie [positiviste] devient une notion essentielle pour la politique de notre pays.” [Italics added]
2. Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien, Straight from the Heart, 1st edition, Toronto, 1986, 213. [Italics added]
3. Henry Kissinger, Diplomacy, New York, 1994, 806–808.
See: “We know that the culture of France, at once Cartesian and Racinian, is a beacon of Western civilization. The historical prestige of French culture is found in the Bastille, Napoléon Bonaparte and ‘Free France.’ The political élites of Québec recognize the superiority of French culture, and desire to remain faithful to its noble and democratic ideals, as advanced by the vanguard of the world famous University of Paris.”
Patrick Straram, “Les français parlent aux français ou pourquoi Duplessis a raison,” Cité Libre, 22(octobre, 1958): 45: “On le sait, la culture française, à la fois cartésienne et racinienne, sert de modèle à l’occident. À cette culture il faut ajouter quelques prestiges historiques: Prise de la Bastille, Napoléon 1er et ‘France libre.’ Si un autre peuple reconnaît le rayonnement de la culture française et veut rester fidèle à l’enseignement, à la fois noble et démocratique, dont l’Université de Paris est un fleuron célébré universellement, c’est bien la province de Québec.”
4. See: “Mr. Lafontaine had accepted the system established in 1841; when Mr. Papineau returned from exile he attacked the new order of things with his great eloquence and all the elevation of his thought. I will not here introduce a comparison between the respective legal ideas of these two great men. Both loved their country ardently, and passionately; both devoted their lives to it; both, by different means had no other end in view than to serve it; both were disinterested and honest. Let us remain contented and satisfied with these memories and seek not to find out who was right or who was wrong.”
Wilfrid Laurier, Lecture on Political Liberalism: Delivered By Wilfrid Laurier, Esq., M.P., on the 26th June, 1877, in the Music Hall, Québec, Under the Auspices of “Le Club Canadien,” Québec, 1877, 20.
According to Wilfrid Laurier, Louis–Joseph Papineau, the leader of the Great Terror (la Grande terreur) of 1837, who “attacked the new order of things” when he returned from exile, (1) possessed great eloquence and elevated thought; (2) he was a great man with legal ideas; (3) he loved his country ardently and passionately; (4) he devoted his life to his country; (5) he had no other end in view than to serve his country; (6) he was disinterested and honest. Wilfrid Laurier, the father of Canadian Liberalism, defends the leader of the mass murderers and terrorists of 1837!
We will find that Canadian Culture, as defined by the Québécocracy, especially under the Québec Regime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais, defends the actions of Papineau and his henchman in the name of democracy, and even equates them with the patriots of the American revolution: Unlike the American patriots, however, the so–called democratic revolution of Papineau and his followers was a failure because unlike the American revolution against the British Empire, which was not directed against the world historical foundations of the Industrial Revolution, their revolt was directed against the conception of right found in the Magna Carta, and therefore also against the Constitution of the United States of America, namely the notion of universal freedom, albeit in embryonic form. Papineau and his followers uphold the Napoléonic and French Revolutionary conception of right, which is profoundly inspired by Machiavellism, and which is the basis of Bonapartism in modern European political and economic history.
5. Robert Bourassa, “Épilogue: Aspects économiques d’un Québec indépendant,” Réflexions d’un Citoyen (Cahiers de Cité Libre), Jean–Paul Lefebvre, Ottawa/Montréal, 1968, 112: “On sait, d’après le dernier discours du budget, que le Québec recevra pendant l’exercice en cours $362,740,000.00 sous divers titres de péréquation, comparativement à 66 millions qu’il touchait en 1962. Sur le plan fiscal, le Québec n’est donc plus perdant.”
See: “The rising power of Québec in the last few years is a truly amazing story in the history of French–Canada. We must control this movement and not hinder our progress: We must avoid a dead–end; we must follow the right road; and we must lay the rational foundations for the upcoming power struggles based on profound knowledge of the facts of the situation.”
Robert Bourassa, Ibidem, 99: “L’Élan qui anime le Québec depuis quelques années est incontestablement l’un des faits les plus marquants dans l’histoire du Canada français, et il ne faudrait aucunement le ralentir mais plutôt l’orienter, le canaliser de façon qu’il ne suive pas un mouvement aveugle mais qu’il devienne une conscience éclairée et qu’il prépare une décision prise en pleine connaissance des données de la situation.”
6. See: “The Quiet Revolution resonated deeply within me … Our federation is ‘asymmetrical.’”
Paul Martin, Hell or High Water: My Life In and Out of Politics, Toronto, 2008, 39–167.
See also: “Just after he graduated from University of Toronto Law School in 1966 at age twenty–eight, he [Paul Martin Jr.] joined Power Corporation of Québec. Martin was hired by Maurice Strong, former assistant to Paul Desmarais Sr., … Paul Desmarais began running the company the next year, and within three years he had appointed Martin vice–president … Paul Martin will be the fourth politician this Québec billionaire has groomed for or financially assisted into being prime minister.”
Murray Dobbin, Paul Martin: CEO for Canada? Toronto, 2003, 11.
See finally: “The deep emotional connection with Laurier and his vision of Liberalism never left him … I have tried to be faithful to my father’s legacy … my experience with CSL [Canada Steamship Lines] was closely linked with my political and economic ideas.”
Paul Martin, Hell or High Water: My Life In and Out of Politics, Toronto, 2008, 18–19–61.
7. Chrétien, Straight from the Heart, 1st edition, Toronto, 1985, 72.
8. Jean Chrétien, Straight from the Heart, 1st edition, Toronto, 1985, 11–17–22–23.
9. Jean Lapierre in Hélène Buzzetti, “Ce Liberal fondateur du Bloc Québecois,” Le Devoir, 30 mars 2016: “Il ne fait aucun doute dans mon esprit que, sans vos [Jean Chrétien’s] basses et tortueuses manoeuvres, nous aurions le 23 juin proclamé le retour du Québec dans la grande famille canadienne. Aujourd’hui, comme tous les Québécois, je suis déçu, je me sens humilié et je sais que vous [Jean Chrétien] nous avez trahis.”
See also: “When the Meech Lake accord was torpedoed, with the help of several prominent Liberals, he [Jean Lapierre] questioned the direction of his party. At the 1990 Liberal convention, Lapierre campaigned against Meech Lake opponent Jean Chrétien, openly calling him a ‘sell–out’ and wearing a black arm–band to mark the accord’s failure.”
Jonathan Montpetit, “Jean Lapierre, Québec Political Commentator, Dead at 59: Lapierre’s Opinion on Québec Politics Heard Daily by Thousands,” CBC News, 29 March 2016.
See also: “[Jean Lapierre] left the Liberals because the new leader, Jean Chrétien, opposed the Meech Lake constitutional accord. As a Québecker he felt ‘sad, humiliated and betrayed,’ he said as he left the Liberal caucus and sat as an independent in June, 1990.”
Les Perreaux, Tu Thanh Ha and Daniel Leblanc, “Obituary: Jean Lapierre Made Friends Across Broad Ideological Spectrum,” The Globe and Mail, 29 March 2016.
See finally: “Jean Chrétien had campaigned against the Meech Lake Accord, and received the support of the masses.”
Jean–Francois Lisée, “L’Énjoleur: Chrétien, Jean,” Le Petit Tricheur: Robert Bourassa derriere le masque, Montréal, 2012: “Chrétien avait fait campagne en critiquant Meech, récoltant les vivats de la foule.”
10. Anonymous, “Power Corp. Chairman Increases Control With $31 Million Buy,” Winnipeg Free Press, 16 July 1977, 17.
11. Mario Pelletier, La machine à milliards: L’Histoire de la Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, Montréal, 1989, 149: “On est alors a l’époque des grands sommets économiques, que le gouvernement Lévesque a décidé de convoquer pour assurer une concertation entre les divers agents économiques. Le premier a eu lieu au Manoir Richelieu, du 24 au 27 mai 1977, et a rassemblé autour d’une même table Louis Laberge, Paul Desmarais, Yvon Charbonneau, Brian Mulroney, etc.”
See: “How did the Québec independence movement which flourished before René Lévesque, end–up in its present state of decline? Ever since 1968, René Lévesque has told his followers in the Québec independence movement that he will not fight for Québec’s independence. Then why did they so loyally support him? … By using the Parti Québécois to climb the rungs of the social ladder in order to dominate Québec, has not this class of newcomers instead replaced the goal of Québec independence with the aim of their own self–aggrandizement?”
Raoul Roy, René Lévesque: Était–il un imposteur? Montréal, 1985, dos du livre: “Comment l’indépendantisme, qui croissait avant Lévesque, a–t–il été étouffé pour aboutir à la confusion cacophonique actuelle? Des 1968, René Lévesque a averti les indépendantistes que ce n’etait pas l’indépendance qu’il allait réaliser. Pourquoi l’ont–ils suivi aussi fidèlement? … En se servant du PQ pour grimper dans l’échelle sociale jusqu’à la dominance, cette nouvelle classe de parvenus n’a–t–elle pas fait passer ses intérêts égoïstes avant ceux de la libération nationale?”
12. Pierre Arbour, Québec Inc et la tentation du dirigisme: La Caisse de dépôt et les sociétés d’État: Héritage d’une génération? Montréal, 1993, 12–14: “J’ai eu l’occasion d’observer l’importance grandissante de la Caisse dans l’économie du Québec grâce aux millions qui y ont afflué. J’ai pu constater aussi que le pouvoir politique, surtout à partir de 1978, y avait une emprise importante et que les décisions d’investissement devenaient colorées par la politique … On veut inconsciemment imiter Paul Desmarais et on y reussit très mal. Malheureusement, celui qui y perd n’est pas un actionnaire privé et fortuné, mais plutôt la collectivite québécoise qui s’en trouve ainsi appauvrie.”
13. Martin Blais, Philosophie du Pouvoir (Cahiers de Cité Libre), vol. 20.1, Ottawa/Montréal, 1970, 53–145: “Kant et bien d’autres nous en fournissent la raison … Toute société établit un ordre. La mafia comme l’Église.”
See: “Kant’s doctrines are destructively opposed to Catholicism. His teaching has been condemned by Popes Leo XIII and Pius X. His great work, ‘The Critique of Pure Reason’ was placed on the Index, 11th June, 1827. Inconsistent with Catholic teaching are (1) Kant’s Metaphysical Agnosticism, which declares his ignorance of all things as they really are; (2) his Moral Dogmatism which declares the supremacy of will over reason, thereby making blind will without the guidance of reason the rule of action; (3) his giving to religious dogma merely a symbolic signification; (4) diametrically opposed to scholastic teaching and the common sense of mankind is Kant’s theory of knowledge which makes mind and thought the measure of reality rather than making reality the measure of mind and thought. Kant maintains that things are so because we must think them so, not that we must think them so because they are really so independently of our thinking them. The reversal of the order of thought and reality, Kant calls his ‘Copernican Revolution’ in his theory of knowledge.”
Michael J. Mahony, History of Modern Thought, New York, 1933, 166.
14. Immanuel Kant, “The Critique of Pure Reason,” Great Books of the Western World: Kant, John Miller Dow Meiklejohn, translator & Robert Maynard Hutchins, editor in chief, Chicago, 1960, 106–106–127.
See: “The concept of the noumenon is problematical … the concept of the noumenon is not therefore the concept of an object, but only a problem … the so–called syllogism of Cartesius, cogito, ergo sum, is in reality tautological.”
Immanuel Kant, Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Commemoration of the Centenary of Its First Publication, vol. 2, Friedrich Maximilian Müller, translator, London, 1881, 249–250–308.
15. Alison Stone, editor, “Introduction: Philosophy in the Nineteenth–Century,” The Edinburgh Critical History of Nineteenth–Century Philosophy, Howard Caygill & David Webb, general editors, Edinburgh, 2011, 1.
16. Immanuel Kant in Kant’s Principles of Politics Including His Essay on Perpetual Peace: A Contribution to Political Science, William Hastie, editor & translator, Edinburgh, 1891, 89–116. [Kant, Zum ewigen Frieden, 1795]
17. Immanuel Kant, Ibidem, 91–92.
The Kantian sophistical distinction between republicanism and democracy is profoundly corrupted by modern European subjectivism, relativism and irrationalism, and is therefore merely transcendental and phenomenal: The European followers of Kant oppose the American revolution to the French revolution, as the dictatorship of the proletariat, while his American followers connect the American revolution with the French revolution, as the power of the people. The modern European political and economic irrationalism of Immanuel Kant is no friend of American democracy and the rise of Global rational political and economic order in the world.
18. Charles Philippe Théodore Andler (1866–1933), “Préface: Hegel,” Le pangermanisme philosophique: 1800 à 1914, textes traduits de l’Allemand par M. Aboucaya [Claude Aboucaya], G. Bianquis [Geneviève Bianquis, 1886–1972], M. Bloch [Gustave Bloch, 1848–1923], L. Brevet, J. Dessert, M. Dresch [Joseph Dresch, 1871–1958], A. Fabri, A. Giacomelli, B. Lehoc, G. Lenoir, L. Marchand [Louis Marchand, 1875–1948], R. Serreau [René Serreau], A. Thomas [Albert Thomas, 1878–1932], J. Wehrlin, Paris, 1917, xliii: “L’ère nouvelle qui s’annonce, c’est–à–dire le ‘royaume de l’esprit réalisé,’ est celle, non seulement de Kant, mais de la Révolution française. Un vouloir libre, tout formel, dont le contenu se crée à mesure qu’il touche au réel, c’est là le principe kantien et c’est, non moins, le principe de la Révolution française. Ce principe donne des résultats pratiques dans la Révolution d’abord. La raison kantienne légifère pour le vouloir collectif comme pour le vouloir individuel … La Révolution fit cette tentative audacieuse de commencer par les vouloirs individuels, par les atomes du vouloir. C’est le vouloir collectif, l’Ancien Régime, que la philosophie révolutionnaire incrimine pour ses privilèges abusifs.”
See: “Hegel’s Lectures on the Philosophy of History demonstrate … that during the period of national sovereignty, a nation has rights conferred upon its people in virtue of their rôle as the ‘support of the universal spirit.’ With regards to this rôle, ‘the souls of all other people are diminished by right and they no longer count in world history.’ Hegel predicts for them a total moral absorption, a fate far worse than physical annihilation.”
Charles Philippe Théodore Andler, Ibidem, xxxvi: “La Philosophie de l’histoire démontrent … que, durant le déroulement de la période où il est souverain, un peuple a tous les droits que lui confère son rôle de ‘support de l’esprit universel.’ Au regard de ce rôle, ‘les âmes de tous les autres peuples sont diminuées de droit et elles ne comptent plus dans l’histoire.’ Hegel leur pronostique une destinée pire que la destruction physique, une totale absorption morale.”
20th century pseudo–Hegelians and anti–Hegelians like Charles Andler reject the genuine Hegelian notion of universal freedom found in the authoritative works of Hegel, based upon their Kantio–Hegelian interpretations of citations from the the non–authoritative editions: The Hegelian notion of universal freedom is sophistry, according to the Kantio–Hegelian delusions of modern irrationalists like Charles Andler, because for the inferior ruling classes of world history, “Hegel predicts for them a total moral absorption, a fate far worse than physical annihilation” (Hegel leur pronostique une destinée pire que la destruction physique, une totale absorption morale).
That I have laid out some of the philosophical reasons for the doctrine of American Idealism in the third edition of another writing of mine, an outline of sorts, named Americanism, is of slight importance: That the teaching therein involves the sciences of economics and politics is of some interest, however, and therefore has a bearing upon the subject at hand, namely, as the developmental unification and coaxial integration of the American world. In that work I flatter myself as the first Hegelian philosopher ever to apply the Dialectic of Hegel to the Hegelian Dialectic: “Modern irrationalism, in order to validate pseudo–Hegelianism and anti–Hegelianism, squares the Lecture Notes and the great works published by Hegel in his lifetime. Pseudo–Hegelianism and anti–Hegelianism thus squares both Kant and Hegel in order to prove the speculative logical and dialectical system of the genuine Hegel’s philosophical science of Absolute Idealism is flawed. Irrationalism thus perverts the history of philosophy and modern Europe … Pseudo–Hegelianism and anti–Hegelianism is therefore the political and economic mask of modern European raison d’état. One drawback will never be remedied in Hegel philology: The Lecture Notes are not authoritative and are therefore useless in the exact determination of the ultimate worth of genuine Hegelianism … In the 20th century upwards of 500 million human beings were slaughtered in the contagion of modern political and economic satanism, more than in all the periods of history combined: Many hundreds of millions more were utterly ruined and destroyed by the most barbaric slavery ever recorded in the world. This is the ultimate verdict of exact historiography and universal history. From whence comes the disease of modern unreason?”
Christopher Richard Wade Dettling, Americanism: The New Hegelian Orthodoxy, 3rd edition, Archive.org, 2016, 6–9.
19. Anonymous [Pierre Trudeau?] and Guy Cormier, “Faites vos jeux” et “Fleches de tout bois,” Cité Libre, 1.1(Juin, 1950), 37–45: “[Emmanuel] Mounier restera present dans toute l’aventure que nous tentons aujourd’hui … Vive quand même la République!”
20. Emmanuel Mounier, Existentialist Philosophies: An Introduction, Eric Blow, translator, London, 1948, 20. [1947]
21. Emmanuel Mounier, Personalism, Philip Mairet, translator, London, 1952, xvi. [1950]
22. Simone de Beauvoir in Madeleine Gobeil, “Entrevue avec Simone de Beauvoir,” Cité Libre: Nouvelle série, 16(15).69(août–septembre, 1964): 30–31: “Nous avons toujours dit, Sartre et moi, que ce n’est pas parce qu’il y a désir d’être, que ce désir corresponde à une réalité quelconque. C’est comme Kant le disait, sur le plan intellectuel. Ce n’est pas une raison parce qu’on croit à des causalités pour qu’il y ait une cause suprême. Ce n’est pas parce qu’il y a chez l’homme un désir d’être pour qu’il puisse jamais atteindre l’être, ou même que l’être soit une notion possible, l’être en tout cas qui soit réflexion et en même temps existence. II y a une synthèse existence et être qui est impossible. Nous l’avons répété toute notre vie, Sartre et moi, et c’est le fond de notre pensée, il y a un creux dans l’homme et même ses réalisations ont ce creux en elles.”
23. Jean Chrétien’s “philosophy” in Laurence Martin, Chrétien: The Will to Win, vol. 1, Toronto, 1995, 377.
24. Wilfrid Laurier, Lecture on Political Liberalism: Delivered By Wilfrid Laurier, Esq., M.P., on the 26th June, 1877, in the Music Hall, Québec, Under the Auspices of “Le Club Canadien,” Québec, 1877, 10–11. [Italics added]
25. Brian Mulroney in Peter Charles Newman, “Appendix 9,” The Canadian Revolution 1985–1995: From Deference to Defiance, Toronto, 1995, 451.
See: “The division of power under Canadian federalism [Québec Regime fédéralisme asymétrique], whereby provinces control the development of natural resources and the federal government controls their export, has reduced the possibility of formulating national electrical policies. The federal Department of Natural Resources Canada and Section 92A of the Constitution Act, 1982, asserts that trade in electricity and the installation of international transmission lines is subject to the prevalence of federal jurisdiction (with concurrent federal and provincial powers over inter provincial trade), whereas the planning, development, and distribution of hydroelectric resources within the provinces is the responsibility of each province.”
Karl Froschauer, White Gold: Hydroelectric Power in Canada, Vancouver, 2011, 51.
26. Michael Meighen in Rae Murphy, Robert Chodos and Nick Auf der Maur, Brian Mulroney: The Boy from Baie Comeau, Toronto, 1985, 62.
See: “In 1972, Desmarais hired Mulroney as negotiator during a labour dispute at his paper La Presse. In apparent appreciation of Mulroney’s work, Desmarais became Mulroney’s biggest financial backer, starting with his leadership bid in 1976. Mulroney confirmed the relationship after becoming Prime Minister. In September 1990, Mulroney appointed John Sylvain, Desmarais’s brother–in–law to the Senate, one of eight controversial appointments that ensured the passage of the Goods and Services Tax. In June 1993, Mulroney appointed Desmarais’s brother, Jean Noël Desmarais, to the Senate as part of a flurry of patronage appointments. Now Mulroney has returned to work for Power Corporation’s long–time law firm, Ogilvy Renault.”
Robert A. Hackett, Richard S. Gruneau, Donald Gutstein and Timothy A. Gibson, The Missing News: Filters and Blind Spots in Canada’s Press, Aurora, Ontario, 2000, 131–132.
27. Lawrence Martin, Chrétien: The Will to Win, vol. 1, Toronto, 1995, 179. [Italics added]
28. Lawrence Martin, Ibidem, 379. [Italics added]
29. General de Gaulle (1964–1965) in John Francis Bosher, The Gaullist Attack on Canada: 1967–1997, Montréal/Kingston, 1999, 34–35.
30. John Francis Bosher, The Gaullist Attack on Canada: 1967–1997, Montréal/Kingston, 1999, 4–5–6–11–13–14–18.
31. Paul Douglas Stevens, “Pierre E. Trudeau: Prime Minister of Canada, 1968,” The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 18, Chicago, 1971, 380b.
See: “Trudeau and his group established the magazine Cité Libre (Community of the Free) [la Francophonie & Communauté]. In it Trudeau wrote: ‘In our relations with the state, we are fairly immoral: We corrupt civil servants, we use blackmail on M.P.’s, we put we put pressure on the courts, we defraud the treasury, we obligingly look the other way when it concerns our interests.’”
Paul Douglas Stevens, Ibidem.
See finally: “[Pierre Trudeau] was a separatist like the others were, like the élite was … he really carried things as far as he could, he became one of the leaders in that sort of thing.”
Monique Nemni in Anonymous, “New Book Traces Trudeau’s Separatist to Nationalist Shift,” CTV News, 13 November 2011.
32. Robin Philpot, Derrière L’État Desmarais: Power, 2e édition, Montréal, 2014, 14–15: “Claude Frenette, adjoint de Paul Desmarais … a été élu président de l’aile québécoise du Parti libéral fédéral en vue du congrès au leadership et, dans les bureaux mêmes de Power Corporation, avec Pierre Trudeau, il a établi le plan qui mènerait celui–ci à la direction du Parti libéral et au poste de premier ministre du Canada.”
33. See: “[36a] Louis became keenly interested in politics. His political hero was Wilfrid Laurier … St. Laurent attended St. Charles Seminary in Sherbrooke, Qué., and received a bachelor’s degree in 1902. He then studied law at Laval University in Québec and earned his law degree in 1905. St. Laurent refused the offer of a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University … In 1914, he became a professor of law at Laval University … St. Laurent ranked as one of the top Canadian authorities on constitutional law. From 1937 to 1939, he served as senior counsel to the Royal Commission on federalism … In November, 1941, minister of justice Ernest Lapointe died … [36b] [St. Laurent] took office as minister of justice on Dec. 10, 1941 … In 1958, St. Laurent returned to the practice of law in Québec. He also lectured on law at Laval University and served on the boards of several large Canadian corporations. St. Laurent did not withdraw completely from political life.”
Wilfrid Eggleston, “Louis Stephen St. Laurent: Prime Minister of Canada 1948–1957,” The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 17, Chicago, 1971, 36a–36b. [Italics added]
See also: “Laval graduates were, in Mason Wade’s words, ‘the true makers of the Quiet Revolution.’”
Rae Murphy, Robert Chodos and Nick Auf der Maur, Brian Mulroney: The Boy from Baie Comeau, Toronto, 1984, 45.
See also: “The aim of this meeting concerns the question of the transportation of electrical energy over long distances between the provinces. From our vantage point, this question is a purely provincial matter … The province of Québec, though determined to use its natural resources for its own development, welcomes mutually beneficial inter–provincial agreements, but in this matter Québec will not be subjected to any federal authority whatsoever [la tutelle du gouvernement fédéral].”
Jean Lesage (1962) in Karl Froschauer, White Gold: Hydroelectric Power in Canada, Vancouver, 2011, 31: “Cette conférence aurait pour objet une discussion sur le transport à longue distance de l’énergie électrique entre les provinces. Nous considérons cette question de jurisdiction provinciale … La province de Québec, tout en étant déterminée à utiliser ses richesses naturelles pour favoriser son développement économique, est bien disposée à faire avec ses provinces soeurs des arrangements d’interêt mutuel mais elle n’entend pas accepter de le faire sous la tutelle du gouvernement fédéral.”
By the phrase, “la tutelle du gouvernement fédéral,” Jean Lesage means the Canadian statecraft of the British Imperialistic ruling class of the generation of Lester Pearson as well as the Canadocentric ruling class of John Diefenbaker: The political and economic power struggle between ruling classes in Canada is also the clash between the owners of White and Black Gold. For this reason the Hydro–Québec is the ultimate bastion of Québec Regime power: Its tentacles are the lifeblood of the Québec Inc.
See also: “[René Lévesque] became a popular hero, the point man of the Quiet Revolution, architect of the nationalization of private companies to form Hydro–Québec … [Lévesque] became a separatist in 1963. By then, the government of Jean Lesage was constantly at war with the new federal government of Lester Pearson. The battleground was jurisdiction. Both, quintessentially, were activist governments: Walter Gordon functioning as Ottawa’s answer to Lévesque, and just as staunchly nationalist as he.”
Richard Gwyn and Sandra Gwyn (editor), The Northern Magus: Pierre Trudeau and Canadians, Toronto, 1980, 239. [Italics added]
See also: “The year 1965 marks a dividing line in his [Lester Pearson’s] administration, as Finance Minister Walter Gordon departed and Jean Marchand and Pierre Trudeau from Québec became prominent in the Cabinet. Pearson’s attempts in his first term to conciliate Québec and the other provinces with ‘co–operative federalism’ and ‘bilingualism and biculturalism’ were superseded by a firm federal response to provincial demands and by the Québec government’s attempts to usurp federal roles.”
Robert Bothwell, “Lester Bowles Pearson,” The Canadian Encyclopedia, 1st edition, vol. 3, James Harley Marsh, editor, Edmonton, 1985, 1378.
See also: “The economy of Québec must not be isolated, but open to the whole world, for then it will find new markets.”
Pierre Elliott Trudeau in Richard Gwyn and Sandra Gwyn, Ibidem, 57.
See also: “Evening after evening, Lévesque would come to Pelletier’s house, to meet with a group that included Marchand, Trudeau, and Laurendeau, to test out his scheme to nationalize the private power companies, and to secure them as allies. Each and every one of Lévesque’s points, Trudeau would rebut … Time and time again, writes Desbarats, ‘the professor would casually skim a barbed epigram at Lévesque, puncturing him in full flight and bringing him down to earth in a temper.’ (Years later, Lévesque must have smiled when he read that Trudeau had created Petro–Canada.)”
Richard Gwyn and Sandra Gwyn, Ibidem, 239.
Whatever philosophical differences with René Lévesque that Trudeau would refute, he always followed, exactly like Lévesque, the road of Québec nationalism in the Belle Province, but also in Ottawa: Pierre Elliott Trudeau and René Lévesque always did everything in their power to advance the cause of the Quiet Revolution, which over the years greatly empowered the Québécocracy, the White Gold ruling class.
See finally: “I started work on this book late in November 1979 … I began work much earlier, gathering material and insights from three different perspectives: From 1968 to 1970, as executive assistant to the Hon. Eric Kierans; from 1970 to 1973, as a civil servant with a long–winded title; and from 1973, as a columnists for the Toronto Star … The book is neither a definitive biography nor a work of historical scholarship … Trudeau is without intellectual equal among Canadian politicians, today or in the past, and there are few in the world who can challenge him.”
Richard Gwyn in Richard Gwyn and Sandra Gwyn, Ibidem, 9–9–9–58.
The Northern Magus: Pierre Trudeau and Canadians, the book by Richard and Sandra Gwyn, is a work of hagiography. That this book was ever published in the first place, is proof of the profound mental flabbiness that afflicts our intelligentsia, the most ambitious of whom have long cultivated the habit of relocating to the United States of America, rather than suffer at the hands of the Québécocracy, a policy which has empowered Americanism over the years, and thereby greatly weakened the Québec Regime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais, which in turn has uplifted Canada and the Canadian people.
Merci Richard and Sandra!
34. Peter Charles Newman, “King Paul,” The Canadian Establishment: The Titans, How the New Canadian Establishment Seized Power, vol. 3, Toronto, 1998, 166–172–172.
35. Jules Bélanger, Jean–Louis Lévesque: La montée d’un Gaspésien aux sommets des affaires, Saint–Laurent, 1996, 138–166: Le financier Lévesque, venu à Montréal de sa lointaine Gaspésie, “savait par expérience quelles difficultés attendaient un Canadian français [sic] désirant se lancer en affaires et il pris en quelque sorte le jeune et fougueux Desmarais sous as tutelle en lui ouvrant les portes des cercles financiers francophones du Québec … le Lévesque dont la plupart des Canadiens ont entendu parler est le volubile orateur, René, le ministre des Resources naturelles du Québec. Le riche, c’est Jean–Louis, un lointain cousin qui contrôle le plus grand empire financier du Québec.”
36. Sheila McLeod Arnopoulos, Voices from French Ontario, Kingston/Montreal, 1982, 157.
37. Paul Martin, Hell or High Water: My Life In and Out of Politics, Toronto, 2008, 48.
38. Richard Le Hir, Desmarais: La Dépossession Tranquille, Montréal, 2012, 16: “Les Québécois ont connu la Révolution tranquille. L’Empire Desmarais leur mijote la Dépossession tranquille.”
See: “Paul Desmarais is not a builder, he is but an animal, a rapist, a wolf in sheep’s clothing: Over the years Desmarais has learned that it is much easier to hoodwink the Good Shepherd, and to thereby prey upon the flock, rather than struggle constantly against the powers that be … the whole of Québec discovered the truly vile and depraved character of Paul Desmarais when he and Michael Sabia, (the president of the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, the Québec Pension Plan), were seen together as two love birds in a gilded–cage, at the palatial Manoir Desmarais, on the vast and luxurious estate of Sagard in the Saguenay: At that instant the scales fell from our eyes, and we understood the nature of his diabolism, and we perceived how our National Assembly, the ministers of our parliament, our highest officials and institutions of government, had all become the puppets of Paul Desmarais.”
Richard Le Hir, Desmarais: La Dépossession Tranquille, Montréal, 2012, 13: “Paul Desmarais n’est pas un bâtisseur. C’est un prédateur, un loup qui a compris qu’il est beaucoup plus facile de convaincre le berger de lui ouvrir toutes grandes les portes de la bergerie que de chercher continuellement à déjouer sa surveillance … Le séjour en famille de Michael Sabia, président de la Caisse de dépôt, au somptueux palais de Paul Desmarais à Sagard aura permis à tous les Québécois de découvrir le caractère totalement anormal et inacceptable des pratiques de l’empire Desmarais dans ses rapports avec le gouvernement du Québec, ses ministères et les entreprises et organismes qu’il contrôle.”
39. Henri de Kerillis, I Accuse de Gaulle, New York, 1946, xii–259–260.
40. Herbert Albert Laurens Fisher, Bonapartism: Six Lectures Delivered in the University of London, Oxford, 1908, 7–22–39–87–120.
41. Frank Morgan and Henry William Carless Davis, French Policy Since 1871, London, 1914, 4.
42. Pierre–Basile Mignault, “Introduction doctrinale et historique,” Le Droit civil canadien basé sur les “Répétitions écrites sur le code civil” de Frédéric Mourlon avec revue de la jurisprudence de nos tribunaux: Contenant une introduction doctrinale et historique, le titre préliminaire du code civil et les titres de la jouissance et de la privation des droits civils, des actes de l’état civil, du domicile, des absents et du mariage, Tome 1, Montréal, 1895, 2: “Le droit n’est pas l’oeuvre des hommes: Les législateurs humains ne le créent point. C’est un principe antérieur et préexistant, général, absolu, imprescriptible et invariable, parce qu’il tire sa source de la nature même de l’homme, qui ne change jamais. On le définit: Le fondement ou la raison première de la justice, le principe dirigeant des actions humaines, au point de vue du juste et de l’injuste. Cette définition, pour être complète et indiquer d’une manière exacte ce que c’est que le droit, aurait elle–même besoin d’être définie: Il faudrait, en effet, préciser ce principe dirigeant des actions humaines, cette raison première de toute justice. Mais la solution de ce problème est étrangère à l’objet de nos études, elle appartient aux philosophes plutôt qu’aux jurisconsultes. Suivant M. Cousin, la raison première de la justice consiste dans le respect de la liberté de l’homme.”
See also: “Nations are individuals: I will always maintain this analogy.”
Pierre–Basile Mignault, L’Administration de la justice sous la domination française: Conférence faite devant l’Union Catholique, le 9 février 1879, Montréal, 1879, 119: “J’ai comparé les nations aux individus, je vais continuer à le faire.”
See finally: “France has the greatest laws and jurisprudence in the world … regardless of its perversity, the Napoléonic Code is actually the most beautiful and grandiose achievement of the almighty Napoléon Bonaparte … Napoléon Bonaparte, who uplifted himself, by which means no one has ever determined, to the heights of conceptual power in his knowledge of the greatest problems of jurisprudence and legislation, often participated in the deliberations of the Judicial Council. Napoléon’s great genius, his profound method and penetrating insight, always astonished the members of the judiciary.”
Pierre–Basile Mignault, Le Droit civil canadien basé sur les “Répétitions écrites sur le code civil” de Frédéric Mourlon avec revue de la jurisprudence de nos tribunaux: Contenant une introduction doctrinale et historique, le titre préliminaire du code civil et les titres de la jouissance et de la privation des droits civils, des actes de l’état civil, du domicile, des absents et du mariage, Tome 1, Montréal, 1895, v–v–36: “Aucun pays ne possède une littérature légale comparable à celle de la France … Ce code [Code Napoléon], malgré ses défauts, est aujourd’hui le plus beau titre de gloire du grand homme [Napoléon Bonaparte] dont il porte le nom … Napoléon, qui s’est élevé, on ne sait comment, jusqu’à l’intelligence des problèmes les plus ardus du droit et de la législation, pris souvent part aux discussions du Conseil. Il y déploya toujours une clarté, une méthode, et quelquefois une profondeur de vues, qui furent pour tout le monde un sujet d’étonnement.”
See: “[Pierre–Basile Mignault] is now chiefly remembered for his monumental treatise Le droit civil canadien which is still cited as an authority in Québec courts … Many of his judgements, written in French and English, are considered authoritative statements on the civil law in Canada.”
John E.C. Brierley, “Pierre–Basile Mignault,” The Canadian Encyclopedia, vol. 2, Edmonton, 1985, 1130–1131.
43. Louis Couzinet, “Le Prince” de Machiavel et la théorie de l’absolutisme, Paris, 1910, xix–xxi–xxvii–136–349–352: “Nous nous proposons un rapprochement, une comparaison, entre la doctrine de Machiavel, telle qu’elle ressort du Prince, et la doctrine de l’absolutisme, que nous essayerons de dégager, non pas de tel ou tel des théoriciens qui en furent les champions; mais de l’ensemble de ces théoriciens … les doctrines absolutistes, dans leur application, conduisent les princes aux mêmes résultats que les doctrines de Machiavel … Machiavélisme et absolutisme sont issus de situations historiques analogues. C’est là un premier point essentiel de notre parallèle. Cette situation inspire à Machiavel l’idée de la légitimité de tous les moyens destinés à atteindre un but d’intérêt public et à réaliser le salut de l’État … Tous ceux qui ont pu étudier Napoléon l de près, nous disent qu’il y avait en lui le Napoléon homme d’État, qui voyait dans le sang des hommes répandu un des grands remèdes de la médecine politique … Le Prince de Machiavel et les doctrines de l’absolutisme sont nés d’un même sentiment profond de patriotisme, à des époques et dans des pays où un souverain puissant était nécessaire pour faire cesser, sous sa domination, les désordres et la désunion, causes de la détresse nationale … Machiavel nous apparaît comme un patriote sans scrupule lorsqu’il s’agit de sauver l’État. Dans sa conception du gouvernement il se révèle à nous comme un politique soucieux du bonheur du peuple et respectueux de sa liberté.”
See: Abbé Aimé Guillon de Montléon (1758–1842), Machiavel commenté par Napoléon Bonaparte, manuscrit trouvé dans la carrosse de Bonaparte, après la bataille de Mont–Saint–Jean, le 15 février 1815, Paris,1816.
44. Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli, The Prince, Luigi Ricci, translator, Oxford, 1921, 71.
45. Friedrich Meinecke, Machiavellism: The Doctrine of Raison d’État and Its Place in Modern History, Douglas Scott, translator, Werner Stark, introduction, New Haven, 1962, 345. [1957]
See: “In our history of the idea of raison d’état, Machiavelli, Frederick the Great and Hegel stand out as the three most prominent figures … on glancing at Kant … one sees that the really permanent German ideas on the subject of the State had remained thoroughly un–Machiavellian.”
Friedrich Meinecke, Machiavellism: The Doctrine of Raison d’État and Its Place in Modern History, Douglas Scott, translator, Werner Stark, introduction, New Haven, 1962, 366–393–393.
In the 20th century, Kantianism and Hegelianism come together in the greatest clash of reason and unreason, as the outdated political and economic notion of the world is overcome in the Dialectic of Finitude, as the collapse of modern European irrationalism and the rise of Global freedom. Friedrich Meinecke and the sophistry (empiricism) of modern European irrationalism are therefore inseparable:
“[Heinrich Brüning] found Meinecke’s lectures more stimulating and soon won permission to enter his seminar on Prussian history. Meinecke taught his Strasbourg students that Frederick the Great had developed Prussia into a Great Power by championing religious toleration and the impartial administration of the laws, but that his state could make no further progress because of its reliance on blind obedience. Baron Karl vom Stein [Heinrich Friedrich Karl Reichsfreiherr vom und zum Stein, 1757–1831], who became chancellor in 1807 after Prussia’s catastrophic defeat by Napoléon, was the greatest of Prussian statesmen because he understood that further development required active participation in government by the citizens. To educate the citizenry in the virtues of patriotism, self–discipline, and service to the community, Stein [and the Royalists] abolished serfdom, created municipal self–government, and opened military careers to talent. He laid the foundation for Prussia’s resurrection by ‘reuniting state, nation, and individual’ in the spirit of Rousseau and the French Revolution, but with greater realism and ‘a more highly developed ethical sense’ [Kant]. Meinecke praised Stein in particular for understanding that Prussia’s mission did not end with its own borders, that it must teach all of Germany to create a healthy [Kantian] political community, and this was the lesson that Brüning always remembered most vividly. Meinecke acknowledged that Stein had suffered painful defeats by reactionary aristocrats but argued that his work had been vindicated by Prussia’s triumphs in the Wars of Liberation, which revealed a glowing new patriotism in the younger generation. Bismarck and the Reichstag had recently avenged many of Stein’s defeats, Meinecke suggested, and healthy progress was being made toward parliamentary democracy. To understand Brüning’s statements later in life praising Bismarck’s constitution, it is important to note that Meinecke taught his students to adopt a remarkably optimistic view of it. Brüning later echoed Meinecke, for example, when he asserted that the Imperial Reichstag would have gained the same influence as the British House of Commons if only the kaiser had been persuaded before 1918 to recruit his cabinet ministers from its ranks.”
William L. Patch, Jr., Heinrich Brüning and the Dissolution of the Weimar Republic, Cambridge, 1998, 17.
On glancing at Kant, one sees that the really permanent German ideas on the subject of the State had remained thoroughly un–Machiavellian: Frederick the Great had developed Prussia into a Great Power by championing religious toleration and the impartial administration of the laws, but his state could make no further progress because of its reliance on blind obedience. Baron Karl vom Stein, who became chancellor in 1807 after Prussia’s catastrophic defeat by Napoléon, was the greatest of Prussian statesmen because he understood that further development required active participation in government by the citizens. To educate the citizenry in the virtues of patriotism, self–discipline, and service to the community, Stein (and the Royalists) abolished serfdom, created municipal self–government, and opened military careers to talent. Stein, laid the foundation for Prussia’s resurrection by “reuniting state, nation, and individual” in the spirit of Rousseau and the French Revolution, but with greater realism and “a more highly developed ethical sense” (Kant). Prussia’s mission did not end with its own borders, that it must teach all of Germany to create a healthy (Kantian) political community. Baron vom Stein had suffered painful defeats by reactionary aristocrats but his work had been vindicated by Prussia’s triumphs in the Wars of Liberation, which revealed a glowing new patriotism in the younger generation. Indeed, Bismarck and the Reichstag had recently avenged many of Baron vom Stein’s defeats, and healthy progress was being made toward parliamentary democracy.
See also: “At the summit of his philosophy, Hegel now conceived of the State in general as an ‘individual totality,’ which developed in a quite concrete manner in accordance with its own special and peculiar vital laws, and which was thereby both permitted and obliged to set aside ruthlessly even the universal moral commands. By doing so, it did not (as his words show) behave immorally, but rather according to the spirit of a higher morality which was superior to the universal and customary morality … ‘The morality of the State is not the moral’ … ‘It is solely through the State that Man has any value, or any spiritual and intellectual reality’ … Hegel was also, as one knows, very strongly under the influence of Napoléon, and rejected any moralizing in the face of the great conqueror–personalities of world history. Thereby he certainly paved the way for a freer and more open–minded interpretation of the personalities of world history, but also for a laxer treatment of the problem of political ethics. He did not take the trouble to limit in any way the completeness of the grandiose powers which he granted to the interest–policy of States in their dealings with one another―apart of course from those reservations he made against the uncleanliness of Machiavelli’s methods, which he stated were only permissible in Machiavelli’s contemporary historical situation, and were not to be considered permanent and universally applicable. This only offered a flimsy kind of barrier against the excesses of a modern Machiavellism, which in the future would also be capable of justifying itself with some new and special contemporary situation, when it made use of its new and frightful methods which were basically perhaps just as immoral.”
Friedrich Meinecke, Ibidem, 361–361–365–369.
See also: “Hegel’s own course notes and those of his students should be used with caution to clarify and illustrate the meaning of the texts he published during his lifetime … In general, the student notes written during or after Hegel’s classes should be used with caution … What has been said about the student notes must also be applied to the so–called Zusatze (additions), added by ‘the friends’ to the third edition of the Encyclopedia (1830) and the book on Rechtsphilosophie … Some commentators, however, seem to prefer the Zusatze over Hegel’s own writings; additions are sometimes even quoted as the only textual evidence for the interpretation of highly controversial issues. For scholarly use, however, we should use them only as applications, confirmations, or concretizations of Hegel’s theory. Only in cases where authentic texts are unavailable may they be accepted as indications of Hegel’s answers to questions that are not treated in his handwritten or published work. If they contradict the explicit theory of the authorized texts, we can presume that the student is wrong, unless we can show that it is plausible that they express a change in the evolution of Hegel’s thought … According to Leopold von Henning’s preface (pp. vi–vii) in his edition (1839) of the Encyclopädie of 1830, the editors of the Encyclopedia sometimes changed or completed the sentences in which the students had rendered Hegel’s classes.”
Adriaan Theodoor Basilius Peperzak, Modern Freedom: Hegel’s Legal, Moral, and Political Philosophy (Studies in German Idealism), Reinier Munk, series editor, Dordrecht, 2001, xvi–27–28–29–29.
See also: Leopold Dorotheus von Henning, Hrsg., “Vorwort des Herausgebers,” Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Encyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse — Die Logik: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke, Vollständige Ausgabe durch einen Verein von Freunden des Verewigten: D. Ph. Marheineke, D. J. Schulze, D. Ed. Gans, D. Lp. v. Henning, D. H. Hotho, D. K. Michelet, D. F. Förster, Erster Theil, Erste Auflage, Sechster (6) Band, Berlin, 1840, v–viii.
See also: Leopold Dorotheus von Henning, Hrsg., “Vorwort des Herausgebers,” Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Encyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse — Die Logik: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel’s Werke, Vollständige Ausgabe durch einen Verein von Freunden des Verewigten: D. Ph. Marheineke, D. J. Schulze, D. Ed. Gans, D. Lp. v. Henning, D. H. Hotho, D. K. Michelet, D. F. Förster, Erster Theil, Zweite Auflage, Sechster (6) Band, Berlin, 1843, v–viii.
See also: “The transcripts known today for all the Berlin lecture series are consistently, even surprisingly, reliable testimonies … It may indeed be disconcerting that only today do we doubt — and not everyone does — that Hegel’s lectures … are actually reproduced authentically in the published [Berlin] edition … that did not become full–blown for more than a hundred and fifty years. We can hardly examine here all the reasons for this circumstance.”
Annemarie Gethmann–Siefert, “Introduction: The Shape and Influence of Hegel’s Aesthetics,” Lectures on the Philosophy of Art: The Hotho Transcript of the 1823 Berlin Lectures, Robert F. Brown, editor and translator, Oxford, 2014, 32–46.
See finally: “Meinecke also publicly supported the Third Reich, especially its antisemitic laws, although he became unpopular with the Nazis in 1935.”
William E. Conklin, Hegel’s Laws, Stanford, California, 2008, 356.
46. Niccolò Machiavelli, Ibidem, 99–100.
47. Machiavelli, 102.
48. Machiavelli, 44–44–101–105.
49. See: “If this problem is not corrected by a very serious inquiry on the part of elected officials, in accordance with the laws of our National Assembly, the Desmarais oligarchy will threaten the power of our Parliament: Does the dangerous nature of this situation require even further proof? Will not this oligarchy eventually usurp the sovereign will of our representatives, and even our Prime Minister? … At this very moment, the Gelco–Trans–Canada Group (controlled by Paul Desmarais) is seeking to further acquire Le Soleil Newspaper, the readership of which is more than 175,000 people, as well as the daily newspaper Le Droit in Ottawa, which has a readership of some 45,000 people.”
Yves Michaud (1968) in Robin Philpot, Derrière L’État Desmarais: Power, Montréal, 2008, 13–14: “En faut–il davantage pour marquer le caractère grave d’une situation qui, si elle n’est pas l’objet d’un examen détaillé, scrupuleux et attentif — tel que le permettent nos règlements — de la part des élus du peuple et des responsables de l’État, risque d’abandonner dans les mains d’une oligarchie financière, une puissance plus grande que celle de l’État, une force éventuellement capable de contrecarrer les volontés des élus du peuple et de l’exécutif? … Le groupe Gelco–Trans–Canada [dirigé par Paul Desmarais] tente d’acquérir à l’heure actuelle, au moment où je vous parle, le journal Le Soleil, dont le tirage est de plus de 175 000 exemplaires et le quotidien Le Droit d’Ottawa, qui a un tirage de 45 000 exemplaires.”
See also: “Through Gesca Ltée, Desmarais controls several daily newspapers, including La Presse, Montréal’s prestigious broadsheet, and Québec City’s Le Soleil … Power Corporation, through its Square Victoria Communications Group subsidiary, and together with the corporate parent companies of the Toronto Star and Globe and Mail newspapers owns The Canadian Press.”
Ross Marowits, “Canadian Business Giant Desmarais Dead at 86,” Global News, 9 October 2013.
See also: “[Paul Desmarais] had gained control of four of Québec’s eight French–language daily newspapers (La Presse, La Tribune of Sherbrooke, Le Nouvelliste of Trois–Rivieres and La Voix de l’Est of Granby), seventeen weeklies (including the three largest weeklies in the Montréal area), and ten radio and television stations (including Montréal’s CKAC, the largest French–language radio station in Canada). These acquisitions raised the spectre of a virtual information monopoly.”
Rae Murphy, Robert Chodos and Nick Auf der Maur, Brian Mulroney: The Boy from Baie Comeau, Toronto, 1985, 72.
See finally: “It has taken some 30 years, but in November 2000 the Desmarais family finally gained control of the newspapers Le Soleil and Le Droit, along with Le Quotidien of Chicoutimi: The Desmarais family controls 70% of the written press in Québec … Canadians are outraged to learn that 66% of all their daily newspapers were owned by media conglomerates in 1970 and that this number had increased to 88% in 1995, and then increased to 95% in 1999. In Québec, all of our daily newspapers, except Le Devoir, are owned by media conglomerates: One conglomerate alone owns 70% of all our daily newspapers.”
Robin Philpot, Derrière L’État Desmarais: Power, 1ère édition, Montréal, 2008, 15–156: “Les Desmarais ont mis environ 30 ans pour mettre la main sur Le Soleil et Le Droit, mais ils y sont parvenues en novembre 2000, avec en prime Le Quotidien de Chicoutimi, ce qui porté à 70% leur contrôle de la presse écrite au Québec … Au Canada, on se scandalise du fait que 66% des quotidiens appartenaient à des chaînes de médias en 1970 et que ce chiffre soit passé à 88% en 1995 et, ensuite, à 95% en 1999. Au Québec, ce sont tous les quotidiens, sauf Le Devoir, qui appartient à des chaînes, et une seule chaîne en possède 70%.”
50. Léo–Paul Lauzon, “La minorité de riches (5,6%) paie 39% des impôts: Faux,” Le Journal de Montréal: Blogues, 28 septembre 2016: “Selon les données du gouvernement du Québec, 6,47 millions de contribuables, soit 36%, ont gagné moins de 20 000$ en 2013 et 14% ont empoché entre 20 000$ et 29 999$ … en 2013, 50% des contribuables québécois ont gagné moins de 30 000$ et 73% moins de 50 000$.”
51. David Descôteaux, “Qui paye de l’impôt au Québec?” Le Journal de Montréal: Opinions, 24 avril 2017: “Le nombre de contribuables ayant produit une déclaration s’élève à près de 6,5 millions. Mais attention: Parmi ces ‘contribuables,’ seulement 4,1 millions sont en réalité imposables. Beaucoup produisent une déclaration, mais ne payent aucun impôt … un peu plus de 4 millions de particuliers paient de l’impôt au Québec, soit environ la moitié de la population.”
See: Michel Girard, “42% des Québécois se sont appauvris,” La Presse, 9 septembre 1997.
52. Chrétien, Ibidem, 214.
53. See: “The assets he [Paul Desmarais] controls add up to $100 billion.”
Peter Charles Newman, The Titans: How the New Canadian Establishment Seized Power, vol. 3, Toronto, 1998, 165.
Newman does not draw the historically exact political and economic inference from this statement because he does not have at his disposal the reports and vast public archives of the Gomery (2005), Bastarache (2010) and Charbonneau Commissions (2011). He does however intimate the notion of the Québec Regime in Ottawa and Empire of Paul Desmarais as the political and economic arm of the Québec Inc when he states:
“Among titans, Desmarais is in a class of his own. He is the only major establishment figure whose hold on power has bridged all of my books, having been featured in my first volume, published nearly a quarter of a century ago, just as prominently as he is in this one.”
Peter Charles Newman, Ibidem, 166.
See also: “The RCMP announced Friday that charges have been laid against a businessman who was described as the ‘central figure’ in the federal sponsorship scandal and was a close associate of ex–prime minister Jean Chrétien. Jacques Corriveau, a longtime federal Liberal organizer, is facing charges of fraud against the government, forgery and laundering proceeds of crime. He is to appear in court on January 10. The charges come after a wide–ranging investigation that was triggered nearly 11 years ago and is still underway. Police say, however, they are finished with the now 80–year–old Corriveau. The Mounties allege that Corriveau set up a kickback system on contracts awarded during the sponsorship program, using his Pluri Design Canada Inc. to defraud the federal government.”
Anonymous, “Charges Laid Against Chrétien–Friend Jacques Corriveau Stemming From Québec Sponsorship Scandal,” National Post, 13 December 2013.
See finally: “The Gomery commission’s report had laid bare the scheming and self–enriching [that] Liberals had engaged in with taxpayer funds.”
Jason Markusoff, “That Time the RCMP Dropped a Mid–Election Bombshell,” Maclean’s, 28 October 2016.
54. See: “For the second year in a row, André [husband of France Chrétien Desmarais, the daughter of Jean Chrétien] and Paul Desmarais Jr. are off the Forbes list of multi–billionaires in the world, because their wealth has been reorganized. This situation is surprising, considering the names of other Canadians on the Forbes list of multi–billionaires. According to Forbes Magazine, the personal fortunes of André and Paul Desmarais Jr. are now less than a $Billion. ‘André and Paul Desmarais Jr. were not on the Forbes list of multi–billionaires last year either. So far as we understand, they share the possession of Power Corporation shares with their entire family — with their mother and two associates (Michel Plessis–Bélair and Guy Fortin). In official documents, their shares of the Power Corporation are thus categorized as a Special Trust in the hands of the Desmarais family,’ according to Crystal Kwok, a porte–parole from Forbes … According to our calculations, the value of their Power shares held in the Special Desmarais Family Trust is actually $3.1–Billions.”
Jean–François Cloutier, “Comment les Desmarais ont évité le classement Forbes,” Journal de Montréal: Argent, 25 mars 2017: “André et Paul Desmarais Jr. évitent pour une deuxième année consécutive de faire partie du classement des gens les plus riches du monde de la revue américaine Forbes en raison de la redistribution de la richesse entre les membres de la famille. Cette situation détonne par rapport aux autres grandes fortunes canadiennes qui apparaissent dans le classement Forbes. Selon les explications du magazine, cela est dû au fait que leur fortune personnelle individuelle se situe actuellement sous la barre du milliard de dollars. ‘André et Paul Desmarais Jr. n’étaient pas sur la liste des milliardaires de Forbes l’an dernier non plus. Tel que nous le comprenons, ils partagent la propriété des actions de Power Corporation avec toute leur famille — leur mère et deux proches (Michel Plessis–Bélair et Guy Fortin). Le propriétaire d’actions de Power est donné comme la Fiducie familiale résiduaire Desmarais dans les documents réglementaires,’ nous a écrit une porte–parole de Forbes, Crystal Kwok … Selon nos calculs, la valeur des actions de Power détenues dans la fiducie est actuellement de 3,1 milliards $.”
55. See: “John Napier Turner served as prime minister of Canada for 2½ months in 1984.”
Christina McCall, “John Napier Turner,” The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 19, Chicago, 1992, 516.
See also: “Becoming PM on June 30, Turner dissolved parliament on July 9.”
Robert Bothwell, “John Napier Turner,” The Canadian Encyclopedia, 1st edition, vol. 3, James Harley Marsh, editor, Edmonton, 1985, 1860.
56. Peter Charles Newman, The Canadian Revolution,1985–1995: From Deference to Defiance, Toronto, 1995, 389.
57. Lawrence Martin, Chrétien: The Will to Win, vol. 1, Toronto, 1995, 326.
58. Ibidem, 323.
59. Ibidem, 332.
60. Ibidem, 369.
61. Jean Chrétien, My Years As Prime Minister, Toronto, 2008, 56. [2007]
See: “[Jean Chrétien] is a genuinely good man.”
Bill Clinton in Jean Chrétien, My Years As Prime Minister, Toronto, 2008, back–cover. [2007]
62. Ibidem.
63. Ibidem, 57.
64. See: “Louis Desmarais has launched a lawsuit against the family of his late brother Paul Desmarais for $75–million. The elderly gentleman is now 92 years old, and he testifies that his late brother Paul Desmarais never returned to him, as he was promised, his 60,000 shares in the Power Corporation. The family of Paul Desmarais refutes this charge, and affirms that Paul Desmarais made no such promise to his brother Louis Desmarais … Louis Desmarais testified in court by video: He affirms that he came into the possession of 60,000 shares of the Power Corporation in 1975, which he gave to his brother Paul in 1979, at the latter’s request. Louis Desmarais testifies that at the time he received a verbal promise from Paul Desmarais, to the effect that one day he would regain his shares, otherwise he would be paid their equivalent market value. Paul Desmarais never kept his word affirms Louis Desmarais, who however has no documentation of the transaction.”
Geneviève Garon et Marc Verreault, “Un procès au civil déchire les Desmarais, de Power Corporation,” Radio Canada Économie, 12 Janvier 2017: “Louis Desmarais poursuit en justice la succession de son frère Paul pour 75 millions de dollars. L’homme de 92 ans allègue que son défunt frère ne lui a jamais rendu, comme promis, 60 000 actions de Power Corporation. Mais la succession de Paul Desmarais affirme que cette promesse n’a jamais été faite … Louis Desmarais a fait une déclaration vidéo enregistrée pour expliquer sa requête. Il affirme être entré en possession de 60 000 titres de Power Corporation en 1975, des actions qu’il aurait remises à son frère Paul en 1979, à la demande ce dernier, dit–il. Louis Desmarais dit avoir alors reçu, de son frère, la promesse verbale qu’il récupérerait un jour ces actions, ou la valeur correspondante. Cette promesse a été rompue, affirme Louis Desmarais, qui ne possède aucun document pour appuyer ses prétentions … l’avocat de la succession de Paul Desmarais, Guy Fortin, affirme que le défunt documentait et archivait la moindre de ses actions. Me Fortin, qui a été l’avocat principal de Paul Desmarais de son vivant, soutient que ce dernier faisait régulièrement de généreux dons aux membres de sa famille. Au fil des ans, Louis Desmarais lui–même a reçu 11 millions de dollars de son frère Paul. Il s’agissait de dons, allègue Me Fortin. C’était plutôt une redevance, affirme pour sa part le nonagénaire.”
65. See: “A huge, high–profile wedding in Montreal today involving the granddaughter of a billionaire and a former prime minister. The granddaughter of Paul Desmarais and Jean Chrétien is marrying a Belgian prince this afternoon. Jacqueline–Ariadne Desmarais is marrying Hadrien de Croÿ–Roeulx … 750 guests are expected, among them former French president Nicolas Sarkozy, described as a close friend of the Desmarais family. Chrétien’s daughter is married [to] a member of the Desmarais family.”
Luciano Pipia, “Huge Montreal Wedding Today,” CJAD 800 News, 7 September 2013.
See also: “This last Saturday at Mary–Queen–of–the–World Cathedral, there was a Royal Wedding, — which is very unusual in Canada. The granddaughter of Jean Chrétien and Paul Desmarais married the Belgian prince Hadrien de Croÿ–Roeulx. Jacqueline–Ariadne Desmarais, 23 years of age, is the daughter of André Desmarais, the president of Power Corporation and president of Power Financial Corporation. The mother of Jacqueline–Ariadne Desmarais is none other than France Chrétien–Desmarais, the daughter of Jean and Aline Chrétien: ‘It was such a beautiful ceremony,’ said Michaëlle Jean [Paul Martin’s Governor General of Canada and erstwhile Québec Separatist], ‘marriage is such a joyful occasion.’”
Annabelle Blais, “Un Faste Royale au Mariage de Jacqueline–Ariadne Desmarais,” La Presse.ca, 7 September 2013: “La cathédrale Marie–Reine–du–Monde a accueilli, samedi, un mariage princier comme on en voit peu au Canada. Devant quelque 750 invités, la petite–fille de l’homme d’affaires Paul Desmarais et de l’ancien premier ministre Jean Chrétien a épousé le prince belge Hadrien de Croÿ–Roeulx. Jacqueline–Ariadne Desmarais, 23 ans, est la fille d’André Desmarais, président et co–chef de direction de Power Corporation (propriétaire de La Presse) et président délégué du conseil de Corporation financière Power. Sa mère, France Chrétien–Desmarais, est la fille de Jean et Aline Chrétien … ‘C’était une belle cérémonie,’ a indiqué Michaëlle Jean, ‘un mariage est un grand moment de joie.’”
66. “Le frère du milliardaire Paul Desmarais Sr est décédé, alors que sa poursuite de 75 millions $ autour d’une prétendue promesse remontant à 1979 n’est toujours pas réglée. Louis R. Desmarais, 94 ans, est décédé à son domicile de Saint–Lambert la semaine passée, indique un avis de décès du Centre funéraire Côte–des–Neiges. Le défunt, qui a notamment été député fédéral, était engagé depuis 2014 dans une bataille judiciaire contre la succession de son frère Paul Desmarais Sr. Dans sa poursuite civile, Louis R. Desmarais Sr allègue avoir vendu 60 000 actions de Power Corporation à son frère, à condition de les récupérer un jour. Or, personne n’a parlé de ce prétendu accord pendant 34 ans. Et Paul Desmarais Sr. est décédé en 2013, avant que quiconque ait pu vérifier la véracité des allégations. Il n’existerait en plus aucune trace de ce contrat verbal … Le procès s’était déroulé en janvier dernier et les parties attendent, depuis, le jugement. Aucune date n’a été annoncée quant à la décision. La magistrature a fait savoir que le dossier était toujours en délibéré, mais la mort de Louis R. Desmarais Sr pourrait changer la donne. ‘Le décès de M. [Louis R.] Desmarais cause la suspension du dossier jusqu’à ce que la succession de celui–ci décide si elle va continuer,’ a fait savoir l’avocat du défunt, Me Karim Renno. Notons que Louis R. Desmarais a laissé dans le deuil ses six enfants et neuf petits–enfants … Au cours du procès, le codirigeant actuel de Power Corporation avait affirmé qu’après des recherches, aucune trace de l’accord allégué n’avait été trouvée. Paul Desmarais Sr avait d’ailleurs ajouté avoir été surpris par la soi–disant existence d’une telle promesse, d’autant plus que son père était un homme très généreux envers ses frères et sœur. Le témoin avait ainsi donné en exemple un dîner où chaque invité a eu la surprise de recevoir un chèque d’un million $, caché sous les assiettes à table. ‘Il était tellement heureux qu’il l’a refait l’année d’après,’ avait dit le fils du défunt au tribunal. Le frère de Paul Desmarais Jr., André, avait pour sa part ajouté que son père avait pris soin de bien organiser sa succession afin d’éviter tout problème et ainsi garder une famille ‘unie, égale et heureuse.’ En plus d’avoir été député au fédéral de 1979 à 1983 et maire adjoint de Sudbury de 1963 à 1965, Louis R. Desmarais a aussi occupé des postes importants au sein de Power Corporation, Canada Steamship Lines et Voyageur Bus Lines.”
Michael Nguyen, “Succession de Paul Desmarais Sr: Louis R. Desmarais est décédé: Il réclamait 75 millions $ à la succession de son frère,” Journal de Montréal: Actualité: Faits Divers, 3 avril 2017.
67. Justice France Charbonneau et Renaud Lachance, “Partie 4 — Chapitre 3: Les conséquences,” Rapport final de la Commission d’enquête sur l’octroi et la gestion des contrats publics dans l’industrie de la construction: Stratagèmes, causes, conséquences et recommandations, vol. 3, Québec, 2015, 74: “Les stratagèmes de collusion et de corruption ainsi que les activités d’infiltration du crime organisé que la Commission a mis au jour ne sont pas sans conséquence. Le détournement des processus de passation des marchés publics dans l’industrie de la construction et des règles de financement des partis politiques, et l’infiltration du crime organisé dans cette industrie, ont non seulement engendré des coûts économiques pour l’ensemble de la société québécoise, mais ils ont aussi miné ses fondements démocratiques, porté atteinte au principe de la primauté du droit et ébranlé la confiance des citoyens dans les institutions publiques.”
68. Linda Gyulai, “Rizzuto’s Construction Links Traced to ’60s Montréal,” The Montreal Gazette, 30 January 2014.
See also: “Elio Pagliarulo, an old friend and close associate of businessman Paolo Catania, of Frank Catania and Partners, affirmed this Monday before the Charbonneau Commission that the Rizzuto crime family controlled the construction contracts in Montreal. Paolo Catania, according to Monsieur Pagliarulo, told him that the mafia pocketed 5 per cent of the value of the corrupt contracts in Montreal. The contracts were organized by Rocco Sollecito, through the mediation of Nicolo Milioto. The Catania people belong to the organized crime family controlled by the so–called Godfather Vito Rizzuto, according to Elio Pagliarulo.”
Anonyme, “Commission Charbonneau: Elio Pagliarulo, un ancien partenaire d’affaires de Paolo Catania à la barre,” Le Huffington Post Québec, 29 octobre 2012: “Un ex–ami et confident de l’homme d’affaires Paolo Catania de Frank Catania et associés, Elio Pagliarulo, a affirmé lundi à la commission Charbonneau que le clan mafieux Rizzuto organisait des contrats de construction à Montréal. Il soutient que Paolo Catania lui a déjà dit que la mafia empochait 5% de la valeur des contrats truqués à Montréal. Les contrats étaient organisés par Rocco Sollecito, avec l’aide d’un intermédiaire, Nicolo Milioto. Les Catania appartenaient au clan du présumé parrain de la mafia Vito Rizzuto, affirme M. Pagliarulo.”
69. Brooke Jeffrey, Divided Loyalties: The Liberal Party of Canada, 1984–2008, Toronto, 2010, 8–195.
70. André Cédilot and André Noel, Mafia Inc: The Long, Bloody Reign of Canada’s Sicilian Clan, Michael Gilson, translator, Toronto, 2012, 53.
See also: “Mélina Rizzuto is the president of Rizzuto Investments, a family owned company. She has signed legal documents for the company. Ms. Rizzuto is the daughter of the late Pietro Rizzuto, a senior official in the Liberal Party of Canada who was a longtime senator in Ottawa. Giuseppe Zambito, the father of Lino Zambito, is one of the members of the board of Rizzuto Investments: The latter affirms that Gilles Vaillancourt the mayor of Laval received 2.5 per cent of the value of every contract awarded by the City of Laval in a kickback scheme.”
Andrew McIntosh, “Une revente très profitable pour les Rizzuto,” TVA Nouvelles, 22 octobre 2012: “Mélina Rizzuto est présidente des Placements Rizzuto, une société de portefeuille familiale. Elle a signé les actes notariés pour la société. Mme Rizzuto est la fille de Pietro Rizzuto, un organisateur du Parti libéral qui est décédé en 1997 et qui avait longtemps occupé un siège de sénateur. Parmi les membres du conseil d’administration de Placements Rizzuto, on retrouve Giuseppe Zambito, le père et associé en affaires de Lino Zambito (son fils), celui–là même qui a avancé que le maire de Laval, Gilles Vaillancourt, percevrait 2,5% en pots–de–vin sur chacun des contrats qu’accorde la Ville de Laval.”
71. Claire Hoy, Friends in High Places: Politics and Patronage in the Mulroney Government, Toronto, 1988, 279.
72. See: “Admirers of Hegel are accustomed to refer to the first edition [Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences in Outline], as having most of the author’s freshness and power … in America, no one can look back a few years, without observing that the whole tone of our public men has changed, and that the phrases, ‘progress,’ ‘necessary development,’ and ‘God in history,’ occur with marked frequency.”
Anonymous, “Karl Rosenkranz: The Life of Hegel,” The Biblical Repertory and Princeton Review, 20.4(October, 1848): 575–586. [Italics added]
See also: “[Hegel’s] legacy was quickly dispersed into … the service of orthodox Protestant theology.”
George Di Giovanni, “The New Spinozism,” The Edinburgh Critical History of Nineteenth–Century Philosophy, Alison Stone, editor and Howard Caygill and David Webb, general editors, Edinburgh, 2011, 27.
See finally: “[29] No writer has carried personification of the faculties to a greater length than has Kant. ‘Pure reason,’ he says, ‘leaves every thing to the understanding which refers immediately to the objects of the intuition, or rather to their synthesis in the imagination.’ Here the mind disappears altogether, and certain imaginary entities take its place … [102] Consciousness does not affirm that the mind creates space: It affirms that the mind cognizes it. It is not, then, a creation of the mind, a subjective state, as is held by Kant … [107] we know that duration is. Like space, it is neither a material nor a spiritual existence. It is not a creation of the mind or form of our cognitions, as is asserted by Kant and others―whatever that phrase may mean … [219] The absolute perfection of God is revealed to us.”
Joseph Alden, Elements of Intellectual Philosophy, New York, 1866, 29–102–107–219.
73. Charles Margrave Taylor, “La révolution futile ou les avatars de la pensée globale,” Cité Libre: Nouvelle série, 16.69(août–septembre, 1964): 10: “Ce que j’appelle une pensée globaliste, c’est une pensée qui définit la réalité par rapport à un seul facteur, qui groupe non seulement l’ensemble mais une totalité de problèmes, tous les maux dont souffre un peuple, pour y trouver une seule et unique solution.” [Italics added]
74. Henry Silton Harris, “The Hegel Renaissance in the Anglo–Saxon World Since 1945,” The Owl of Minerva, 15.1(Fall, 1983): 78–84.
75. See: “The problem as to whether or not and to what extent Hegel succeeded in overcoming Kant’s ‘thing–in–itself’ is a separate question. At any rate, this was his aim. In a metaphysics of the Absolute Spirit, realities beyond the realm of knowledge, in so far as the ‘thing–in–itself’ represents such realities, cannot exist.”
Richard Hoenigswald, “Philosophy of Hegelianism,” Twentieth Century Philosophy: Living Schools of Thought, Dagobert David Runes, editor, New York, 1947, 270.
See finally: “Hegel’s presence in twentieth–century philosophy is overwhelming … Was Hegel too complicated, or too much of a Janus, to be understood in a non–unilateral, dialectical, rational way?”
Adriaan Theodoor Basilius Peperzak, “Introduction,” Modern Freedom: Hegel’s Legal, Moral, and Political Philosophy (Studies in German Idealism), Reinier Munk, series editor, Dordrecht, 2001, 1–49.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CITED
Joseph Alden, Elements of Intellectual Philosophy, (New York: D. Appleton & Company, 1866).
Charles Philippe Théodore Andler (1866–1933), “Préface: Hegel,” Le pangermanisme philosophique: 1800 à 1914, textes traduits de l’Allemand par M. Aboucaya [Claude Aboucaya], G. Bianquis [Geneviève Bianquis, 1886–1972], M. Bloch [Gustave Bloch, 1848–1923], L. Brevet, J. Dessert, M. Dresch [Joseph Dresch, 1871–1958], A. Fabri, A. Giacomelli, B. Lehoc, G. Lenoir, L. Marchand [Louis Marchand, 1875–1948], R. Serreau [René Serreau], A. Thomas [Albert Thomas, 1878–1932], J. Wehrlin, (Paris: Louis Conard, Librairie–Éditeur, 1917), xxix–xlv.
Anonyme, “Commission Charbonneau: Elio Pagliarulo, un ancien partenaire d’affaires de Paolo Catania à la barre,” Le Huffington Post Québec, 29 octobre 2012.
Anonymous, “Charges Laid Against Chrétien–Friend Jacques Corriveau Stemming From Québec Sponsorship Scandal,” National Post, 13 December 2013.
Anonymous, “New Book Traces Trudeau’s Separatist to Nationalist Shift,” CTV News, 13 November 2011.
Pierre Arbour, Québec Inc et la tentation du dirigisme: La Caisse de dépôt et les sociétés d’État: Héritage d’une génération? (Montréal: L’Étincelle, 1993).
Sheila McLeod Arnopoulos, Voices from French Ontario, (Kingston/Montreal: McGill–Queen’s University Press, 1982).
Jules Bélanger, Jean–Louis Lévesque: La montée d’un Gaspésien aux sommets des affaires, (Saint–Laurent: Fides, 1996).
Annabelle Blais, “Un Faste Royale au Mariage de Jacqueline–Ariadne Desmarais,” La Presse.ca, 7 September 2013.
Martin Blais, Philosophie du Pouvoir (Cahiers de Cité Libre), vol. 20.1, (Ottawa/Montréal: Éditions du Jour, 1970).
John Francis Bosher, The Gaullist Attack on Canada: 1967–1997, (Montréal/Kingston: McGill–Queen’s University Press, 1999).
Robert Bothwell, “Lester Bowles Pearson,” The Canadian Encyclopedia, 1st edition, vol. 3, James Harley Marsh, editor, (Edmonton: Hurtig Publishers, 1985),1378–1379.
Robert Bothwell, “John Napier Turner,” The Canadian Encyclopedia, 1st edition, vol. 3, James Harley Marsh, editor, (Edmonton: Hurtig Publishers, 1985), 1860.
Robert Bourassa, “Épilogue: Aspects économiques d’un Québec indépendant,” Réflexions d’un Citoyen (Cahiers de Cité Libre), Jean–Paul Lefebvre, (Ottawa/Montréal: Éditions du Jour Inc., 1968), 99–113.
Hélène Buzzetti, “Ce Liberal fondateur du Bloc Québecois,” Le Devoir, 30 mars 2016.
Giosuè Carducci (1835–1907), “On the Death of Eugène Napoléon,” A Selection From the Poems of Giosuè Carducci: Translated and Annotated With a Biographical Introduction, Emily A. Tribe, editor and translator, (London: Longmans, Green and Company, 1921), 91–93.
André Cédilot and André Noel, Mafia Inc: The Long, Bloody Reign of Canada’s Sicilian Clan, Michael Gilson, translator, (Toronto: Vintage Canada, 2012).
France Charbonneau et Renaud Lachance, “Partie 4 — Chapitre 3: Les conséquences,” Rapport final de la Commission d’enquête sur l’octroi et la gestion des contrats publics dans l’industrie de la construction: Stratagèmes, causes, conséquences et recommandations, vol. 3, (Québec: Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, 2015), 73–80.
Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien, Straight from the Heart, 1st edition, (Toronto: Key Porter Books Limited, 1985).
Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien, Straight from the Heart, 1st edition, (Toronto: Seal Books, 1986). [1985]
Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien, My Years As Prime Minister, (Toronto: Vintage Canada, 2008).
William E. Conklin, Hegel’s Laws, (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2008).
George Di Giovanni, “The New Spinozism,” The Edinburgh Critical History of Nineteenth–Century Philosophy, Alison Stone, editor and Howard Caygill and David Webb, general editors, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011), 13–28.
Murray Dobbin, Paul Martin: CEO for Canada? (Toronto: James Lorimer & Company Limited, 2003).
Wilfrid Eggleston, “Louis Stephen St. Laurent: Prime Minister of Canada 1948–1957,” The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 17, (Chicago: Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, 1971), 36a–36b.
Herbert Albert Laurens Fisher, Bonapartism: Six Lectures Delivered in the University of London, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1908).
Karl Froschauer, White Gold: Hydroelectric Power in Canada, (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2011).
Geneviève Garon et Marc Verreault, “Un procès au civil déchire les Desmarais, de Power Corporation,” Radio Canada Économie, 12 Janvier 2017.
Aimé Guillon de Montléon, Machiavel commenté par Napoléon Bonaparte, manuscrit trouvé dans la carrosse de Bonaparte, après la bataille de Mont–Saint–Jean, le 15 février 1815, (Paris: Nicolle, 1816).
Richard Gwyn and Sandra Gwyn (editor), The Northern Magus: Pierre Trudeau and Canadians, (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1980).
Linda Gyulai, “Rizzuto’s Construction Links Traced to ’60s Montréal,” The Montreal Gazette, 30 January 2014.
Robert A. Hackett, Richard S. Gruneau, Donald Gutstein and Timothy A. Gibson, The Missing News: Filters and Blind Spots in Canada’s Press, (Aurora, Ontario: Garamond Press, 2000).
Henry Silton Harris (1926–2007), “The Hegel Renaissance in the Anglo–Saxon World Since 1945,” The Owl of Minerva, 15.1(Fall, 1983): 77–106.
Richard Hoenigswald, “Philosophy of Hegelianism,” Twentieth Century Philosophy: Living Schools of Thought, Dagobert David Runes, editor, (New York: Philosophical Library, 1947), 267–291.
Claire Hoy, Friends in High Places: Politics and Patronage in the Mulroney Government, (Toronto: Seal Books, 1988).
Brooke Jeffrey, Divided Loyalties: The Liberal Party of Canada, 1984–2008, (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010).
Immanuel Kant, Kant’s Principles of Politics Including His Essay on Perpetual Peace: A Contribution to Political Science, William Hastie, translator & editor, (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1891).
Immanuel Kant, Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Commemoration of the Centenary of Its First Publication, 2 vols., Friedrich Maximilian Müller, translator, (London: Macmillan, 1881).
Henri de Kerillis, I Accuse de Gaulle, (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company, 1946).
Henry Kissinger, Diplomacy, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994).
Wilfrid Laurier, Lecture on Political Liberalism: Delivered By Wilfrid Laurier, Esq., M.P., on the 26th June, 1877, in the Music Hall, Québec, Under the Auspices of “Le Club Canadien,” (Québec: The Morning Chronicle, 1877).
Richard Le Hir, Desmarais: La Dépossession Tranquille, (Montréal: Les Éditions Michel Brûlé, 2012).
Jean–Francois Lisée, Le Petit Tricheur: Robert Bourassa derrière le masque, (Montréal: Les Éditions Québec/Amérique, 2012).
Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469–1527), The Prince, Luigi Ricci, translator, (Oxford: Humphrey Milford, 1921).
Michael J. Mahony, History of Modern Thought, (New York: Fordham University Press, 1933).
Jason Markusoff, “That Time the RCMP Dropped a Mid–Election Bombshell,” Maclean’s, 28 October 2016.
Ross Marowits, “Canadian Business Giant Desmarais Dead at 86,” Global News, 9 October 2013.
Lawrence Martin, Chrétien: The Will to Win, vol. 1, (Toronto: Lester Publishing, 1995).
Paul Martin, Hell or High Water: My Life In and Out of Politics, (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 2008).
Christina McCall, “John Napier Turner,” The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 19, (Chicago: World Book Inc., 1992), 516–518.
Andrew McIntosh, “Une revente très profitable pour les Rizzuto,” TVA Nouvelles, 22 octobre 2012.
Friedrich Meinecke (1862–1954), “Hegel: Machiavellism, Idealism and Historicism in Recent German History,” Machiavellism: The Doctrine of Raison d’État and Its Place in Modern History, Douglas Scott, translator, Werner Stark (1909–1985), introduction, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1962), 343–369. [1957]
Pierre–Basile Mignault, “Préface,” Le Droit civil canadien basé sur les “Répétitions écrites sur le code civil” de Frédéric Mourlon avec revue de la jurisprudence de nos tribunaux: Contenant une introduction doctrinale et historique, le titre préliminaire du code civil et les titres de la jouissance et de la privation des droits civils, des actes de l’état civil, du domicile, des absents et du mariage, Tome 1, (Montréal: Whiteford & Théoret, Éditeurs Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence, 1895), v–xii.
Pierre–Basile Mignault, “Introduction doctrinale et historique,” Le Droit civil canadien basé sur les “Répétitions écrites sur le code civil” de Frédéric Mourlon avec revue de la jurisprudence de nos tribunaux: Contenant une introduction doctrinale et historique, le titre préliminaire du code civil et les titres de la jouissance et de la privation des droits civils, des actes de l’état civil, du domicile, des absents et du mariage, Tome 1, (Montréal: Whiteford & Théoret, Éditeurs Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence, 1895), 1–57.
Pierre–Basile Mignault, L’Administration de la justice sous la domination française: Conférence faite devant l’Union Catholique, le 9 février 1879, Montréal, 1879.
Jonathan Montpetit, “Jean Lapierre, Québec Political Commentator, Dead at 59: Lapierre’s Opinion on Québec Politics Heard Daily by Thousands,” CBC News, 29 March 2016.
Frank Morgan and Henry William Carless Davis, French Policy Since 1871, (London: Oxford University Press, 1914).
Emmanuel Mounier, Existentialist Philosophies: An Introduction, Eric Blow, translator, (London: Rockliff, 1948). [1947]
Emmanuel Mounier, Personalism, Philip Mairet, translator, (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1952). [1950]
Friedrich Maximilian Müller, translator, “Translator’s Preface,” Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason: A Commemoration of the Centenary of Its First Publication, Immanuel Kant, vol. 1, (London: Macmillan, 1881), v–lxii.
Rae Murphy, Robert Chodos and Nick Auf der Maur, Brian Mulroney: The Boy from Baie Comeau, (Toronto: James Lorimer & Company, 1985).
Peter Charles Newman, “Appendix 9,” The Canadian Revolution 1985–1995: From Deference to Defiance, (Toronto: Viking, 1995), 448–457.
Peter Charles Newman, The Titans: How the New Canadian Establishment Seized Power, vol. 3, (Toronto: Vintage Canada, 1998).
Peter Charles Newman, “King Paul,” The Canadian Establishment: The Titans, How the New Canadian Establishment Seized Power, vol. 3, (Toronto: Viking Canada, 1998), 164–189.
Michael Nguyen, “Succession de Paul Desmarais Sr: Louis R. Desmarais est décédé: Il réclamait 75 millions $ à la succession de son frère,” Journal de Montréal: Actualité: Faits Divers, 3 avril 2017.
William L. Patch, Jr., Heinrich Brüning and the Dissolution of the Weimar Republic, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998).
Mario Pelletier, La machine à milliards: L’Histoire de la Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, (Montréal: Les Éditions Québec/Amérique, 1989).
Adriaan Theodoor Basilius Peperzak, “Introduction,” Modern Freedom: Hegel’s Legal, Moral, and Political Philosophy (Studies in German Idealism), Reinier Munk, series editor, (Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media, B.V., 2001), 1–52.
Les Perreaux, Tu Thanh Ha and Daniel Leblanc, “Obituary: Jean Lapierre Made Friends Across Broad Ideological Spectrum,” The Globe and Mail, 29 March 2016.
Robin Philpot, Derrière L’État Desmarais: Power, 2e édition, (Montréal: Livres Baraka Inc., 2014).
Raoul Roy, René Lévesque: Était–il un imposteur? (Montréal: Les Éditions du Franc–Canada, 1985).
Paul Douglas Stevens, “Pierre E. Trudeau: Prime Minister of Canada, 1968,” The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 18, (Chicago: Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, 1971), 380a–381.
Alison Stone, editor, “Introduction: Philosophy in the Nineteenth–Century,” The Edinburgh Critical History of Nineteenth–Century Philosophy, Howard Caygill & David Webb, general editors, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011), 1–12.
Patrick Straram, “Les français parlent aux français ou pourquoi Duplessis a raison,” Cité Libre, 22(octobre, 1958): 45–48.
Charles Margrave Taylor, “La révolution futile ou les avatars de la pensée globale,” Cité Libre: Nouvelle série, 16.69(août–septembre, 1964): 10–22.
Joseph Philippe Pierre Yves Elliott Trudeau, “Politique fonctionelle,” Cité Libre, 1.1(juin, 1950): 20–24.
Joseph Philippe Pierre Yves Elliott Trudeau, “Politique fonctionelle II,” Cité Libre, 1.2(février, 1951): 24–29.
HEGEL BIBLIOGRAPHY: VORLESUNGEN AUSGEWÄHLTE NACHSCHRIFTEN UND MANUSKRIPTE (1983–2007) 17 VOLS
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (1): Vorlesungen über Naturrecht und Staatswissenschaft Heidelberg 1817–1818, Mit Nachträgen aus der Vorlesung 1818–1819, ―Nachgeschrieben von Peter Wannenmann, Claudia Becker, Wolfgang Bonsiepen, Annemarie Gethmann–Siefert, Kurt Rainer Meist, Friedrich Hogemann, Hans Josef Schneider, Walter Jaeschke, Christoph Jamme & Hans Christian Lucas, Herausgegeben, Mit einer Einleitung von Otto Pöggeler, Band 1, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1983).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (2): Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Kunst, Berlin 1823,―Nachgeschrieben von Heinrich Gustav Hotho, Annemarie Gethmann–Siefert, Hrsg., Band 2, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1998).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (3): Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, Teil 1, Einleitung, Der Begriff der Religion, Walter Jaeschke, Hrsg., Band 3, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1983).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (4): Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, Teil 2, Die bestimmte Religion, in zwei Bänden: Textband (a), Anhang (b), Mit einem Begriffs– Realien– und Personenverzeichnis zum Gesamtwerk, Walter Jaeschke, Hrsg., Band 4, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1985).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (5): Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Religion, Teil 3, Die vollendete Religion, Walter Jaeschke, Hrsg., Band 5, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1984).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (6): Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie, Teil 1, Einleitung in die Geschichte der Philosophie, Orientalische Philosophie, Pierre Garniron & Walter Jaeschke, Herausgegeben, Band 6, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1994).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (7): Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie, Teil 2, Griechische Philosophie, I, Thales bis Kyniker, Pierre Garniron & Walter Jaeschke, Herausgegeben, Band 7, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1989).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (8): Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie, Teil 3, Griechische Philosophie, II, Plato bis Proklos, Pierre Garniron & Walter Jaeschke, Herausgegeben, Band 8, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1996).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (9): Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie, Teil 4, Philosophie des Mittelalters und der neueren Zeit, Pierre Garniron & Walter Jaeschke, Herausgegeben, Band 9, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1986).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (10): Vorlesungen über die Logik, Berlin 1831,―Nachgeschrieben von Karl Hegel, Udo Rameil, Hrsg., Herausgegeben unter Mitarbeit von Hans–Christian Lucas, Band 10, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2001).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (11): Vorlesungen über Logik und Metaphysik, Heidelberg 1817,―Mitgeschrieben von Franz Anton Good, Karen Gloy, Hrsg., Band 11, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1992).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (12): Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Weltgeschichte, Berlin 1822–1823,―Nachschriften von Karl Gustav Julius von Griesheim, Heinrich Gustav Hotho & Friedrich Carl Hermann Victor von Kehler, Karl Brehmer, Karl–Heinz Ilting & Hoo Nam Seelmann, Herausgegeben, Band 12, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1996).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (13): Vorlesung über die Philosophie des Geistes, Berlin 1827–1828,―Nachgeschrieben von Johann Eduard Erdmann & Ferdinand Walter, Franz Hespe & Burkhard Tuschling, Herausgegeben, Band 13, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1994).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (14): Vorlesungen über die Philosophie des Rechts, Berlin 1819–1820,―Nachgeschrieben von Johann Rudolf Ringier, Emil Angehrn, Martin Bondeli & Hoo Nam Seelmann, Herausgegeben, Band 14, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2000).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (15): Vorlesungen über philosophische Enzyklopädie, Nürnberg 1812–1813,―Nachschriften von Christian Samuel Meinel & Julius Friedrich Heinrich Abegg, Udo Rameil, Hrsg., Band 15, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2002).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (16): Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Natur, Berlin 1819–1820,―Nachgeschrieben von Johann Rudolf Ringier, Martin Bondeli & Hoo Nam Seelmann, Herausgegeben, Band 16, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2002).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, Vorlesungen, Ausgewählte Nachschriften und Manuskripte (17): Vorlesungen über die Philosophie der Natur, Berlin 1825–1826,―Nachgeschrieben von Heinrich Wilhelm Dove, Karol Bal, Gilles Marmasse, Thomas Posch & Klaus Vieweg, Herausgegeben, Band 17, (Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2007).
©2017 Christopher Richard Wade Dettling, Jean Chrétien and French Chauvinism (Special Edition), 2nd edition. All rights reserved. This work is only for MEDIUM and its users: Users are not permitted to mount this writing on any network servers. No part of this writing may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the author, except for reading and browsing via the World Wide Web.
We wish to thank our benefactors over the years for their goodwill: Humanity benefits greatly from the rise of Americanism in the world.
