Nov 6, 2022·edited Nov 8, 2022Liked by Brad Salzberg
Given the Quebec culture of Anglo hatred taught by the corrupt Catholic church from 1759 on, the answer to the question " Is Turd continuing to fight the Battle of the Plains of Abraham" is an emphatic YES. A bloodless genocide through mass immigration is part of the pogrom (not a typo). This means that this family and its associated cabal are de facto war criminals deserving of execution.
Two people that I knew several decades ago (one of these being J V Andrew , author of "Bilingual Today, French Tomorrow," "Backdoor Bilingualism," and "Enough!") were told by French Canadians; i. e., "frogs" that the British made two mistakes after the Conquest; viz., letting the frogs keep their language & religion and they wouldn't make that mistake when they took power.
All of this must get to Trump supporting Republicans and to Trump himself ASAP so he can make plans to liberate Canada and straighten out our Constitution shortly after returning to the White House. I firmly believe we need help from the USA to remove the frog yoke.
In Quebec, prior to the Social Revolution in 1961, French people in Quebec had a harder time getting jobs and when they did, they were paid less than their English counterparts.
Today, they are defending their language and culture. Should the English not be doing the same?
Also, to my knowledge, France is part of Europe.
If this site's aim is to defend the rights of European Canadians, you need all the help you can get. Maybe it's time the English & the French put aside past conflicts & resentment and unite to defend European Culture in Canada.
Forced diversity lowering quality of life by increase in crime and gun violence. Canadian cities have evolved into higher crime areas due to mass immigration. The elites don't and won't risk their lives by living in these areas but expect average Canadians to do so with a smile on their faces.
You have it wrong when you blame Quebec for the Trudeaus ; they both despise French-Canadians and are largely seen as traitors by nationalist Quebec French-Canadians. By the way, P.E.T.'s mother was Montreal Scottish, and you know Justin's mother is that crazy St-Clair woman from BC. Not much to do with Quebec ; accordingly, Justin's more English than French, which is obvious to a french ear when he ventures to speak the language. You just happen to have finally realized that you are also their victim. French power in Ottawa has all to do with demographics and elections and, accordingly, is dwindling. Third world immigration is used the same way in Quebec as in the rest of Canada, the only difference is more points for knowledge of french in a point system. Britain/the Empire has always used immigration against the French-Canadians. Our big sin as a people seems to have been wanting to survive. The confederation was a pact between equals only in words ; it was sold to French-Canadians as such and their political leaders at the time believed they could gain a measure of autonomy. In that regard the federal Liberals where always the centralizing force in Canada, displeasing all provinces but Ontario and the Maritimes. As well, if the 1982 constitution was favouring Quebec so much, how come no Quebec government, not even liberal, since has signed it? P.E.T. and his son are enforcing the "post-national" plan of their imperial sponsors, whose current storefront is the World Economic Forum. In P.E.T.'s time it was the British Fabian Society liberals. Your blind Quebec bashing is only serving the divide to reign imperial agenda. Canadian Conservatives have always favoured, and still would, a looser federal union, a confederation, which would have satisfied Quebec nationalists, be it Daniel Johnson (Égalité ou indépendance), René Lévesque (Souveraineté-association) or Jacques Parizeau.
Where does the Empire sit in Canada? It can be historically identified as "The Laurentians", the Quebec (once the capital of British Canada) - Montreal (The Golden Square mile of railroad tycoons and English/Scottish colonial merchants) - Toronto axis: anglos all, with their tag along sold out bourgeois indigenous pawns, along with their loyalist base in the Maritimes, Quebec Eastern Township and Eastern Ontario anglo Orangists.
French-Canadians have every reason to hate the Empire ; New France lost 20% of its population in the last phase of the Seven Years war, not only in the months-long bombardment of Quebec, but mainly due to the scorched earth tactic of general Wolfe downstream of Quebec. That's a larger percentage than the Russians lost in WWII... That's something we have in common with the Irish. And Daniel Johnson, the conservative Quebec PM who was shooting for a square deal with Ottawa, was, as his name shows, of Irish lineage. Finally, speaking of "Old Stock" Canadians, Mr. Salzberg (not an English name, that), no one is of older stock in Canada than the French-Canadians, the first Canadians.
Knowledgeable people are frequently right in the details. Though one has to be carful of mistaking the forest for the trees. The Seven Years War as it manifested in Lower Canada was not an invasion. It was an adjunct to a much bigger conflict. France bargained away New France and chose to retain the “sugar islands” at the Treaty of Paris.
England did not want France’s North American colony. The English had enough trouble in their American Colonies.
War has never been a pretty thing. Generals are hired to win wars not decide whether or not they ought to be fought. Generals use every means at their disposal to win wars. Much of history is a bi-product of intentional actions; in fact seldom are the objectives the obvious. Even then, outcomes are seen in retrospect by the winners as intentional. New France was a manifestation of Champlain’s incredible persistence and notably force of will. For more: I’d suggest reading Champlain’s Dream by David Hackett Fisher. New France was the most successful of the European settlements in North America. Certainly history intruded; people though are often better to have let sleeping dogs lie. When the policies of an entire country are subordinated to re-establish ancient prerogatives this reactionary behaviour as a rule is a tangle of hidden consequences.
Canada’s internal policies as promulgated by the urge to remedy and restore ancient prerogatives has been a disaster in so far as Canadian unity is concerned. Behind the scenes wrangling within the Federal jurisdictions to transfer federal powers to Quebec is stupid. Do Quebecers really want to restore the Ancien Régime? Seigniorial society was not so pretty as imagined. The average person in New France was a serf — a tenant living on Seigniorial grants — the size of which is instructive. Hundreds of thousands of acres were granted by Louis XIV to a few politically connected individuals.
The inheritors of the original Régime were the people who wanted, indeed needed a railroad, and needed, but did not desire a commingling of their people, or the loss of power a union of some kind would ensure. But they expected the railroad was inevitable in addition to which the saw it as a means of restoring trade.
It was not the English that had the know how to build the railroad — the “English” lent the money. But without the knowledge the Scots had as a result of the Scottish Enlightenment the railroad would not; could not have been built. The French were even in the 1860s uneducated in the knowledges the Scots had acquired in the previous 125 years or so.
The politics of reaction still prevail in Quebec. Bilingualism in much of Quebec is non existent. These people are becoming an isolated island in an ocean of English speakers. Is that a good thing? The elites in Quebec and their handmaidens like Justin Trudeau are painting their province into a corner.
Demography is the enemy! Societies with their feet on two horses are divided at the root.
The Seven Year war was really the first world war between empires ; also traded in Paris in 1763 were French trading posts in India. In Europe, France tried to invade a German duchy but failed. In the imperial chess game of the time, it would have been an exchangeable token and France wouldn't have had to choose between its New World colonies. But it failed and kept the lucrative sugar island. France did try hard to keep New France, multiplying by five its military expenses in Canada in the 1755-1760 period. Alas, most of these funds and supplies did not find their way to the St-Lawrence valley. Administrator Bigot, a corrupt, protected aristocrat, and his accomplice, Bordeaux-based merchant Gradiz (or was it the other way around, this Jewish slave trader consorting with the British...) made sure most of these assets were "lost at sea". But as far as the Canadiens (New France born settlers) were concerned, Wolfe's force was an invading army, the culmination of the French-Indian wars, as the American say. British Prime minister William Pitt sent the largest force ever assembled by England at that time to finally boot France out of North America. England for a while prior did bid its time, seeing as its unruly eastern seaboard colonies were contained by French-allied tribes across the Blue Mountains, but it was only to be able to build its forces and prepare for the coming war. Getting a German king probably wasted a few years, too. Hackett Fisher - I read his book years ago - is indeed enlightening, at least for the English world - about Champlain, the founding father of Canada. The other founding figure is Marie Guyard (Marie de l'Incarnation), founder of the Ursulines convent in Quebec City. Both exceptional leaders and strong figures to emulate. In the 30 odd years of their combined action, the colony made roots. A nation was born that would flourish for a hundred years under the impetus given by French minister Colbert under Louis XIV, becoming literally a new France.Its conflicts with the New England colonies were fuelled by the furs trade, spiked by religious animosity between protestants and "papists". When the British merchants took over from the Dutch in New Amsterdam they exploited tribal conflicts and sent the Mohawks close to Lake Champlain, the route to the St-Lawrence valley, to harass the French settlers. The furs routes were always the prize. Champlain had made alliances with their enemies, and so it went.The Voyageurs penetrated the continent, making alliances with tribe after tribe. That is easily seen on a map of the continent with French name places. In 1701, Indian chiefs came from great distances, travelling for two months to sign a peace treaty in Montreal. Indians delegations from everywhere numbered around 2000, more than the population of the city at the time. The alliance became so strong that after 1763 Midwest chief Pontiac continued fighting the British for several years.Compared to this, English Canada relinquished the Union Jack in 1963 and accepted a modified translation of the French Canadian national hymn Ô Canada to replace the God Save the Queen (now King, I guess). Its first uneasy step away from British colonial rule had been the treaty of Westminster, making it a "Dominion" in the British Commonwealth. Mere rebranding if you ask me. Colonial bureaucrats were replaced by the oversight of shadowy Crown Agents steering the dominions in the Empire's interests. It took 30 more years for the ROC to actually believe it was its own country, somewhat. Keep in mind, Newfoundland joined Canada in 1949, and only through Smallwood's shenanigans. And Newfoundland sunk the Mulroney Conservatives Meech Lake Accord some 40 years latter...Lower (Quebec) and Upper(Ontario) Canada were united after the Patriots' republican revolt of 1837-8 for representation (No taxation without representation), giving West Canada (Ontario) dwellers much more weight in the united parliament and a larger taxation base to finance its canals, namely the Rideau Canal. The BNAA was essentially the same type of maneuver to finance the transcontinental railroad, a much needed strategic infrastructure to move troops along the new transcontinental border and keep American views in check after 1812. Victoria bridge in Montreal was built to move Loyalists west to populate the Niagara peninsula and further west, lest French-Canadians move that way to populate their already existing settlements in the region. And so it was also for the Prairies (damn, another French word!). The Metis were encircled and contained and Montreal educated Louis Riel hung high by Orangists.Canadian federal liberal policy has been a long game to woo French-Canadians into docility while using immigration to reduce their political leverage. No one in Quebec really cares about bilingualism in the rest of Canada and only the Liberal elite has wanted it. Bilingualism in the ROC is both an irritant and a litmus test. Those who've accepted it wanted to propel their children into the federal bureaucracy's cushy jobs, gaining the liberals a number of electoral circumscriptions in the Ottawa River area, and eastern Ontario, having them believe that a centralized Canada was good for French-Canadians. An illusion, a long game.Liberal ideology gained traction in Quebec as a result of Fabian Society wannabe P.E.T's circles before he even considered federal politics. These liberal-leftists circles created the myth of a backward past and shifted the political outlook to a liberal-propelled "Revolution tranquille" that had been started by the Duplessis conservatives and would have happened anyway because of the postwar baby boom and general prosperity. And then the stupid Parti Québécois accepted the federal-inspired referendum strategy brought in by RCMP agent Claude Morin, giving a say to Anglos and immigrants about the French-Canadian nation's future. Thus Britain ruled sub-continents. Thus goes the Empire always.But this is not over. It's just currently taking a new form as world geopolitics evolves.It has more to do with than mere language. 33 millions North-Americans claim their roots in New France.Canadian politic is basically Conservative regionalization, which suits Quebec fine, vs Liberal centralization.You saying "The elites in Quebec and their handmaidens like Justin Trudeau" shows you need more time to grasp the "Laurentians" concept. Think Colonial Canada. If I say "Bay Street" and "Family Compact" maybe you'll understand? Or maybe, more simply, you haven't realized you're part of it because you were born in it?
Well, much of what you wrote are facts, some of what you wrote, is interpretation. But rather than contest or agree or disagree may I refer you to a book few people in Canada have read: The Constitution of Canada by WPM Kennedy and I suggest the edition with an introduction by Martin Friedland.
I also recommend: A History of Canadian Wealth by Gustavus Myers, the edition with an Introduction by Stanley Ryerson.
And: The Fur Trade in Canada by Harold A. Innes the edition with a Foreword by Robin W. Weeks.
By the way I appreciate the considerable work you put into your response. Thank You.
Few Canadians truly understand Canada’s history. It seems as though this is an intentional oversight rather than ignorance.
Most of the country’s leaders seem equally ignorant of Canada’s constitution. The premiers should have understood the threat the Charter of Rights and Freedoms would be to the freedoms of Canadians. Why? Because the Charter subverts parliament.
The Constitution intended laws to be made in the House of Commons not in the Supreme Court. The Charter is de facto a constitutional amendment. The premiers have more power in Canada to countervail the Federal Government, because Canada is a federation not a confederation. Natural resources are a provincial prerogative. The Federal Government has no business preventing a provinces natural resources from being developed or transported to market. A federated state is one where every jurisdiction has certain rights which every other jurisdiction should/must abide by. By what right does Quebec have blocking a pipeline to a deep water port in a maritime province?
No matter the past grievances Quebecers should/must be made to abide by the principle or reciprocity. Quebec is not a nation. The premiers in the other provinces need to grow a spine.
i have told you from the beginning brad, quebec has never got over to losing to the english. its always the same, whats good for quebec, is no good for the rest of canada, there has to something major to stop all this bull crap. but it will, never going to happen, c,est la vie mon commrade.
Nov 7, 2022·edited Nov 7, 2022Liked by Brad Salzberg
The answer to the question is unquestionably yes; Trudeau has an agenda. His fathers generation in Quebec cleverly played the ignorant masses against one another, masterfully playing the good guy bad guy game, which kept the Anglo old stock off their guard. Anglos for the most part had no humiliation to remember; there were very few in New France, even long after the Treaty of a Paris. But the humiliation was encouraged within Lower Canada it’s leaders keeping that pot simmering over decades. The fact is, elite French society, had no interest in either joining the American revolutionaries even though invited; the French had no interest in being melted in the American pot, or being subsumed by the English either.
The American Revolution successfully created a new country. People loyal to the English crown fled to Lower Canada especially to the Eastern Townships and to Upper Canada mostly along the north shores of Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River. The curious thing is that Canada hosted very few English settlers — they preferred to emigrate to the United States. Loyalists spoke English but they were not Englishmen, they were North American colonists.
Two important consequences of the American Revolution on New France was the Jay Treaty of 1794 and the construction of the Erie Canal. England and the United States agreed to the present border between the United States and Canada. Thus within a single generation New France lost their hold over the lands west of the Appalachians and east of the Rocky Mountains. The enormous trade supported by trapping beaver on the dozens of rivers flowing into the Ohio and Mississippi lowlands was cut off. John Jacob Astor saw to that. His American Fur Company quickly took over the fur trade. Congress excluded foreign traders in 1817.
The Erie Canal, completed in 1825 was the first navigable waterway connecting the Atlantic Ocean to the Great Lakes; stretching from the Hudson River near Albany NY, to Lake Erie above Niagara Falls, vastly reducing trade through the St Lawrence lowlands.
These events caused recession in Lower Canada. Railroads in the United States began to rapidly connected the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. The leading figures in Lower Canada had no interest in connecting to the American railroad network. The answer was to connect Lower Canada to the Pacific with a railroad ensuring a steady traffic in goods from west to east. However this required enormous borrowing! And borrowing as always required collateral which only a federated constitution could pledge. The French in Lower Canada had a problem; how to reconcile the further loss of sovereignty began in 1763, which would follow creating an enterprise with enough collateral to borrow the money to build the railroad.
After years of deliberation and many crossings of the Atlantic Ocean to London where constitutional authority was lodged Lower Canadians had the instrument they desired which enabled them to regain the power they had gradually lost over the hundred years before Confederation. Yes! Canada oddly, called the thing agreed to Confederation, but is in reality a Federation. Even more weirdly the United States is a confederation not a federation. Lower Canada wanted a federated structure — which is much like the European Union. Baked into the original “Confederation” are some important differences between a real confederation and a federation; one important difference is the distribution of seats in Parliament, as one example. There is not space enough here to write more.
The main point here, is certain aspects of Canadian history are not widely understood. Some aspects of Canada having a history which the majority do not know, such that the French see themselves as wounded and therefore are due more than the residents living in the other provinces and feel deeply justified in their claims, cause Canadians, not of French ancestry to wonder at their betrayal by especially the ruling elites in Quebec who never stop playing the game of justifiable reconciliation — as though Quebec was pushed out of their catbird seat by the ancestors of those living in the other provinces.
France lost the Seven Years War; no one invaded New France. The Loyalists immigrated to Canada; they did not invade. The United States and England established the border; which benefited Lower Canadians. The U.S. had to negotiate with Great Britain to have the border there at all. Manifest Destiny spoke otherwise. If it was not for English power in the nineteenth Century, Lower Canada might today be a State in a greater United States rather than a province in Canada. Are Quebecers grateful for that.
Pierre Trudeau restored the dwindling power of Quebec in the Canadian federation by patriating the so called “Constitution” and floating on its back, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter is, de facto, a Constitutional Amendment. Bilingualism as effected by the Charter was made the law of the land. This of cause, was meant to be exclusionary. In truth, how many people in the other provinces can ever expect to supplant the Quebec born bilingual power brokers in Ottawa.
Almost every last person in the Federal Government is a bilingual Quebecer or was born to couples whose first language is French; no doubt probably born in Eastern Ontario. The constitution is clear on the granting of certain authority over natural resources to the provinces. But Quebec has been blocking Alberta from exploiting its own resources.
The Present Prime Minister is continuing the centralizing of power in the PMOs office away from Parliament. The Provincial Premiers ought to resist that abrogation of Parliamentary authority to the PMOs office. Trudeau is not a King. Canadians have a constitution. It is a federation. The premiers have power and authority they are not using. There is a reason Britain decided the candle was not worth the flame. The Provinces could work in concert to threaten Canadas separation from Quebec.
But the premiers need some gumption i.e., backbone. Threaten to withhold the taxes sent to Ottawa, for example. Canadians ought to know and understand the nature of the Constitution. We live de jure in a federation. Do some homework.
Nov 7, 2022·edited Nov 7, 2022Liked by Brad Salzberg
Quebec is another reason for Trudeau to push green policies/climate change on us......Quebec can then sell their excess hydro! They also have lithium mines!!!!
So as we suffer with inflation, carbon tax, etc., Trudeau is killing the western economies to benefit China and Quebec!!
Given the Quebec culture of Anglo hatred taught by the corrupt Catholic church from 1759 on, the answer to the question " Is Turd continuing to fight the Battle of the Plains of Abraham" is an emphatic YES. A bloodless genocide through mass immigration is part of the pogrom (not a typo). This means that this family and its associated cabal are de facto war criminals deserving of execution.
Two people that I knew several decades ago (one of these being J V Andrew , author of "Bilingual Today, French Tomorrow," "Backdoor Bilingualism," and "Enough!") were told by French Canadians; i. e., "frogs" that the British made two mistakes after the Conquest; viz., letting the frogs keep their language & religion and they wouldn't make that mistake when they took power.
All of this must get to Trump supporting Republicans and to Trump himself ASAP so he can make plans to liberate Canada and straighten out our Constitution shortly after returning to the White House. I firmly believe we need help from the USA to remove the frog yoke.
Calling people names dilutes your argument.
In Quebec, prior to the Social Revolution in 1961, French people in Quebec had a harder time getting jobs and when they did, they were paid less than their English counterparts.
Today, they are defending their language and culture. Should the English not be doing the same?
Also, to my knowledge, France is part of Europe.
If this site's aim is to defend the rights of European Canadians, you need all the help you can get. Maybe it's time the English & the French put aside past conflicts & resentment and unite to defend European Culture in Canada.
Forced diversity lowering quality of life by increase in crime and gun violence. Canadian cities have evolved into higher crime areas due to mass immigration. The elites don't and won't risk their lives by living in these areas but expect average Canadians to do so with a smile on their faces.
The article is well written, when I try to share your message FB doesn’t allow it.
Did you try to cut and paste the url into FB, rather than hit share?
You have it wrong when you blame Quebec for the Trudeaus ; they both despise French-Canadians and are largely seen as traitors by nationalist Quebec French-Canadians. By the way, P.E.T.'s mother was Montreal Scottish, and you know Justin's mother is that crazy St-Clair woman from BC. Not much to do with Quebec ; accordingly, Justin's more English than French, which is obvious to a french ear when he ventures to speak the language. You just happen to have finally realized that you are also their victim. French power in Ottawa has all to do with demographics and elections and, accordingly, is dwindling. Third world immigration is used the same way in Quebec as in the rest of Canada, the only difference is more points for knowledge of french in a point system. Britain/the Empire has always used immigration against the French-Canadians. Our big sin as a people seems to have been wanting to survive. The confederation was a pact between equals only in words ; it was sold to French-Canadians as such and their political leaders at the time believed they could gain a measure of autonomy. In that regard the federal Liberals where always the centralizing force in Canada, displeasing all provinces but Ontario and the Maritimes. As well, if the 1982 constitution was favouring Quebec so much, how come no Quebec government, not even liberal, since has signed it? P.E.T. and his son are enforcing the "post-national" plan of their imperial sponsors, whose current storefront is the World Economic Forum. In P.E.T.'s time it was the British Fabian Society liberals. Your blind Quebec bashing is only serving the divide to reign imperial agenda. Canadian Conservatives have always favoured, and still would, a looser federal union, a confederation, which would have satisfied Quebec nationalists, be it Daniel Johnson (Égalité ou indépendance), René Lévesque (Souveraineté-association) or Jacques Parizeau.
Where does the Empire sit in Canada? It can be historically identified as "The Laurentians", the Quebec (once the capital of British Canada) - Montreal (The Golden Square mile of railroad tycoons and English/Scottish colonial merchants) - Toronto axis: anglos all, with their tag along sold out bourgeois indigenous pawns, along with their loyalist base in the Maritimes, Quebec Eastern Township and Eastern Ontario anglo Orangists.
French-Canadians have every reason to hate the Empire ; New France lost 20% of its population in the last phase of the Seven Years war, not only in the months-long bombardment of Quebec, but mainly due to the scorched earth tactic of general Wolfe downstream of Quebec. That's a larger percentage than the Russians lost in WWII... That's something we have in common with the Irish. And Daniel Johnson, the conservative Quebec PM who was shooting for a square deal with Ottawa, was, as his name shows, of Irish lineage. Finally, speaking of "Old Stock" Canadians, Mr. Salzberg (not an English name, that), no one is of older stock in Canada than the French-Canadians, the first Canadians.
Knowledgeable people are frequently right in the details. Though one has to be carful of mistaking the forest for the trees. The Seven Years War as it manifested in Lower Canada was not an invasion. It was an adjunct to a much bigger conflict. France bargained away New France and chose to retain the “sugar islands” at the Treaty of Paris.
England did not want France’s North American colony. The English had enough trouble in their American Colonies.
War has never been a pretty thing. Generals are hired to win wars not decide whether or not they ought to be fought. Generals use every means at their disposal to win wars. Much of history is a bi-product of intentional actions; in fact seldom are the objectives the obvious. Even then, outcomes are seen in retrospect by the winners as intentional. New France was a manifestation of Champlain’s incredible persistence and notably force of will. For more: I’d suggest reading Champlain’s Dream by David Hackett Fisher. New France was the most successful of the European settlements in North America. Certainly history intruded; people though are often better to have let sleeping dogs lie. When the policies of an entire country are subordinated to re-establish ancient prerogatives this reactionary behaviour as a rule is a tangle of hidden consequences.
Canada’s internal policies as promulgated by the urge to remedy and restore ancient prerogatives has been a disaster in so far as Canadian unity is concerned. Behind the scenes wrangling within the Federal jurisdictions to transfer federal powers to Quebec is stupid. Do Quebecers really want to restore the Ancien Régime? Seigniorial society was not so pretty as imagined. The average person in New France was a serf — a tenant living on Seigniorial grants — the size of which is instructive. Hundreds of thousands of acres were granted by Louis XIV to a few politically connected individuals.
The inheritors of the original Régime were the people who wanted, indeed needed a railroad, and needed, but did not desire a commingling of their people, or the loss of power a union of some kind would ensure. But they expected the railroad was inevitable in addition to which the saw it as a means of restoring trade.
It was not the English that had the know how to build the railroad — the “English” lent the money. But without the knowledge the Scots had as a result of the Scottish Enlightenment the railroad would not; could not have been built. The French were even in the 1860s uneducated in the knowledges the Scots had acquired in the previous 125 years or so.
The politics of reaction still prevail in Quebec. Bilingualism in much of Quebec is non existent. These people are becoming an isolated island in an ocean of English speakers. Is that a good thing? The elites in Quebec and their handmaidens like Justin Trudeau are painting their province into a corner.
Demography is the enemy! Societies with their feet on two horses are divided at the root.
Appreciate the info.
The Seven Year war was really the first world war between empires ; also traded in Paris in 1763 were French trading posts in India. In Europe, France tried to invade a German duchy but failed. In the imperial chess game of the time, it would have been an exchangeable token and France wouldn't have had to choose between its New World colonies. But it failed and kept the lucrative sugar island. France did try hard to keep New France, multiplying by five its military expenses in Canada in the 1755-1760 period. Alas, most of these funds and supplies did not find their way to the St-Lawrence valley. Administrator Bigot, a corrupt, protected aristocrat, and his accomplice, Bordeaux-based merchant Gradiz (or was it the other way around, this Jewish slave trader consorting with the British...) made sure most of these assets were "lost at sea". But as far as the Canadiens (New France born settlers) were concerned, Wolfe's force was an invading army, the culmination of the French-Indian wars, as the American say. British Prime minister William Pitt sent the largest force ever assembled by England at that time to finally boot France out of North America. England for a while prior did bid its time, seeing as its unruly eastern seaboard colonies were contained by French-allied tribes across the Blue Mountains, but it was only to be able to build its forces and prepare for the coming war. Getting a German king probably wasted a few years, too. Hackett Fisher - I read his book years ago - is indeed enlightening, at least for the English world - about Champlain, the founding father of Canada. The other founding figure is Marie Guyard (Marie de l'Incarnation), founder of the Ursulines convent in Quebec City. Both exceptional leaders and strong figures to emulate. In the 30 odd years of their combined action, the colony made roots. A nation was born that would flourish for a hundred years under the impetus given by French minister Colbert under Louis XIV, becoming literally a new France.Its conflicts with the New England colonies were fuelled by the furs trade, spiked by religious animosity between protestants and "papists". When the British merchants took over from the Dutch in New Amsterdam they exploited tribal conflicts and sent the Mohawks close to Lake Champlain, the route to the St-Lawrence valley, to harass the French settlers. The furs routes were always the prize. Champlain had made alliances with their enemies, and so it went.The Voyageurs penetrated the continent, making alliances with tribe after tribe. That is easily seen on a map of the continent with French name places. In 1701, Indian chiefs came from great distances, travelling for two months to sign a peace treaty in Montreal. Indians delegations from everywhere numbered around 2000, more than the population of the city at the time. The alliance became so strong that after 1763 Midwest chief Pontiac continued fighting the British for several years.Compared to this, English Canada relinquished the Union Jack in 1963 and accepted a modified translation of the French Canadian national hymn Ô Canada to replace the God Save the Queen (now King, I guess). Its first uneasy step away from British colonial rule had been the treaty of Westminster, making it a "Dominion" in the British Commonwealth. Mere rebranding if you ask me. Colonial bureaucrats were replaced by the oversight of shadowy Crown Agents steering the dominions in the Empire's interests. It took 30 more years for the ROC to actually believe it was its own country, somewhat. Keep in mind, Newfoundland joined Canada in 1949, and only through Smallwood's shenanigans. And Newfoundland sunk the Mulroney Conservatives Meech Lake Accord some 40 years latter...Lower (Quebec) and Upper(Ontario) Canada were united after the Patriots' republican revolt of 1837-8 for representation (No taxation without representation), giving West Canada (Ontario) dwellers much more weight in the united parliament and a larger taxation base to finance its canals, namely the Rideau Canal. The BNAA was essentially the same type of maneuver to finance the transcontinental railroad, a much needed strategic infrastructure to move troops along the new transcontinental border and keep American views in check after 1812. Victoria bridge in Montreal was built to move Loyalists west to populate the Niagara peninsula and further west, lest French-Canadians move that way to populate their already existing settlements in the region. And so it was also for the Prairies (damn, another French word!). The Metis were encircled and contained and Montreal educated Louis Riel hung high by Orangists.Canadian federal liberal policy has been a long game to woo French-Canadians into docility while using immigration to reduce their political leverage. No one in Quebec really cares about bilingualism in the rest of Canada and only the Liberal elite has wanted it. Bilingualism in the ROC is both an irritant and a litmus test. Those who've accepted it wanted to propel their children into the federal bureaucracy's cushy jobs, gaining the liberals a number of electoral circumscriptions in the Ottawa River area, and eastern Ontario, having them believe that a centralized Canada was good for French-Canadians. An illusion, a long game.Liberal ideology gained traction in Quebec as a result of Fabian Society wannabe P.E.T's circles before he even considered federal politics. These liberal-leftists circles created the myth of a backward past and shifted the political outlook to a liberal-propelled "Revolution tranquille" that had been started by the Duplessis conservatives and would have happened anyway because of the postwar baby boom and general prosperity. And then the stupid Parti Québécois accepted the federal-inspired referendum strategy brought in by RCMP agent Claude Morin, giving a say to Anglos and immigrants about the French-Canadian nation's future. Thus Britain ruled sub-continents. Thus goes the Empire always.But this is not over. It's just currently taking a new form as world geopolitics evolves.It has more to do with than mere language. 33 millions North-Americans claim their roots in New France.Canadian politic is basically Conservative regionalization, which suits Quebec fine, vs Liberal centralization.You saying "The elites in Quebec and their handmaidens like Justin Trudeau" shows you need more time to grasp the "Laurentians" concept. Think Colonial Canada. If I say "Bay Street" and "Family Compact" maybe you'll understand? Or maybe, more simply, you haven't realized you're part of it because you were born in it?
Well, much of what you wrote are facts, some of what you wrote, is interpretation. But rather than contest or agree or disagree may I refer you to a book few people in Canada have read: The Constitution of Canada by WPM Kennedy and I suggest the edition with an introduction by Martin Friedland.
I also recommend: A History of Canadian Wealth by Gustavus Myers, the edition with an Introduction by Stanley Ryerson.
And: The Fur Trade in Canada by Harold A. Innes the edition with a Foreword by Robin W. Weeks.
By the way I appreciate the considerable work you put into your response. Thank You.
Few Canadians truly understand Canada’s history. It seems as though this is an intentional oversight rather than ignorance.
Most of the country’s leaders seem equally ignorant of Canada’s constitution. The premiers should have understood the threat the Charter of Rights and Freedoms would be to the freedoms of Canadians. Why? Because the Charter subverts parliament.
The Constitution intended laws to be made in the House of Commons not in the Supreme Court. The Charter is de facto a constitutional amendment. The premiers have more power in Canada to countervail the Federal Government, because Canada is a federation not a confederation. Natural resources are a provincial prerogative. The Federal Government has no business preventing a provinces natural resources from being developed or transported to market. A federated state is one where every jurisdiction has certain rights which every other jurisdiction should/must abide by. By what right does Quebec have blocking a pipeline to a deep water port in a maritime province?
No matter the past grievances Quebecers should/must be made to abide by the principle or reciprocity. Quebec is not a nation. The premiers in the other provinces need to grow a spine.
Thanks for the details.
i have told you from the beginning brad, quebec has never got over to losing to the english. its always the same, whats good for quebec, is no good for the rest of canada, there has to something major to stop all this bull crap. but it will, never going to happen, c,est la vie mon commrade.
Agree.
Maybe we should start building the wall to keep liberals out, they are demons, can't wait till there gone and not fast enough
The answer to the question is unquestionably yes; Trudeau has an agenda. His fathers generation in Quebec cleverly played the ignorant masses against one another, masterfully playing the good guy bad guy game, which kept the Anglo old stock off their guard. Anglos for the most part had no humiliation to remember; there were very few in New France, even long after the Treaty of a Paris. But the humiliation was encouraged within Lower Canada it’s leaders keeping that pot simmering over decades. The fact is, elite French society, had no interest in either joining the American revolutionaries even though invited; the French had no interest in being melted in the American pot, or being subsumed by the English either.
The American Revolution successfully created a new country. People loyal to the English crown fled to Lower Canada especially to the Eastern Townships and to Upper Canada mostly along the north shores of Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River. The curious thing is that Canada hosted very few English settlers — they preferred to emigrate to the United States. Loyalists spoke English but they were not Englishmen, they were North American colonists.
Two important consequences of the American Revolution on New France was the Jay Treaty of 1794 and the construction of the Erie Canal. England and the United States agreed to the present border between the United States and Canada. Thus within a single generation New France lost their hold over the lands west of the Appalachians and east of the Rocky Mountains. The enormous trade supported by trapping beaver on the dozens of rivers flowing into the Ohio and Mississippi lowlands was cut off. John Jacob Astor saw to that. His American Fur Company quickly took over the fur trade. Congress excluded foreign traders in 1817.
The Erie Canal, completed in 1825 was the first navigable waterway connecting the Atlantic Ocean to the Great Lakes; stretching from the Hudson River near Albany NY, to Lake Erie above Niagara Falls, vastly reducing trade through the St Lawrence lowlands.
These events caused recession in Lower Canada. Railroads in the United States began to rapidly connected the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. The leading figures in Lower Canada had no interest in connecting to the American railroad network. The answer was to connect Lower Canada to the Pacific with a railroad ensuring a steady traffic in goods from west to east. However this required enormous borrowing! And borrowing as always required collateral which only a federated constitution could pledge. The French in Lower Canada had a problem; how to reconcile the further loss of sovereignty began in 1763, which would follow creating an enterprise with enough collateral to borrow the money to build the railroad.
After years of deliberation and many crossings of the Atlantic Ocean to London where constitutional authority was lodged Lower Canadians had the instrument they desired which enabled them to regain the power they had gradually lost over the hundred years before Confederation. Yes! Canada oddly, called the thing agreed to Confederation, but is in reality a Federation. Even more weirdly the United States is a confederation not a federation. Lower Canada wanted a federated structure — which is much like the European Union. Baked into the original “Confederation” are some important differences between a real confederation and a federation; one important difference is the distribution of seats in Parliament, as one example. There is not space enough here to write more.
The main point here, is certain aspects of Canadian history are not widely understood. Some aspects of Canada having a history which the majority do not know, such that the French see themselves as wounded and therefore are due more than the residents living in the other provinces and feel deeply justified in their claims, cause Canadians, not of French ancestry to wonder at their betrayal by especially the ruling elites in Quebec who never stop playing the game of justifiable reconciliation — as though Quebec was pushed out of their catbird seat by the ancestors of those living in the other provinces.
France lost the Seven Years War; no one invaded New France. The Loyalists immigrated to Canada; they did not invade. The United States and England established the border; which benefited Lower Canadians. The U.S. had to negotiate with Great Britain to have the border there at all. Manifest Destiny spoke otherwise. If it was not for English power in the nineteenth Century, Lower Canada might today be a State in a greater United States rather than a province in Canada. Are Quebecers grateful for that.
Pierre Trudeau restored the dwindling power of Quebec in the Canadian federation by patriating the so called “Constitution” and floating on its back, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter is, de facto, a Constitutional Amendment. Bilingualism as effected by the Charter was made the law of the land. This of cause, was meant to be exclusionary. In truth, how many people in the other provinces can ever expect to supplant the Quebec born bilingual power brokers in Ottawa.
Almost every last person in the Federal Government is a bilingual Quebecer or was born to couples whose first language is French; no doubt probably born in Eastern Ontario. The constitution is clear on the granting of certain authority over natural resources to the provinces. But Quebec has been blocking Alberta from exploiting its own resources.
The Present Prime Minister is continuing the centralizing of power in the PMOs office away from Parliament. The Provincial Premiers ought to resist that abrogation of Parliamentary authority to the PMOs office. Trudeau is not a King. Canadians have a constitution. It is a federation. The premiers have power and authority they are not using. There is a reason Britain decided the candle was not worth the flame. The Provinces could work in concert to threaten Canadas separation from Quebec.
But the premiers need some gumption i.e., backbone. Threaten to withhold the taxes sent to Ottawa, for example. Canadians ought to know and understand the nature of the Constitution. We live de jure in a federation. Do some homework.
Excellent detail.
Whoops.
Quebec is another reason for Trudeau to push green policies/climate change on us......Quebec can then sell their excess hydro! They also have lithium mines!!!!
So as we suffer with inflation, carbon tax, etc., Trudeau is killing the western economies to benefit China and Quebec!!
I don’t for a minute believe he ‘cares’ about these people but only ‘using’ them for his evil plan and sick mind!!!
Trudeau cares about no one. In Jamaica, they would call him a "blackheart man"-- no feeling for humanity, only for POWER. AH was like that too.