UP YSSEYVol . XLIV

VANCOUVER, B .C ., WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1962

No. 44

FE RES

Separatism is a vital force in th eprovince of Quebec. It is not the fanaticpreaching of a small group of lunatics oreven the opinion of the uneducatedarrived at through misinformation . It is theopinion of an active group led by a well-educated research chemist Marce lChaput, whose book Why I . am a Sepa-ratist is perhaps the most concise treat-ment of the separatist point of view.

At The Congress on Canadian Af-fairs at Laval University last November,13 of Canada's most informed men gath-ered to present their views on Canadianaffairs, especially as they apply to pres-ent-day Quebec.

The Ubyssey presents, in the first ofwhat we hope to be a series . of regularmonthly features, excerpts from the

speeches of four of these men, as theywere delivered at the Laval conference .

The purpose of this issue of the"magazine" is to bring to UBC studentsthe arguments used by both the Separa-tists and the Federalists in support of thei rrespective positions.

Future editions will deal with otherissues of local, national and internationalimportance. We will solicit material frommen who are leaders in their fields andwhose opinions and ideas will, we hope,give: students an insight into problemsfaced by members of different societiesand groups .

An attempt will be made to presen t"in depth" reports of campus happeningsthat would ordinarily have to be ignored

by The Ubyssey because of space limita-tions in the regular editions.

Contributions by students comment-ing on campus or non-campus events-willbe considered an integral part 't s-ofpublication and will be. printed - *henspace permits and qualify is high.setiou#h.•

This is a first for The Ubyssey. Itan attempt to give more than just newscoverage without overloading the alreadycrowded news columns of the regula reditions.

Policies are tentative; and we wouldbe interested in any comments you migh tcare to. make.

The Ubyssey would like to know wha tyou think of Ubyssey Features. We wouldlike to hear any criticism you might haveand any suggestions for improvement .

J

Speech by

Dr. Marcel Chaput

Mr: President ,Gopfederate Opponents,Ladies and Gentlemen :

The situation, in which I am present-ly involved, recalls to my mind a cer-tain Confederation. There is, in theland of North America, a vast countrycalled Canada, where, nine of its 1 0provinces identical by "thought", forma common front against another of adifferent language and culture .

Supported by their large populatio nof 13 million English-speaking inhabi-tants these nine provinces proclaim theglory of Confederation whieh insure swith all the desired success the suprem-acy of their • dollar and of their lan-guage .

Nine against one,' this truly "Cana-dian" numerical relationship may againbe found iu.tbe lectern of this congress .Mathematically, it is easily understood :of the ten speakers, nine Were chosen ,by pure 'chance it seems, for their fed-eral convictions; one only—your hum-ble servant, - a notorious separatist—having the right to criticize the BN A

Act, of mournful memory .

aToday' s : probesBut let us deal with the problem

which pre-occupies us today, not asusual that of the survival of French inNorth America, but that of. the Cana-dian Confederation .

To the question: "Canada—integra-tion, separation, . . or?" I thus answe r"separation and independence forQue-bac" because in the Canadian Confed-eration—which is . not one-Quebec,motherland of French Canadians, i spurely and simply, whatever my. illus-trious colleagues at this conference ma ysay, a colony . of Ottawa ; French-Can-ada, colony of Ottawa .

h know that this expression, Quebec ,colony of Ottawa, makes the Old Guard ,which has learned to adapt itself toterms and situations, laugh . But thei rirony does not change in any respec tthe truth existing in these words for theyoung people of all ages whose clarityof mind has not been' clouded by thenecessity for compromise .

.Quebec is therefore a colony of Ot-tawa and here is the proof of it :

Quebec invadedHistorically, Quebec was, two cen-

turies ago, a territory where ther elived a French-speaking people and thi sterritory was invaded by an army for-eign to these inhabitants .

English domination was thus estab-lished by force in Quebec and wasmaintained by force until the day i twas replaced by strength of the num-bers and some political and economicinsititutions controlled by English -speaking people .

In this respect, 1867 has changednothing, since at that time, • French-Canadians, i .e . 'Quebec, did not hav ea choice between Confederation an dindependence, but - rather a choice —never ratified by the people—betweenConfederation and the status of an isol-ated British colony .

If someone can show me that duringthe course of its existence Quebec, o rFrench-Canadians, has refused to be -come independent ; I shall withdraw m ycomments .

The 'history of •French Canadians. i sthus similar to that of all the . worldcolonies, emancipated or not . One can-not remake the past . But one cannoteasily erase historical facts . TheFrench-Canadians are a conquered peo-ple and they have never recovered

from this conquest, so much that onthe cultrual, social, economic, politicaland military levels, they are ' still acolonialized people .

What do we call, if not social col-onialism, the present state of affairs i npublic works, 'private enterprise an dthe 'armed forces where six millionFrench-Canadians living in' their coun-try, Canada are kept away from ad-ministrative positions . How do we ex-plain rather than by colonialism, th efact that in the federal administration ,French Canadians hold•-.from a repor tof the "Conseil de la Vie Francaise"and not a survey of the "RIN"—only10• per cent of the positions instead of30 per cent and that these 10 per centare almost all lower positions .

How can you call, by another termrather than colonialism, the fact thatEnglish is the only official languagein the armed forces and .that a French -Canadian cannot die in:-French for hi sown country? Do you have anothe rword than to describe the' treatmen tinflicted upon the Catholic and FrenchCanadian minorities of nine provinceswho have' to fight daily for a modesthour of French and religion in a coun-try which" is said to be their own .

What other term than colonialismcan you invent to qualify the attitude

:of the Canadian government ` abroad.In , 15 years of representation at theUN Canada has almost never mad eheard a• French-speaking voice.

Finances affectedDoes the colonialism which affect s

Quebec stop there? Alas, no. How aboutfinances? This 'French-Canadian peo-ple, so rich in talents and hope, wha tdoes it possess of its land, of its heri-tage, of its resources, of its forests, of

its trade, of its industry, small or -large ?

It possesses a particle, it possesse sthe crumbs . Accounting for 85.8 percent of Quebec population, French-Ca-nadians possess 10 per cent of the econ-omy of their province, and I am notreferring to an up-to-date account.Economically, the French-Canadians ofQuebec are not masters in their ownhome, and that is called colonialism .The difference which exists on alllevels between the past of English -Canada . and that of French-Canada i sthe difference that we discover be-tween the past of the conqueror an dthe past of the conquered, the past o fthe imperialist and the past of the col-onialist.

Same rightsI seem to here hear voices that recal l

to me that in a colony, the inhabitantsdo not have ,as we do, the right to vot eand the' right to be elected . For thos ewho consider Quebec a province likeall the others, they are right : Quebechas the same rights as the other prov-inces . But the Canadian `reality statesthat Quebec is not a province like theothers. It is the national State of FrenchCanadians . And considered as such ,Quebec is in fact a colony of Ottawa .

Politically, in the House of Common sthere - are , only 75 French-speakingMPs of a total of 265, thus 28 per cent .That ie to say, that politically, Frenc hCanadians do not exert more controlover their national destiny. If a project ,of value to the French-Canadian na-tion, presented to the House of Com-mons is not to the liking of the English -speaking MPs, they block it . The past94 years of Confederation are thereto prove it.

(Continued next page )

Speech by

Michael Olive r

Mr. President,Ladies and Gentlemen :

The subject assigned today is, as youknow: "The Future : Separatism, Inte-gration or . . . ?" It leaves me an arather odd position . I am not : a separ-atist . I do not believe in integration .My real subject is thus a question mark !Actually it is not very difficult for meto substitute a word for this questionmark—for I believe that federalism is

and will be, as it has been in the past ,the best method of meeting the desiresand needs of both French-speaking an dthe English-speaking peoples in Cana-da. Of course there has to be change sin Canada—particularly economic andsocial changes, but also political ones .Federalism must adapt to changing con-ditions — and if it cannot, then w eshould throw it out . There are manythings wrong with Canada today, and ,when I read a book such as the oneDr. Chaput recently published, I findmyself in hearty agreement with 95%of the criticisms which he makes o fCanadian policies and practices ; I ech ohappily the objections he makes to the*ay in which Quebec's economic lifeis controlled . What I can't fathom i swhy these criticisms should lead t oseparatism .

Chief grievanceI have always belonged to the Ca-

nadian democratic left, and my reactionto •a great part of what Dr . Chaput andhis colleagues are saying is : "But thisis what we have always wanted—thisis what we still want . This and a greatdeal more ." But more of this later .. Let's first look at the critique ofCanadian society which is being madein Quebec society today and try to de-termine whether there is any necessary

connection between the diagnosis of ourills and the remedy which is being sug-gested .

Unless I am badly mistaken, the chie fgrievances of French-Canadians fall in -to two categories . First ; there are thosewhich concern the Elate of the French -Canadian nation in Canada as a whole ;secondly, those which' relate to the po-sition of French-Canadians in Quebecitself.

Official lip=,serviceWhen a French-Canadian moves ou t

of the province of Quebec, he findshimself at a grave disadvantage. Inspite of the fact that he belongs to anational group which constitutes . nearlyone-third of the population of Canada ;in spite of the. fact ' that his languag ehas been given official recognition i nthe Canadian constitution, once_ heleaves Quebec -he enters a world of, atbest, lack of comprehension ; more usu-ally a 'barely disguised irritation unles she speaks English with great fluency .More serious still, in spite of officia llip-service to the concept of bi-cultural-ism, he find that he is unable to ente rany except the lowest level of the fed-eral public service unless he is pre-pared to accept English as his workin glanguage. And let it be quite clear—this is not just an inconvenience forhim, not just an offence to his pride,but a substantial disadvantage . For itmeans that , he is almost bound to b eunder-valued .

Yet this is the inescapable situationof French-Canadians in the federal civi lservice . And it is. certainly time that w edo something about it . But what? Withdue respect, I fail to see that creatingan independent state in Quebec solvesanything. It is inescapable indeed, that

it will deprive those centres of FrenchCanada which lie outside Quebec ' ofthe chances they have at present t opreserve the Iangauge and culture .With the best will in the world, I can-not see how the CBC in a Canada with -out Quebec could provide Frenc htelevision to the communities in theWest who enjoy it now .

It is ironical that a vocal minority ofFrench-Canadians should choose thepresent to recommend that their nationgive up its long struggle for ' equalrecognition in Canada's national ; gov-ernment. For I suspect that at no timein the past has there been a comparablewillingness among the English-Canadi-an majority to begin to remedy the in-equities to which French Canadians 'have been subjected . The sheer stupidi-ty of a system which requires that aletter from one French-Canadian t oanother French-Canadian in the civi lservice must be translated into English ,replied to in English, then translate dinto French again seems to be finallystriking home .

The political career of Michae lOliver began in April, 1961, when h ewas elected first ' national presiden tof the NDP.

Oliver has contributed to man yCanadian magazines. such as Cit eLibre, Christian Outlook. the Cana-dian Journal of Economics and Poli-tical Science .

The standard excuse for this comedyis, of course . that "efficiency" demand sthat the files be kept in one language .The next person to use the file may no tread French as the two correspondent sdo. But when are we going to realizethat "efficient" administration in a bi-lingual, bi-cultural country is obviously

bi-lingual, bi-cultural administration? Ithink this point is at last beginning tosink home.

Legislation asked

If, at present, federal governmentdoes not at . the next session introducelegislation which with all 'deliberatespeed will begin to create a bi-lingualcivil service, it will richly deserve thebeating at the polls which I think it isgoing to get anyhow. Canada must havea' strong representative contingent o fFrench-speaking civil- servants at alllevels of the administration — andespecially at the top levels, where grav eunder-representation is now the rule .Furthermore, these French-Canadian smust be permitted to express them-selves—orally and in writing—in thei rown language. Why? Not only becaus ejustice to French-Canada demandsnothing less, but because no countr ycan afford to waste a large ,part of th etalents of 30% of its population . . Can-ada cannot afford to waste the possibili-ty of enrichment and broadening whichthe interplay between two of the grea tcultures of the Western world can pro -vide .

Let me make it clear that I am notproposing the impossible . I am not sug-gesting that overnight some magica lact of government can transform uni-lingual Canadians into bilingual ones .an English-speaking civil service int oone which uses both languages . I amsuggesting that some immediate stepscan readily be taken — bilingualcheques ; and immense improvement i nthe speed and quality of translatio nservices ; a rule that reports can bewritten in either language in any de-partment, just to give three examples .

I am further suggesting that a begin-(Continued next page)

Chaput: "Why I'm a separatist"

Thus, to those who see in the BN Ae lect the guarantee of the freedom ofFrench-Canadians I ask this question .What do you call a nation' which is toleave to another nation the control ofits national and international affairs ?I call it a colony and all the diction-aries in the world, as I do, call thi snation a , colony .

What would Canada look like if al lthe minorities, Italians, Germans, Uk-rainians ; Polish and others decided on eday, similarly to you French-Cana-dians, that their political representa-tion was insufficient, that they als o

- wanted schools where their languag eand their religion would be taught ?

This argument is used by nine Anglo-Canadians out of ten .

French here firs tOur English-speaking fellow country -

- men appear as if they do not know tha tFrench-Canadians . were here befor ethey and that there exists in their 35 0year-old past, a continuity that the 1760conquest has not shattered . They pre-tend. to ignore that the immigrant ha sbroken his ties with his original coun-try the day he accepted the Canadiancitizenship . Italian, German, Ukrainian ,Polish are languages that have no con-stitutional stature in Canada. Theyhave no right to become official lan-guages .

The status of the French languageis or should be different. It is themother tongue . of six million Cana-dian's, thus 30 per cent, who are thesons and daughters of the pioneers andthe founders of this country .

Let no one be mistaken in the mean-ing of these words . Those who, withthe "RIN", ask for the independenc eof Quebec, the so called new look sep-aratists, do not come here to claim a

just treatment for the French lan-guage, a greater diffusion of the prac-tice of : bilingualism, the small gift ofa flag, of an anthem or of bilingualcheques .

French-Canadians do not want them .They do not come here to try and bringthe English speaking to correct th ewrongs committed against them . Forthe separatists of today, for those wh oanswer by the word separation to thequestion put forward at this congress ,the time for recrimination, the time fo rtears has gone by .

Also gone by are the times for bow-ing, for kneeling and for compromise .Gone by is the time for a unilateralbilingualism. Gone by are the time sfor slavery and guardianship . TheFrench-Canadians have become anadult nation which refuses to live con-stantly as a minority fighting anEnglish-speaking majority which al -ways remains the same. The French-Canadians of today and tomorrow, sud-denly conscious of their strength andtheir capacity, decide to become th esole masters of their national life .

New submissionThere will be some in this hall wh o

will try a last effort in view to bringus a new submission . They will tell u swith a sobbing voice or write with anervous pen, that the French-Cana-dian minority is the most importantminority in Canada and larger thanthe British, Irish, Scottish, or otherminorities .

The position of French-Canadiansis thus, not that of an important min-ority among many others . It is oneFrench-speaking nation facing oneother English-speaking nation . Thereare not 20 different minorities or 1 0different provinces in Canada . There

is a French-Canada of 5 to 6 millio ninhabitants and an English-Canada of1-2 to 13 million inhabitants .

Others, poets lost in the politicaljungles, plead with our generous heartsto help them save from the meltingpot this poor British .minority, an or-phan since George Washington . Do younot realize, you French-Canadians, the ycall out to us with tears in their eyes ,you are the only hope of our belove dBritish-Canada . which is threatened .t obe swallowed by its neighbour, theUnited States . Do you not see, un-grateful French-Canadians, that w eneed you to survive?.

Since '1952 Marcel Chaput hasworked for the . Defence ResearchCouncil at Ottawa.

Chaput is the author of "Why Iam a separatist", published by Edi-tions du dour at Montreal . Last.October he was elected president ofthe National Independence Move-ment .

Ungrateful ' we are, in effect: thispleading does not sadden us the least .We like you well enough ; we bid youno harm; we also believe, that youneed French-Canada to survive .Ameri-canization, . but we do. not believe tha twe should annihilate ourselves to en -sure the English supremacy . In a crudeway this truth may be enunciated a sfollows : you perhaps need the French-Canadians to survive, . but French-Ca-nadians do not need you to grow . up .

A ` nation, it wants .to be treated a ssuch. It wants the control of its poli-cies, of its. economy, the orientation o fits culture ; it wants to reach the . "ep-anouissement" to which . every nationhas a right to want, it wants to pla yan international role . Briefly, it want sto work for civilization .

This goal cannot be reached toda yas the constitutional structure of Can-ada is obsolete . It is the autonomy Ofa province, not the techniques of poli-tical .immobility that it wants ; it is thefull' control of its destiny. It is notsearching for its rights; it is requiringfreedoms, its freedoms .

No concessionsThe Hon . Davie Fulton happily in-

formed his audience at the openin gbanquet, Wednesday, that his govern-ment was preparing legislation thatwould guarantee the application of therights of French-Canadians. This couldhave been _ predicted, as in view of the"fulgurante" rise of the idea of inde-pendence, the English-speaking goverri-ment in Ottawa, scared, would makepropositions, promises, even conces-sions.

'Ottawa, like many others, still has no tunderstood that all the protective leg-islation, all , the best promises willbring no changes to our problems, since—must we repeat it one hundred times ,one thousand times,we do not wantto be a ' minority any more .

It is not, as in the olden time, arms ,force, it is not the menace• of starva-tion, of a depression that watches us .The worst enemy of the future sover-eignty of Quebec, of the coming libera-tion of French-Canada made ' itselfheard through the warm and seizingvoice of the Hon. Davie Fulton .

This enemy is not the Hon . Mr. Ful-ton, it is not the cabinet which he rep-resents . It is the promises that h ebrings . And even kept, these promises,these corrections will remain even sothe enemy of French Canada as be -cause of them, our nation is threatenedto sacrifice the prey for its shadow ,

- (Continued next- pge)

liver: "Why I'rnafederalist"

Xing can be made toward much moretar-reaching changes. Let me cite justtwo examples: first, apolicy that i nthree yeare time, a healthy bonus willp added . to the salaries of all civilservants who are bilingual ; second ,a policy- that after a somewhat longerdelay, bi-lingual ability will be a . con-iition of recruitment into all senior ad -

ministrative posts . Needless to say, th elatter changes will require some : rapidimprovement in the quality of languageinstruction in the schools of every

province—and federal grants-in-aid willprobably he necessary to do it . But thisis something. we cannot go into now .

Second grievanceLet me turn then, to the second are a

Of grievance—the social and economicposition of the majority of the provinc eof Quebec. It is here that anyone whois associated with the politics of theleft finds himself on good, familia rground. For generations the democrati cleft in Canada, whether English-speak-ing or French-speaking, has said that asociety which permits a small minorit yto control its destinies is a societywhich is in serious need of reform .Turn to the figures which you will findcited by Professor Gideon Rosenbluth' schapter on "Concentration, and Mono-poly in the Canadian Economy" inSocial Purpose for Canada; or turn t othe older CCF publication Who OwnsCanada? and you will find that thebasis of this critique -- the critiquewhich the New Democratic Partymakes today-is that an unrepresenta-tive handful of men exercise enormou sand largely irresponsible power ove rthe economic life of Canada .

The evidence shows pretty clearlythat the economic and social problem

representative ?

The logical route for any . majoritywhich is 'dominated by a ' minority is .that of :democratic political action . . Th eform which is taken depends on the cir-cumstances . The Party which representsthe Canadian left today—the . New De-mocratic Party—believes, that for~Can-ada,'as a whole, methods which ensure 'that economic decisions will conform t oa democratically prescribed plan ar emany and varied. Public ownership i sonly one of them. But it will not besurprising if the emphasis which th eNew Democratic Party for the Prov-ince of Quebec gives to public owner-ship will be greater. For in this prov-ince, there is not only a crying need t omake the pattern of economic develop-ment conform to the interests of -themajority, but also to change the com-position 'of the top of levels of corpor-ate -leadership. It is intolerable that th elanguage of the executives of almos teveryone of Quebec's big industrial andcommercial concerns should be .Engli'shexclusively and the of the workersFrench, when the English-speaking pop -ulation is only 17% of the total, and

the French-speaking : population 83%.Permit me to read a few paragraphs

from Dr_ Chaput's book. He is speak-ing about the economic independenceof, Quebec . (Marcel Chaput) WILY -ama Separatist, p.98-99, beginning withthe fourth paragraph (p . 98 to the endof page 99) .

In an independent Quebec, econom-ic liberation would begin at the pointwhere we are at present and could onlyProgress, if our governments k'n e .whow to apply the proper measures :

Proper measuresf° bring _ back to Quebec the two bil-lion dollars that she sends to Ottawa . .each year in customs duties and taxes.0.' nationalize key industries-electric-ity, . etc .*encourage secondary industry .• channel the savings to French Ca-nadian institutions .• : diversify imports of foreign capital .« ; promote the founding of co-opera-tive enterprises .0. occupy the vacant sectors of econ-omic activity.S raise the foundations of a mixe denterprise system .• oblige foreign countries to emplo yat all-ranks a set proportion of Quebe cand French-Canadians ,• set up a general plan .•'- support a spirit of nationalism ineconomic matters .a : profit by the example of other peo-ples . .▪ train businessmen, technicians ,economists, engineers and ' other spe-cialists .• lead the French Canadian peopleto consider the State of Quebec theirally.• convince them of the necessity of

state participation in the. economic de-velepment . of the country .

end the untrue myth that Freneh-Canadians do not have business sense .And others!

Perhaps none of these points is orig-inal with 'the separatists . Many hav ebeen proposed in t h e past . A greatmany liberating measures can be appplied before Quebec becomes even po-litically independent . So much the.better . :. All this proves only one thing ; thatseparatism is a natural idea . It bring,to the solution of the French-Canadiannproblem only the co-ordination of task.%and the devotion of minds . Only tweiremarks : First, I agree that these pointsare not the inventions of the. separat 'ists. They have been borrowed fro m

'other programs or from the old Parti ;Also, it is true that "many of these

measures can be applied ' under t h epresent federal system ; all but thefirst, immediately . Which proves, inmy opinion, not. that separatism is anatural idea, but that the federal sys-tem is, flexible enough to accommodatea complete social and economic revo-lution in Quebec, if the people so de -sire .

-

Best of two worldsBut thus far I have been defensive

about Canadian Federalism—and thereis need to be. For it is a system of gov-ernment which permits us to get thebest of two worlds . It gives to the pep-,pie of Quebec—and to those of mostother provinces--the chance to wor kfundamental transformations in ' thei rregional societies and also permits them ,to collaborate in a broader . setting—the setting of Canada . as a .whole:for,the tasks which best handled on a larg e

(Continued next page)

of French-Canada is a special case of ageneral problem in Canadian society .- Iwould be the last to deny that havingyour society dominated by an economi celite which speaks a, different languageadds a new and important element tothe picture . But does it change the rem-edies? Do they not remain what th eleft has always said they were, whatthe New Democratic Party says the yare today—the . demcratic use of ' re-sponsible, constitutional, public authori-ty: to take major economic decisionsout of the hands of this elite ; to make .it responsive to the needs of the vastmajority ; to transform it as that it is

Chaput: attacks Fulton Oliver: NDP proposal

. to yield to the illusion of an easy halt -measure .

The French-Canadian has known solittle of what is one's own nationallife, of what is a non-offended nationa ldignity, that a .small promise made bythe great politicians of Ottawa over-whelms him with satisfaction an dmakes him forget his past misfortunes .

Besides, I do not see too clearly whywe French-Canadians, should rejoic eourselves. I read yesterday morningthe report of Mr. Fulton's speechprinted in the Gazette of Montreal . Idid not read, even once, the wordFrench-Canadians . One can read "an

. aineridment to the BNA Act whichwould safeguard Quebec's characterarid identity" or- even "entrenchment of'those things which are essential to thepreservation of the separate identityand character of Quebec . "

This speech of Mr . Fulton is an his-toric speech, not because of the trans-cendence of his words, but more so be-cause it is identical in its form to al lthe speeches, of all the representative sof all metropolises, delivered in answe rto the first revolts of all the world ' scolonies, i .e . promises of reform .

If only Ottawa was sincere, it wouldnot have delegated Mr . Fulton to tel lus, in the heart of Quebec, that theprovince of Quebec may keep its per-sonality, on one condition, to remainone province out of ten, but it should

have asked Mr . Fulton to ' go and in-form the nine English provinces thathenceforth there will no more be te nprovinces, but rather, two Canadas ,French - Canada and English- Canada ,

.united -in a true Confederation .

English supremacyFor only a true Confederation ca n

put unilingual French-Canada on asame level of equality with English -Canada, also unilingual . By its flatter-ing and flashing remarks, the federa lCabinet of which Mr . Fulton is todaythe spokesman, tells us in fact : "Que-

bec yes : but long live English suprem-acy in Canada ." Besides, how can w etake seriously the promises of the Hon .

Mr. Fulton? English-Canada took 9 4years to discover the presence o fFrench-Canadians and according to Mr .Fulton himself, bilingualism will b e.slow to spread itself .

Mr. Fulton, similarly to your col -league Mr. Pearson last week, you arewoefully mistaken about the patienceand the submission of French-Cana-dians . Allow me to repeat to you: Wedo not want but only a few rights with-in Confederation . We do not want tobe a minority any more .

If during an instant of political medi-tation, Mr. Oliver, the Gentleinan ofthe Congress, Mr . Fulton and his col-leagues of the Cabinet want to under-stand the reasons for Quebec's French-Canadian separatism, they only haveto examine their own intentions tohave a Canada independent from theUnited States or England . They rec-ognize for Canada the right and th eopportunity to have a proper and dis-tinct existence from that of its neigh-bor, the United States, then they areidentical by their language and thei rmentality .

Our own masters• This means to say, in very simpl eterms, that as Ottawa refuses to entrus tthe protection of its rights and thecontrol of its business in the hands ofWashington, the French-Canadians o fQuebec refuse to entrust the protectio nof their rights and the control of thei rbusiness in the hands of Ottawa . Wesimply want, hereafter, to be the onlymasters of our own home .

Hence, French-Canadians are risingtoday to reclaim the sovereignty oftheir own state, Quebec, as did at on epoint in its history each of the 104member nations of the UN, because :

1) French-Canadians form a nation .(2) Because this nation also has a

right to freedom and dignity.(3) Because effectively, better than

in its minority participation in a Can-ada paid to be bilingual, its sovereignt ywill insure its true expansion .

(4) Because the French-Canadian na-tion can, only through the sovereigntyof its state, Quebec, play the interna-tional role which becomes her .

If during its life as a sovereign coun-try, Quebec must compromise withwhat is today the rest of Canada, itwill do it on an international scale,as Canada does presently with th eUnited States and all the other coun-tries of the world .

scale, including economic -stabilizationand the elimination of the course ofunemployment, defence, foreign policy ,trade, shipping, postal services, a n dcertain forms of welfare . I would bethe last to deny that we have got toimprove our federal system not onl yin terms of the creation of genuine bi-culturism and the national level bu talso in terms of the relations betwee nthe federal government and those o fthe provinces .

The New Democratic Party . at itsfounding convention adopted a pro -gram which specifies some of the

changes which we believe are neces-sary. It recognizes that some types o faction on the part of the central gov-ernment have, in the past, been ar-bitrary incursions into provincia lspheres . It particularly notes that con-ditional grants—by which Ottawa of-fers sums of money to the provincesif they will abide by conditions whic hare unilaterally laid down by the cen-tral government—are to be avoided ina federal state .

It proposes instead to co-operativ efederalism — co-operative planning fo r'greater abundance and greater welfarefor Canadians . It calls for consultatio nand free 'acceptance of joint programsof federal-provincial collaboration . Itprovides, indeed, that where a provinc eprefers to. remain outside a join tscheme involving education, languageor other basic rights defined in BN AAct, it is not only free to do so, bu tit .will be entitled to receive with nostrings attached the s u m of moneywhich it would have received from Ot-tawa had it joined in the scheme . Itrecognizes that provincial planning i sjust as essential as federal planning ,and it affirms a belief by proper col-laboration, these plans can be dove-tailed for the greater benefit of all .

Pearson attackedI have the greatest difficulty in un-

derstanding the concept of Federationwhich the leader of the Liberal Party ,Mr. Lester Pearson, has touched on inrecent speeches . In Quebec City, hepledged his party to a policy of federa lwithdrawal from all joint programs

involving Ottawa and the - provinces .Yet, in another speech, he spoke of aprogram of federal economic planning . - .

I wonder how this would work out? I sthe federal planning to consist of uni-lateral Ottawa decisions? Or is it toinvolve no more than prediction andthen hope that somehow wishes wil lbecome a reality? -Effective action t ogive shape and direction to our econo-omic life while at the same time fullyirespecting the principles of federation ,seems to demand voluntary collabora-tion in joint programs. But I am stray:ing from my point .

Fundamental changesI believe that people n b t only in

Quebec but right across Canada arelooking for fundamental changes inour society and our economy. I believethat in every province, those whosevoices have not been heard in makingthe decisions which shape our desti-nies-

workers, farmers, professionalpeople, artists, all those who are ex-cluded from the interlocking circles ofcorporate and political power—are go-ing to insist on having their say . I be-believe that they are going to look fo rthe government, federal and provincial ,which will act, rather than promise, toprovide full employment, a great in-crease in public services, in hospitals ,health care, houses, schools, universi-ties, libraries, roads, parks, electri cpower, clear water in our lakes a n drivers increase in social security ; a sus-tained and sensible rate of growth ; aplanned use of our natural resources;compensation and provision for thos ewho, as a result of economic progres sthrough automation, find their live sdislocated .

And I wonder whether those whocall on French Canadians to seek se-cession first and only afterwards socialand economic change aren't invitin gtheir compatriots to fall well behind therest of the country. Surely there is acase for using' the democratic federa linstitutions which we have now, in-cluding the wide powers of the govern-ment of Quebec, to make these changes—and then, if separatism still seemsnecessary for French-Canada', so be it !

Reverend Jack Shaver

UBC United Church Chaplai n

Academic community fl Being problems of da yBy REV . JACK SHAVER

UBC United Church Chaplain

This should have been written last year. After aterm as one of several church-appointed chaplain sat UBC, I had formed a firm image of the moder n

student . One year later, during which time many

interviewees had turned into real people, this imag e

got a little shook up .Perhaps there is some point in trying to salvag e

it . Images are useful as far as they go—just don' t

trust them when they try to go all the way. Therehas never been a general image that reflected an y

actual person . The image I had may be useful a sfar as it goes, or it may be real gone .

The dominating element in this image is FLIGHT .The picture I had of the academic community

is of people in flight . The political clubs do no tappear to be engaged so much in thought as propa-ganda. These clubs are not a forum for thrashingout answers to political problems, they are part yorgans for the training of future leaders . A shortacquaintance with student political activity doe snot reveal much crossing - of heredity lines as aresult of it . An identical remark, also upon shor tacquaintance might be made of religious clubs .

The modern student is in flight' from problemsgenerally . Top brains just naturally go into tech-nical fields, where intelligence is needed, of course .But this is also where problems are less ambigious ,and where one has to be responsible only to hi sdata, and not for decisions when his data consists o fconflicting elements . Our age is cynical of the

simple solution to political-economic problems, wit hgood reason . The human situation has reached thestate in which it is frightening to think about the mat all . Let's keep busy with problems that can behanded over to a computer.

There are people in non-technical fields . Butthese aren't interested in problems either . I wasn' table to find many students in the Industrial Rela-tions option in Commerce who were interested inworking at the role the academic discipline oughtto have in B .C.'s industrial relations problem.

There are people in creative clubs . But I did alot of talking before I met anyone who was seriou sabout the responsibility the academic communit yhas for probing the troublesome problems tha tconfront a culture in its communication industries .Dozens of serious and knotty problems centr earound the operation of modern mass media .Movies, Radio, TV, the Press — what has moreinfluence on thought than these? How does societyinsure responsibility here and not itself engage i ntyranny ?

And who should delve into this question mor edeeply than the University community? But Ifound, student interest remarkably confined to th efun of gaining skills .

There are lots of people discussing questions . Thestudent union, academic freedom, fraternal segre-gation, sex, religion—but much of this is flight also .

University days are the days in which peopl efind things out for themselves . They are a tim eof questioning and testing . . . of experimentalthinking .

My fellow chaplains and I discuss this all thetime. We think the experimental thinking is mostlyshallow. People are in flight from, the real ques-tions . We have a ball with the questions of chastityor the question of the existence of God.

But no one has a ball as he hangs over the abys-mal question of whether his existence means any -thing or not, or over the question of what use h eshall make of his body as this relates to the mean-ing of existence . The question of the nature of ma nand the- nature of being can be fun—at the aca-demic level . But when these start to become thequestion of personal being or non-being, the back-ground music gets a little more strident .

A lot of people at the University today kee pbusy at shallow questions in order to shut out themusic (or is it the silence) of the big question .

I think I stand by this image, generally .But I have met people who don't fit it . I have had

religious discussion that was not superficial. I havemet people who knew they were in flight becaus ethey knew the terror of embracing life as it reallyis . These have at least more wisdom than the whol-ly innocent.

And I have been in forums where people of wide-ly differing views brought knowledge and concernto a knotty problem of international affairs . I want-ed to get up and say "May this very group mee tagain!" In the struggle and pain of listening to on eanother in a forum bf this quality the universitycomes to be .

This student community has hidden in it a poten-tial I didn't see a year ago .

Ryersonian' Edifor-m-chie f

claims to 'solve everything'(SPECIAL TO THE UBYSSEY )

The Toronto office of Mora lRearmament at 749 Yonge St . ,is modest and unpretentiouslyfurnished. It is the Canadianheadquarters and the only Ca-nadian office .

Mr. Pat Stevens, a tall, spareman is the office "head ." Withhim on the day I went to findout more about this movement ,was a Mr. Everett Fleming,whose capacity with the or-ganization was never madeclear . I was shortly to find thatnothing Would be made clearabout the organization . or itsmembers .

Both, men were delighted tosee a, representative of T h eRyersonian. They are partic-ularly interested in young peo-ple because the world and Can-ada, they said, was corruptedfrom drinking, womanising an ddope .

Stevens had prepared pressreleases and pictures whichwould tell about the wonderfulthings MRA was doing . All Ihad to do was take my pick .

I was hoping to get answersto confusing and controversialcharges and counter charges ,I said, and asked if they wouldanswer some questions .

Queries removedThe second question asked

almost ended the interview .`Would they comment on th estatement the MRA leader, Dr .Buchman, was alleged to havesaid prior to World War II that"I thank God for a man likeAdolph Hitler who has builta front-line defence against th eanti-Christ of Communism . "

I had written down the fore-going quote and several other son a piece of paper, which Ste-vens deftly removed from myhand .

"These questions are all neg-atives," Stevens said . "This i snothing but a bunch of lies, "he added, standing up .

"If you want the truth, hereit is," he continued and point-ed to a pile of press release sand literature on his desk .

I tried to explain that I wa strying to be as objective as pos-sible a n d if these questionscould be answered, then bot hsides of the argument could b epresented .

"Objectivity is the tool of _Communists," Fleming said ,jumping into the conversation ."The question is, what doesyour country mean to you "

I sat there with the two menstanding looking down at me .

Peace due"I'm not here to help yo u

practice journalism, " Flemin gsaid . I inferred from this andother statements that he ha dtaken time from other activi-ties to be in the office whenI arrived . He appeared to havesome executive function withthe movement .

Both men then began to out-line what MRA had donethroughout the world . I learn-ed from therm and literatur ethey gave me that MRA h a dsolved everything from t h ecold war to the crises in Keny aand the Congo. It had, Iwas told, saved Japan from go-ing Communist . Peace in theworld today, I was informe dwas due to MRA.

Stevens said there were-onlytwo ideologies in the world .Communism and its arch foeMRA. Without MRA, the me nsaid, the world surely was lost .He who does not choose MR Afor himself chooses Commun-ism for his country .

It was pointed out the MR Acounts among its supporterssuch men as Konrad Adenauer ,the chancellor of West Ger-many, Robert Schuman, th eformer prime minister ofFrance, and Nobusuke Kishe ,the former prime minister ofJapan.

Dual roleMRA's dual religious and po-

litical role has its advantages .It gets support from right wingpolitical leaders who natural-ly oppose Communism or an yform of socialism and at t h esame time Moslems, Hindu sand Buddhists gravely c o n-cerned with , man's moral con -duct perhaps to a degree mor ethan Christianity, give MRAtheir support . U Nu, the primeminister of Burma and a lead-er in the Buddhist world, i san ardent supporter of MRA' smoral ideals .

Roman Catholics have beentold to shun MRA as a religi-ous movement and a Churchof England group claims MRA"psychologically dangerous, de-fective in its thinking, a n dpossibly a Christian heresy . "

All monies received by MRAis in the form of. "gifts ." Dur-ing my interview with t hToronto office I was informedthat the books of the MRAhave been audited by the sam efirm for years and are opento public inspection . Officialreceipts are given for any fi-nancial support .

Stevens said he himself wa ssupported by "donations" andwas staying at the house of " aToronto businessman" w h oalso realized the "danger" fac-ing the world .

Life devotedMr. Fleming, the other ma n

present during the interview ,said he was a former businessmachine salesman who h a d"devoted his life to the MRAcause" as had Mr . Stevens .

When I asked whether a manwith a family would receivemore money than a single man ,there was no straight answer .The question, I felt, was bein gavoided .

In 1921 at Oxford Univer-sity in England, Dr . FrankBuchman, a visiting Lutheranminister from Allentown, Pa . ,appalled by what he consid-ered moral laxity and • analarming increase in homo-sexuality , decided it was timeto bring a new hope to theworld . Dr. Buchman's move-ment was subsequently label-ed the "Oxford Group" thoughtoday, Oxford is quick to den yany support of or associationwith his followers .

Dr . Buchman called for wha the termed a "moral and spirit-ual rearmament." He said th eworld desperately needed anew "m o r a 1 consciousnes sbased on a faith in God ." The

movement has since been calledMoral Rearmament .

MRA claims to have no doc-trine, but four absolutes : hon-esty, , purity , unselfishness andlove. The barrier to these issin. One critic of the move-ment has termed it a "reac-tionary ideology" with "avague program of moral right-eousness ."

MRA claims to have no pai dstaff, hierarchy or ' member-ship. You cannot resign orjoin : You simply belong . Todayit is based in every part of theworld except in the Iron Cur-tain Countries .

MRA is well organized ,though , it claims no organiza-tion . It is incorporated in eachcountry it is based . Its Euro-pean centre is at Caux, Swit-zerland. In the U.S., it has"head offices" in Seattle ,Detroit ; Washington and Ne wYork . It has training centres atLos Angeles and Mackinac Is -land , Michigan . At Mackinac ,there are 46 separate building swith room to accommodate1,200 people at one time .

MRA has its own film studiosat Mackinac Island, where i tfilmed the p i c t u r e, "TheCrowning Experience . "

Anyone in Toronto who ha sread the papers may have see nan example of the full pageads MRA uses to spread itsgospel . One appeared severalweeks ago in The Globe andMail. It is not unusual forMRA to run as many as 66 ofthese full-page ads simultane-ously across Canada, the U .S .and Europe .

Funds just cameIt is immediately . obviou s

that such ambitious program scost money. Leaders in theMRA movement depend o n"gifts" as did Dr . Buchmanwhen he began the movement .It aims its appeal toward th emiddle class and at people withinfluence; as a result it hasbeen dubbed the "SalvationArmy of the Middle Class . "

Dr. Buchman said, "Moneyjust comes to us . I don't knowwhere it comes from . "

This self - styled ideology ,which claims not to be a relig-ious movement, during the wa rsaw 15 followers, all . Britishaliens, lose their appeal fro mdraft reclassification in IA in-stead of 4D as religious mis-sionaries . This happened in theU.S .

With the recent death of Dr .Buchman , the mystery of "n oorganization" has not bee nclarified. There is no apparentsuccessor . The movement car-ries on, stronger perhaps, thanbefore .

Open threatsToday MRA bombards th e

non-Communist world with aform of propaganda rangingfrom simple naivety to ope nthreats . Its advertisements ex-aggerate its claims and are un-erringly aimed at the type o fperson it wants to corral . MRAbooks, papers, pamphlets, mag-azines and movies are pervad-ed with a religious aura, an dthey are not above using dem-agoguery to attract followers .

MRA films have world-wid edistribution and the quarterl ymagazine, "MRA .Pictorial," i spublished in 26 languages .

Booklets and pamphlets hav e'been distributed to tens o fthousands of homes .

The MRA booklet ; "Ideologyand Co-existence" gives an in-sight into the methods andaims of MRA .

It opens with these words :"We are at war . World War

III has begun." It goes on t otell of the struggle betweenMRA and Communism . "Com-munism has a plan to take overthe country (U.S .) . . . MRA i sthe revolutionary idea that i sputting,, right what is wrong .."

The booklet quotes Dr . Buch-man as having said, "Most ofus would like to change theworld . The trouble is too manyof us want to do it our ownway." One rather suspects Dr .Buchman wants everyone todo it his way.

There can be no compromise .with Communism, MRA states ,and even calls for an economicblockade of the Communis tworld . .

"The basic problems of in-dustry are not economic butmoral," the booklet tells us .Perhaps if all Canadians tookvows of chastity and purity, w ecould wipe out our trade def-icit with the U.S .

Ballet a weapon"The ideology of MRA en-

ables wage structures to b equickly altered, taxes lowere dand the standard of livingraised," we are naively inform -ed .

Here is an example of MRA' smore 'vicious type of propagan-da: "The peace campaignlaunched with the trade wartoday increasingly takes th eform of persuading people thatCommunists are really peopl ejust like ourselves . . . WE aresupposed to infer that they ar esome sort of horrible, mishape nmonsters .

Even the Bolshoi Ballet, ac -cording to that booklet, is " aweapon of war . "

If there is one thing sureabout MRA, it is its completeintransigence . "When a Mont-gomery, a Billy Grahame, agroup of governors, senators o rindustrialists • visit Moscow,

they are entertained there bythose who are planning theirfuneral," MRA warns .

Even former U .S . PresidentEisenhower is attacked for hav-ing visited the Soviet Exhibi-tion in New York and allow-ing himself to be photograph-ed "arm, in arm with Kozlov, "while youth leaders around th eworld are "encouraged to ac-cept honeyed invitations toCommunist-inspired Youth Fes-tivals . . ."

If the president of the' U.S.is not safe. from attack, thenlittle wonder that a Methodistchurch in Michigan should be .Mr. Theodore Guething, anAmerican = machine tool manu-facturing- executive is quote din the booklet :

No shadings"We American businessmen

don't like being fooled . Aschairman of a committee, Ihelped raise $140,000 for oneof the largest Methodist church-es in Michigan. Last week theDetroit Conference of the Meth-odist Church adopted a policywhich couldn't have been writ -ten better by Mr . Khrushchevhimself . The program calls fortotal world disarmament ad-mission of Red China to theUN, an end to selective service ,curtailment of civil defense andthe establishment of Berlin a sa 'free city under UN supervi-sion .

Statements such as these giveus a small insight into the cloakof MRA . It is a quasi-political-religious group which calls it -self an ideology . For MRA, theself-appointed opponent of ahated Communism, there areno shadings of political thoughtor moral ideals .

Black is Communism andwhite is MRA . Each man mustchoose one of the two, and' ifhe is not for MRA, he is agains this country, religidn, and fel -low man .

It is ironical indeed tha tMRA, self-appointed sole rivalto Communism, pursues th every same means as Commun-ism to arrive at an oppositeend .

MRA also works closely wit hmany leaders of non-Christianfaiths; especially in southeas tAsia .

For_Your Book Requirement s

Text

Technical

Trade

Hard Bac k

Medical

Paper .Back

The University Book Storethe University of B .C ., Vancouevr 8, B .C.

i

Laurndeau :

QUEST1ON OE MfgForsey:

15 IT NECESSARYThe word "nation", Mr . For- .

sey says, may have, in Frenc has well as in English, many dif-ferent meanings . In particular ,we may have the following two :

(1) The "nation", as an eth-nic, cultural and sociologicalentity .

(2) The "nation", as a politi-cal, legal and juridical entity .

Referring to the first mean-ing, Canada is made of tw o"nations . In the second case ,Canada constitutes only one"nation". I accept this in prin-ciple .

But let us observe that muc hmisunderstanding may arisefrom this double meaning . Thusit is legitimate to favor one o rthe other . This choice of wordshowever, may imply divergingattitudes .

In my opinion, the secondmeaning - political and juri-dicial — is humanly weak andpoor . The first one — cultura land sociological — is stronge rand more valuable .

Avoid. difficultyWhen I was young, it seems

to me that we would try toavoid this difficulty by usingthe distinctions formulated bya French jurist, Lonis LeFur .

This jurist states that thegroup of human beings whic hpossessed the ethnic, culturaland sociological unity is a na-tionality; for there necessarilyenters a political element in thedefinition of the "nation" ; thus ,the "nation" would- .be the na-tionality topped by the State .

At this rate, Canada wil lnever be a "nation", as it doe snot possess the primary ele-ments — because it is a "duel""nation" .

But French-speaking Canadais not a "nation" either, not yetbecause it does not properlypossess a sovereign politicalstructure because it is not aState .

We are French-Canadians —and not only . Canadians ofFrench language or culture .

France is undeniable . In an-other way, Great Britain is als oalmost undeniable . But whenCanada is discussed, we mayask ourselves, whether it exists .

Canada is, perhaps, an unde-niable fact, but the Canadianhimself is not .

-

Ask questionThis would take us too far.

Let us ask ourselves ' instead ,why, despite discussions within .each group, when an Anglo -Canadian speaks of "nation" ,he thinks about Canada; andwhen a French - Canadianspeaks of national group, hethinks, above all, of French-Canada ?

On behalf of French-Cana-dians, the answer to this ques-tions seems simple enough . Wetruly experience the feeling o fbelonging to a group of huma nbeings which is not easy to de-signate otherwise. "Ethnicgroup" and "cultural commu -nity", are incomplete and defi-cient expressions .

Our ancestors spoke of `race '— but this word is even mor efalse and has been outlawedfrom the Western world voca-bulary since Hitler. Thus, theimportance of the word "na-tion . '

On the other hand, English-

Canada does not see itself as a"nation" .

There are three, if not fouror five, English-Canadas: theMaritimes, Ontario, the Prai-ries, without forgetting BritishColumbia, nor today, •New-foundland.

They have common groundsof communication : one can eas-ily go from one to the other .But their traditions have nei-ther the same age nor the sam ecolor .

No differenceSecondly, English-Canada, as

everyone knows, speaks Eng-lish, if not American. Thus, it slanguage does not distinguishit from the two countries withwhich Canada maintains a mostdiversified, most intense andmost prominent relationship .

It has less than us ; the directinsight or evidence of a distinc-tion .

In that case, the languagedoes not divide, it creates unit y— thus, it tends to confuse dif-ferences instead of indicatin gthem .

Certain English - Canadiansmay try to oppose themselve sby necessity, in order to be: butthey achieve this only afterserious consideration .

How many Ontarians orWesterners feel more at homein -the American West or inNew England than in Quebec?

The border between the Uni-ted States_ and Canada is al -most exclusively political: nowonder, therefore, that the yspontaenously choose the poli-tical meaning of the word"nation" .

Add to this a third factor :the presence of Millions of NewCanadians, almost all English -speaking .

Old enemyYou know the traditional re -

action of the French-Canadianin regards to immigration: hesees it as the main reason forthe growth of English-speakin gCanada .

Immigration is in his opinio n— an enemy, in the same wayas the Anglo sCanadian fears the"revenge of the cradle ."

The results turn out to be ex-acid" what had been anticipat-ed . English is, nine times outof ten, the assimilative langu-age in Canada .

New Canadians in a greatmajority, have become English -speaking Canadians ; but havethey become English-Canadi-ans ?

The English language assimi-lates: but the social life is trans-formed. Italians settled in To-ronto may speak English ; butalready Toronto is no longe rthe same; and some Torontoni-ans of the "old school" are wor-ried .

Briefly, massive immigrationhas achieved the task of reduc-ing the numerical importanceof French-Canadians . But i thas also attacked English-Can-ada in a more subtle way.

The homogeneity and the os iginality of the group have beenconsumed from the inside . No-body is to blame for this ; therehas been no plot nor ill will ; ifone detects in these words, a"rancoeur"' against New Cana-

(Continued next page)

Born in Montreal in 1912 ,

Andre Laurendeau s t u d i e d

literature and history at the

University of Montreal . From

1935 to 1937 he studied socia l

philosophy at the Sorboi ne

and at the Institut Catholiqu e

in Paris.

From 1937 to 1943, he was

editor of the . magazine "L'Ac-

Lion Nationale" . He entered

provincial politics in 1943, as

ieputy for Montreal-Laurier .

In 1947, he joined Le Devoir as

assistant editor, later becomin g

editor-in-chief ,

Eugene Forsey was born i n

Newfoundland in 1904. He re-

ceived his master's degree i n

economy and political science

from McGill in 1926. He stu-

died in England on. a Rhode s

scholarship, from 1926 to 1929,

and returned to teach at Mc-

Gill from 1929 to .1941 .

He began his political caree r

when he helped draft the Re-

gina Manifesto of the CC F

party. He has frequently stood

as a candidate for this party .

Dr. Forsey has contributed t o

many Canadian magazines an d

has often addressed national

and international conferences .

Since 1942 he has been th e

director of the department o f

research of the Canadian Con-

gress of Labour .

The Ubyssey wishes to

thank Ray Noel for translating

the speeches of Chaput an d

Laurendeau .

Is it necessary to discuss thi squestion ?

I'm afraid so . Rise of separat-ism; . theory of "two nations ina bi-national state" — hemi-demi-semi-separatism .

Reaction of English-speakin gCanadians to either "separat-ism" or "bi-nationalism" : (a)profanity ; (b) silence (the si-lence of mystification; the si-lence of hope that if left aloneit will go away; or the silenceof fear); (c) grovelling acquies-cence in what any group ofF r e n c h- Canadians says th eFrench-Canadians want .

All three reactions are wron gand dangerous . The subjec tneeds full and frank discussion ,and firm and careful handling .

Several meaning sMeanings of the word "na-

tion" : in both French and Eng-lish it has several . The t w othat matter , for our purpose ,are :

(a) an ethnic, cultural, so-ciological entity ;

(b) a political, legal, juris-tic entity.

In the ethnic, cultural, socio-logical sense, Canada is un-doubtedly "two nations," just a sthe United Kingdom is three .The two, here, are (i) Quebec,or French - Canada (we shal lhave to consider which ; t h epoint is important) ; and (ii) th erest . The rest are not an ethni centity, but they are a cultura land soeiological entity . To cal lthem "English-Canadian is arather dubious form of short-hand; "English-speaking Cana-dian" would be more accurate :

In the political, legal, juris-tic sense , Canada is one nation .It is Canada, not Quebec, o rFrench - Canada, or English-speaking Canada which is amember of the United Nations ;just as it is the United King-dom, not England, Scotland orWales which is a member ofthe United Nations . (Economic -ally also Canada is a nation ;even sociologically, to s o m eextent . Reality is too complexto fit neatly into pigeon-holes .

The proof that Canada is onenation in this sense is to b efound (apart from her member-ship in the United Nations, an dher general position in interna-tional law) in two things : (a)the clear intentions of the Fa-thers of Confederation , and (b)the terms of the British Nort hAmerica Act itself .

Proof of nationThe intentions of the Fathers ,

French-speaking and English -speaking, are unmistakable . Ican give dozens of quotations ;e .g ., Sir John A. Macdonald ,who, speaking of the distribu-tion of legislative powers, said :"We thereby make the Confed-eration one government a n done people, instead of f i v egovernments and five peoples ,. . . one united province, wit hthe local governments and leg-islatures subordinate to the gen-eral government and legisla-ture"; and if anyone says, "Oh !yes, but he said `people' not`nation,' " I can produce state-ment after statement where h eused the word "nation" a n d"nationality . "

The terms of the BritishNorth America Act are no les splain .Just look at the terms of

section 91 : the residual powe rin legislation is given to t h eParliament of Canada; andMacdonald's words make itclear that this was deliberate :the Fathers wanted to preventthe new nation from being dis-rupted, as the American natio nhad just been, by "states 'rights . "

Failure or notIf the Canadian experiment

is deemed to be a failure, anabsolute failure, and Confeder-ation is to be broken up intotwo separate "nations," in thepolitical, legal, juristic sense ;if a French-speaking nation is _to secede; then the questio narises, which French-s peakingnation? Quebec? Or French -Canada?

If you say "Quebec," the nwhat becomes of the French -speaking minorities in the res tof Canada? The other "nation "(I wonder what it would b ecalled, by the way) would al -most certainly not be please dby the separation, and migh twell be reluctant to give it sFrench-speaking citizens allthe rights or privileges t owhich they felt entitled, andto which the people of Quebe cfelt they were entitled . Evennow, many people in Quebecfeel that French-speaking Ca-nadians in the other ,provincesare not getting justice . I cansee no feason why separationwould lead the majority in theother provinces to be an ymore considerate of the minor-ity than it is now . This wouldcertainly lead t h e people ofQuebec to demand concessions .The other successor state or it sprovinces might be very de-luctant to grant them; indeed ,the central Government of theother state might have to tellthe Foreign Minister of Que-bec that it was powerless to d oanything, since education, fo rexample, was a purely provin-cial matter .

Agitation result sThe result would almost cer-

tainly he t h e creation of a"Laurentia irredenta" in th eother successor state, and a fur-ious agitation in Quebec forthe expansion of that natio nto take in the oppressed breth-ren .

If you say that the new ; sep-arate French-speaking nationis to be the whole of French-Canada, then you have othe rproblems . Expanding Quebe cto take in the French-speakin gparts of New Brunswick andof northern and eastern On-tario might be fairly easy . Butwhat about the French-speak-ing people on the west coast ofNewfoundland? Or those inR i c h m a n d . Inverness, Yar-mouth and Digby counties inNova Scotia? Or the French-speaking people in PrinceCounty, PEI? Or perhaps somemixed counties in New Bruns-wick where it would not beeasy to draw a nice, neat linebetween the two linguisti cgroups? What a b o u t th eFrench-speaking people of Ot-tawa? What about the scatter-ed French-speaking people o fthe four western provinces?What about the English-speak -

(Continued next page)

dians, it is just that I have notmade myself clear .

Simply, integration — whic his a polite word to describe as-similation — cannot be accom-plished, culturally, at the rateof influx of New Canadians .By Their bulky presence , I be -Iieve that they tend to breakthe cultural bonds with whichEnglish Canada was formed ,thus leaving the latter less an dless as a "nation" .

In the exclusive choice of thepolitical meaning of the word"nation", I believe there is anunconscious imperialism .

Three weeks ago, I was i nToronto, .where I attended th elast sessions of the Ontario Con-servative Party convention a twhich a new leader was chosen .

This convention, in regardswith national unity, passed amotion where the Ontario Con-servative Party stated its regre tabout the attitude of the NDPin Ottawa .

One and indivisibleThis attitude would tend t o

separate Canadians, because th edeliberate fashion by which th eNDP rejected the national char-acter of this country .

The Conservative delegates ,while recognizing the naturalaspirations of the diversifie dcultures of our society, believethat, as a "nation", we are oneand indivisible .

You may say that this is verynatural and that the Ontari oConservatives were only ex -pressing a conviction shared bythe vast majority of Anglo-Canadians .

Is it my fault if this one an dindivisible seems to me to b every authoritative and if I re -cognize in it a weakened echoof the one country, one flag ,one language motto of yester-day .

Why would Anglo-Canadian sfeel the need to affirm them -selves as a "nation ", in termsof English-Canadians, whenthey are rich and almighty i nterms of a "nation ", which isCanadian?

And for the same reason tha tmany French-Canadians feel illat ease, lost in this one and in -divisible "nation" .

French-Canadians like to con -fine themselves within theirown "nation" (in cultural andsociological sense) with som eafterthought to become a "na-tion" in full with its politica linstitutions .

In the same way, Anglo-Can-adians refuse to lower them -selves in the same way, man yamong them have dim hope sthat, by . slow absorption, thepolitical "nation" will becomean homogeneous cultural "na-tion . "

Foreign 'enclave 'In any case, they tolerate a

foreign "enclave", but they d onot want to be dispossessed ofthe "nation" which is Cana-dian .

Perhaps we do form a "na-tion", in the sense that yo ustate, but then I am stunned bythe fact that we cannot giveourselves a nag .

Quebec has chosen its em-blem. Canada, on the othe rhand, cannot arrive at a defi-nite choice between 1,000 to

.1,500 designs .In other words, we often hear

that some Anglo-Canadians ar eworried about what is going o nin Quebec . Allow me to worr yabout what is taking place inEnglish Canada . What is in fac tthe "nation" of which theyspeak and on what do they in-tend to base it? Are they be-coming Americans faster tha nwe? In what direction wil lthey lead us ?

Lester - B. saysOn November 6 . in Quebe c

City, Hon. Lester B. Pearson

made some comments which

seemed very revealing to me .

He Was not speaking as th e

leader of a political party butas an observer of his own"milieu" . He said, and pleaseexcuse the length of this quote :

"In the last few years Anglo-Canadians are more than everconscious of the American cul-tural invasion and they feelthat they are gradually losin gcontrol over their economy.

"However, they know tha ttheir standard of living, whichthey do not want to see lower-ed, depends a large extent onexport of our produce to theUnited States and importingAmerican capital .

- "Thus, they feel that the in-vasion which they regret is it -self the source of the prosperitywhich they desire . That is wh ythey realize that their politica lindependence cannot be effi-cient enough to prevent an in-vasion which has become insep-arable from prosperity .

"This situation inevitablygives rise to frustration . Cer- .taro English-Canadians lookupon the past and regret th eday when they were living un-der the care of England . Othersare tempted to abandon thefight and become Americans . "

Hon . L . B . Pearson concludedwith this sentence, which ex-presses, I am afraid, the trac eof optimism .

Nearer to French"Most of them, nevertheless ,

have decided to react positive-

ly in front of the American in-vasion, to accentuate their iden-tity and to bring themselvesnearer to French-Canadians ."

Does this mean to react posi-tively in front of the Americaninvasion? And is it true thatthe Anglo-Canadian is comin gnearer to French-Canadians ?

My fear is that the Anglo-Canadian lives in a period ofindifference .

Canadian Broadcasting Cor-poration (born thirty - threeyears ago as a measure of cul-tural protectionism, has livedand thrived from this , whichstarted to give way during thelast years of the St . Laurent ad-ministration and which seemsto be very weak at present .

I do not put the blame on th egovernments as much as onpublic opinion .

When French-Canada associ-ates itself with these critics, Ideplore it, but I understand i tbetter. We have within our -selves an instinctive distrust forfederal institutions, it is jus tthat history has made us likethis .

But English - Canada is athome, should feel at home. Is

(Continued next . page)

ing people of Westmount andMontreal West and the Lake-shore?

The alternative is, of course ,a transfer of populations: anew expulsion of the Acadian sfrom Newfoundland, Nova Sco-tia, Prince Edward Island andthe mixed counties of N e wBrunswick, and of the French -speaking people from the west-ern provinces and some pock-ets in western Ontario, and ofthe English-speaking peoplefrom Quebec, into a GreaterQuebec, enlarged by the addi-tion of large areas from Ne wBrunswick and Ontario .

In either case. the economi cproblems are going to be stag-gering; Not only will there bea complete disruption of estab-lished economic habits andpatterns, markets, etc., therewill also be the frightful jobof unscrambling the assets andliabilities of the present cen-tral power. It will be the par-tition of the Indian sub-con-tinent over again .

Second nationA "bi-national state" means ,

in effect, replacing the present

Canada by the ghost of the de-

- ceased Austro-Hungarian dua lmonarchy, sitting crowned up-on the grave thereof. Perhapsthe hemi-demi-semi-separatist spicked up the idea from t h e

Archduke Otto during his res-idence in Quebec! Obviously ,

the second "nation" wouldhave to have powers much be-yond what any province nowhas . Presumably, there woul dbe provision for a common tar-iff and common armed force sand a common department ofExternal Affairs ; perhaps acommon currency, w h i c hwould mean a common Cen-tral Bank. How much else? Idon't know. I'd Iike to know .I think the public is entitledto know. What about socia lsecurity, for example? Unem-ployment insurance? Old agepensions? Family allowances ?

Engl ish rightsBut, whatever the arrange-

ments, there remains the prob-lem of deciding what the sec-ond "nation" is to be : Quebec ,or French-Canada ?

Either way, you'd still havea problem of unscrambling thepresent Canadian state and it sassets and liabilities . Youwould have the prbblem" of therights of French-Canadians inthe English-s peaking "nation"and its provinces (if any), an dof English-speaking Canadiansin Quebec or Greater Quebec

I don 't think the Canadianexperiment has been a failure .It hasn't been a perfect suc-cess : what human effort, whathuman institution is, or canbe? But I think it's been doingbetter and better . I think theferment of ideas in Quebec i salready making it easier forEnglish-speaking Cana d i a n s

- and French-speaking Canadiansto understand and appreciateeach other . I think narrownes sand bigotry in English-speak-ing Canada are declining, mar-kedly. They have certainly no tdisappeared ; b u t -I am surethey a r e declining . I thinkthere is more and more ap-

preciation of the French-Cana-dian culture, more and morerealization that, by not know-ing French, English-speakingCanadians are missing . a lo tmissing the tremendously rich ,lively, varied, exciting, valu-able intellectual, literary andartistic life that is going on i nFrench-Canada .

.More bilingualis mOfficial bilingualism in th e

central Government and . itsagencies, however inadequate,has, I think, none beyond wha tit was even when I was grow-ing up: there are, to take asmall but not insignificant ex-ample, bilingual calendars o nthe table- of the House of Com-mons, something which not somany years ago, Sir Georg eFoster (if my memory serves) ,dismissed as prepo s t e r o u s .

In general, I take my stan don the Constitution, the Con-stitution framed by Cartier andMacdonald, by Langevi.n andMcGee, by Tache and Tupper .That Constitution providedthat French and English shouldboth be official languages inthe Parliament and Courts o fthe Dominion of Canada, andin the Legislature and Courtsof t h e Province of Quebec .That was all . But, devoted asI am to the Constitution, con-vinced as I am of its genera lsoundness, reluctant as I am t osee it tinkered with, let alon edestroyed, in this 'matter Ithink we must recognize that.circumstances have changed ,and that the French languagenow needs and deserves a sta-tus beyond what the Father sprovided for it . In 1867, toguarantee the rights of Frenc hin the Dominion Parliamen tand Courts a n d the Quebe cLegislature and Courts w a sreasonably satisfactory, sinc ethe number of. French-speakingCanadians outside of Quebe cwas very small . This is nolonger true. Times change, and ,though the spirit of the Con-stitution need not change, it sapplication must .

I am in favor of equal right sfor 'Canadians of French an dEnglish speech throughoutCanada, within the limits o fthe practicable . I am not in fa-vor of insisting that ever ypostal clerk in Vancouver shal lspeak French, or every postalclerk in Chicoutimi English .They don't need to : there arenot enough French-speakingpeople in Vancouver or Eng-lish-speaking people in Chicou -timi .

French competenceI am also in favor of givin g

French-Canadians their propor stionate share of jobs at all le-

vels in the national armedforces and the national civi t

service, provided that compet-ent French-Canadians can b efound . That sounds insulting .It isn't meant to be. It is onlymeant to be frank . Let me ex-plain why I feel I must say i teven at the risk • of being mis-understood and sounding of-fensive.

Hitherto, there have bee ntwo difficulties about appoint-ing French-Canadians to t h ehigher posts in the civil sera-

(Continued next page)

Forsey: 'remedied'

• ice. One has been the rather been accomplished . There is, Iit letting itself be lured by the-profit of a few? -

We live near the Unite dStates — as- we would say, nearthe precipice .

At times we even stagger . Ibelieved at the time of the Mas-sey Report, that this fear wouldunite us, that the idea of main-taining and constructing toge-ther a different country woul dbring us closer to one another .

This seemed to be a forth -coming sign of new methods o f

.collaboration. But since then,each side is retreating . In Que-bec, it is separatism .

In the rest of Canada there i s_indifference towards one's selfand ,indifference towards the

. other :

-

Indifference

Some intelligentThe intellectual and the art-

ist, usually, go somewhat fur-ther; but they only speak forthemselves. For a quarter ofa century, I noticed that someindividuals handle the Anglo-French problem with intellig-ence and understanding . -

These optimistic - swallow salways seem to forecast the 'ar-rival of spring . Time goes by ,and we still hope . - The swal-low always comes, but neverany spring .

What do I call spring , in thistheme of bilingualism whic hby far is not the only one ?

Firstly, a formal and frankacceptance of the principle;then, an honest discussion onwhat realizations - are , impliedby an official bilingualist, i nOttawa, and in all the provin-ces where French'-Canadiansare numerous enough for _thisproblem to arise .

Establish a firm distinctionbetween measures readily ap-plied and which may be pu tinto effect immediately, andthose which, even if they mustbe enforced, adopted little bylittle .

In the latter case a schedulemust-be established and follow-ed .-accurately.- A few examples of measuresthat may be put into effect im-mediately are recognition ofthe French-language as an offi-cial language in all the provin-cial Legislative Assemblies ; allofficial documents to be writtenin both languages .

A few examples of measures

which may be adopted slowl yare: progressive recognition ofFrench as a working languagein Ottawa; progressive recogni-tion of the right of French-Canadians to be taught in theirlanguage wherever it is pos-sible .

Or else, if one reckons tha ton a provincial scale, bilingual-ism is unrealistic for the tim ebeing, it could be .decided tomake them all unilingual ; thus ,after modification of the Con-stitution, Quebec will becom eexclusively French . -

It is clear that difficulties 'would arise, and then we couldachieve the following settle -ment.

- - -We could adjust the treat-

ment of our linguistic minorityexactly on that which is ap-plied by New Brunswick andOntario to their Iinguistic - mi-norities.

In this respect, a previou smeeting of the French-speakin gminority of Ontario and Ne wBrunswick with the English-speaking minority of Quebec,would perhaps lead to astonish-ing results .

It would allow a compariso nof the varied treatments in useup to now and a favorable ex-change of information.

Following this, the three mi-norities would be given permis-sion to present a common frontto the three provincial govern-ments and the administrationsof the three provinces wouldtake into consideration thesecombined recommendations .

Perhaps one may answer tha tthis is an unreasonable and un-realistic solution . This wouldmean admitting that the Cana-dian bilingualism is an unrea-listic failure . This would mea nadmitting that bilingualism isan incurable failure .

Thus, Mr. Forsey rejoice shimself at the thought that per- -haps we are getting closer tothe. day when French will berecognized by the LegislativeAssemblies of Ontario and Ne wBrunswick.

-Let us take this latter ease .

Is it .not"uniikel and scandal-ous that in a province wheretwo-fifths of the people areAcadians, where the Premieris an Acadian, bilingualism re-mains but only a hope ?

I am sorry to be brutal in mystatement; but if we are askedwho, for Quebec, was the realteacher of separation, I mus tadmit that it is English-Canada .

Bad shapeIf we have been assigned a

reserve, if as members of theFrench-Canadian "nation", weare condemned to live on thisreserve, let us not be illusione dthat young men- want to makethis reserve one that belongsentirely to us .

If Confederation is not a -failure, in our opinion it is invery bad shape and we havethe Conviction of suffering. adecrease;--very often we evenfeel denied.

-If An -'increasing number of

French-Canadians think of Ot -tawa as '"foreign", I am afraidthat- we are proceeding, by un-foreseen means, towards separ-ation. In order to avoid it, wemust all accept to rebuild theConfederation .

excessive emphasis on the hu-manities in French-Canadianeducation. This meant that -for technical. and scientific po-sitions the -supply of competen tFrench-Canadians was oftenlimited . That difficulty is nowbeing remedied, `hough it maytake a little while for English-speaking people to find it out .

New happeningsThe other difficulty is tha t

qualified French-Canadians donot often come to Ottawa, An d

perhaps even more so now thanbefore, since so many excitin gnew things are happening here ,and . the opportunities and th eneed for their services in theprovince itself are so over-whelming .

-

-I'm not saying there is n o

prejudice in English-speakingCanada. There is . But it's part-ly ignorance, and dwindling .

-I think we English-Canadiansneed to sit down and thinkhard and work hard at makingCanada one nation in the sensethat the Fathers intended . Mostof us are deplorably ignorantof French-Canada . (Some ofyou are perhaps equally ignor-ant of English-speaking Can-ada; but that's primarily a mat-ter for you to deal with .) Weneed to ask ourselves constant-ly how we'd feel of we wer ea relatively small English -speaking island in an ocean o fFrench-speaking people, an dwhat rights we'd feel we had ,and what we'd expect the ma- -jority to do about it .

But I think we've made pro-gress, and I'm frightened thatall this talk of separatismand hemi-demi-semi-separatismmay undo much of what has

am afraid,- a serious risk thatEnglish-speaking Canad i a n s ,hearing- it, will say, `"Oh! . well ,if that's what they-- want, letthem go. Let them - have theirseparate state. Perhaps thewhole attempt t s build a Ca-nadian . nation has been a mis-take and a failure . Perhaps wemay as well give up, and jointhe United . States" . I assureyou this is a perfectly seriouspossibility . I am sure it wouldbe bad for us;- and I -think i tmight be very much worse for -you. You would run the . riskeither of being -isolated on thiscontinent,- economically at themercy of the American ,- Colts -sus grown more colossal - still ,or of being ; absorbed, assimi-lated like your Franco-Ameri-can brethren .

-

-

Builders needed

I remain an unrepentant be-

liever in the Canadian -nationthe Fathers of Confederatio nthought - they were founding .I think they wrought well. Thenoble. constitutional fabric theyreared stands unshaken . Its de-sign was sound . Its foundationswere laid on rock as enduring

as the Laurentian Shield. It swalls - were solidly - built; of

Good Canadian stene : It mayneed -restoration where the Ju-dicial Committee of the PrivyCouncil has defaa"ed it . It mayneed a repair hire, an altera-tion there . But it doesnot needa wrecking crew. or a bombingsquad. It needs builders ; build-ers who will' carry on the workthat Cartier and Macdonald be-gan, - and that generations oftheir successors have continued .

I need .an English-Canadianinterpreter who truly accept sto discuss, who even values dis-cussion as necessary, and who ,

-at the same time represents animportant sector of English

: opinion..The majority of interpreters ,

up to now, have been men ofpolitics and intellectuals o rartists . The first do not always Astonishing resultsexpress their whole ideas; theothers express only their own .

Let us -take the case of theAngle - Canadian politician .More often than ever he tellsus that the Canadian state i sbilingual, that the French cul-ture is an integral part of Cana-dian heritage .

Then, he talks about simul-taneous translation or bilingua lcheques . There is, between th esaid principle and its practicalapplication, such a dispropor-tion, that we come to ask our-selves why the principle is as-serted .

4,, 9iu'ittztion to Young &en

To those of you who' are strangers .

to our place, please- accept . this in-vitation to visit our shop:. for . young

men at 545 'Granville St . between -

Dunsmuir and Pender Streets .

We offer the finest in natural

shoulder clothing, _an amazing selec-tion of sweaters, and the most taste-

ful and attractive array - of sports-

wear and furnishings available in thecity for young men.

-

Drop by soon, even our decor is

unique. We think you'll like it . And,we know you'll like the Jack Faison

style of clothes .

ack (Lw., ltd.

545 Granville St MU 14831 '