This just in:
Mergers and Acquisitions (and other economic disappointments) of Canada’s best companies was booming last week.
Our hi-tech firms just U.S. farm teams?
Markham jewel latest acquisition. Lack of investment support blamed.
Tyler Hamilton, Jul. 25, 2006
CPR chief pooh-poohs takeover rumours
Brent Jang
Globe and Mail Update, 25/07/06
Canada wins softwood lumber case in U.S. court (disputed once again)
Last Updated Fri, 21 Jul 2006
The Canadian Press
BFGoodrich closing tire factory in Kitchener
1,100-employees face job loss
Canadian Press
Published: Thursday, February 02, 2006
Canadians (the people) have always resisted American incursions, militarily, philosophically and economically, in our sovereign affairs. Though for some mysterious reason there are times that the Canadian government has opened its arms to encroaching “Integration”, more often than not in the last 20 years and more deceivingly, if not completely invisible, to the Canadian public.
Mulroney primarily, Chretien, Martin and Thomas d'Aquino, Chief Executive and President of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, all share complicity to a large degree in this drift by either lying, reneging and/or trying to sneek through legislation that Canadians never gave them a mandate to. In this article I am referring to the 'Mulroney Free Trade Debacle' (FTA), NAFTA, Deep Integration and the ‘boiling frog’ technique to stew us. They try to not only sell us the hot tub to luxuriate in, they extol the virtues of this pot as they very gradually turn up the temperature until we find we are cooked.
Having just finished reading “The Fight for Canada” by David Orchard (check it out!) it was news to me that the Canadian history I was taught in grade school was far more than limited to the Battle of 1812. I exaggerate of course but I must admit that paying attention to history was pretty far from my mind, well, others things mattered way back then. I do remember the early French explorers, Cartier, Champlain (French), Hudsons Bay Company (English), General Wolfe (hero) and Montcalm (defeated), Louis Riel (Metis traitor hanged) Brebeuf (missionary murdered and skinned alive by Indians). All else in later grades Canadian history was second to British history, European history and American history (where Manifest Destiny was revealed to me). (Comments in brackets are what I was led to believe.)
The book by David Orchard, “The Fight for Canada”, resurrected from my subconscious, or genetic memory (?), a Canadian history to be proud of, for the most part, and particularly our successes in defending our distinct Canadian values derived from survival through co-operation (for the most part), when the "chips were down", as opposed to survival by genocide and theft. As such, I have revised my grade school notions of Canada’s past.
With courage, cunning and respect amongst the compatriot-allies, English, French and other multinational Canadians, First Nations and the British, Canada was defended from the American obsession with Manifest Destiny.
This is what I read and knew in my Canadian bones that I was proud of:
“If “manifest destiny” is to be stopped, it will have to be done where it has been done before: in 1690, at the rock of Quebec (Count Frontenac) ; in 1775, under the battlements of that same city (Guy Carleton); in 1812/13, on the battlefields of Queenston Heights (Tecumseh, Isaac Brock, Laura Secord) and Chateauguay (de Salaberry, First Nations); in 1864 in Charlottetown (Thomas D'Arcy McGee, Sir John A. Macdonald, Sir Georges-Etienne Cartier, George Brown and so many more ‘fathers’); in 1870, on the plains south of Winnipeg (Louis Riel and Gabriel Dumont); in 1871, in British Columbia (De Cosmos); and in 1949, in Newfoundland (Smallwood). When the chips were down Canadians never failed the test of history. The chips are down today.”
- The Fight for Canada p.243 (comments in brackets mine)
“At so many other critical times in Canadian history, a remarkable individual had emerged.”
- ibid p.110
So what happened after Smallwood?
The big slide seemed to start at the end of the 1970’s with the neo-con ascendancy of Margaret Thatcher, PM of Britain (1979 -1990) , not to mention being preceded one year by “Dallas”, the TV series (1978 - 1991) to get us in the ‘mood’.
But, for the most part, the common thread is during the period of the 80’s and 90’s. Thatcher was on a roll in the early 80’s and so was “Dallas”, the most successful American soap opera in the world. On the heels of this trend to economic growth, conspicuous consumption, pursuit of wealth and happiness, was the American Dream come true - two times over, a Hollywood movie star and President of the United States, Ronald Reagan ((1981 – 1989), famous for financing Bin Laden and the Afgan mujahadeen, Reagan’s “freedom fighters”, and ultimately bankrupting the USSR ending the Cold War. The TV series “Dynasty” (1981 - 1989) jumped on the lucrative bandwagon and bloated the national economy – buy, buy, buy debt is cool! And if that was not to beat all Canada got Brian Mulroney (1984 – 1993) and the TV series, “Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous” (1984 – 1995) in the same year!! Is there no end to this neo-con dream?
It is also important to keep in mind that there were some ‘redeeming’ (sarcasm) qualities to this period I call, “The Age of Excellence”, initiated by a book, “In Search of Excellence” an international bestselling book written by Tom Peters and Robert H. Waterman Jr, first published in 1982. Wall Street/Harvard Business School seemed to interpret the message of excellence in balance sheets and bottom lines, heralding in the epoch of the ‘excellence of the leanest and meanest’. Interestingly enough the book was based on false data, He (Tom Peters) is quoted as saying, "This is pretty small beer, but for what it's worth, okay, I confess: We faked the data." Seems like ‘excellence’ was devolving into shady ethical regions. Signs of more to come: Enron, Worldcom, and other corporate scandals.
Alas, back in Canada, the Mulroney/Campbell Conservatives finally succumbed to a woken up Canada, Trudeau was making much influential noise in his retirement to whom Canadians still turned to. In 1993 and his/her (actually Mulroney retired, plummeting in the polls, and left to Kim Campbell to make the best of a looming disaster) government was humiliatingly thrown out of office with only 2 members surviving of 295 parliamentary seats. The following governments, Liberals under Chretien (and later Martin) were ‘saviours’ to a desperate public clamouring to get out of this FTA and GST as had been promised in the famous Liberal ”Red Book”.
Another interesting event in 1993, George H.W. Bush was voted out and Bill Clinton came to power. Had North America had enough right-of-centre Conservatism? Not really, part of it went underground and distilled into Neo Conservatism and the other part morphed into the Liberals. Clinton disgraced himself with Monica and several years after that, Chretien disgraced the Liberals with Harper making an incredible noise about Ad Scam and Liberal corruption. I don’t know if Martin was disgraced but it seems he did nothing to disgrace himself except by almost submitting to Bush’s version of American Manifest Destiny. Canadians still had the courage to oppose its government and he backed down much to Bush’s disgust. Nevertheless we were sick of the corrupt Liberals and were angry enough to risk teaching them a lesson – a minority government of Harper's neo-con Conservatives. Now we are out of the territory that is covered in “The Fight for Canada” and I would highly recommend it to all before Harper finds a good excuse to get his Conservatives (Note: emphasis on the “his” as he does the talking and not his ministers) a majority government.
To give him his due, He stands head above shoulders in laying out his goals and taking action on them. He means what he says and then more so, he means what he isn’t saying. He reminds me of Mike Harris out-kleining Ralph Klein, and Reagan out-thatchering Thatcher and given Harper’s current unique global profile, he has achieved a reputation of “out-bushing Bush”!
PM's pro-Israeli tilt could cost him at polls
- But Harper is "out-bushing Bush," as Opposition Leader Bill Graham says. Whereas several G8 leaders thought of the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon as outrageously disproportionate, Harper found it "measured."
- A Canadian prime minister thus did not utter a word of protest against the killing of eight Canadians, let alone of nearly 300 other people and the displacement of about 500,000 civilians and the destruction of civilian infrastructure
Haroon Siddiqui, Jul. 20, 2006
rabble.ca
The man is re-defining the power of minority government! It is truly remarkable what he says he’s going to do! And the scariest part is that there is no one on the radar that will stand up to him!
Remember when Trudeau made the statement, “Just watch me.” when he refused to yield to the FLQ demands in the October Crisis? Well at least he represented a majority of Canadians and his feisty leadership style was something he was born with. You either loved him or hated him. Alberta, Big Oil and the Republican Americans hated him but the rest of us loved him. He had magic.
Harper mirrors this attitude towards his opponents but is not concerned with “annoying certain segments of the population”. He also had image consultants and a ‘makeover’ to sell him to the public, also a majority of Canadians didn’t vote for him (“certain segments” = 63%) and then this stunning Rambo attitude makes you wonder how he can say what he says and does. His bravado is backed by something as yet unseen, though I expect it is Bush. Rex Harper has recently described Harper as:
He is, in his personal demeanour, reserved, formal, polite, studious. Almost, in fact, a classic nerd. His personality, insofar as he allows himself to project one in public, is low key to the point of being indistinct. Allow me to tantalize those with long memories: Stephen Harper is more Earl Cameron than Douglas Fairbanks
- Rex Murphy, theglobeandmail .com, July 22/06
I think Harper went overboard, either that or he shares a telephone booth with Clark Kent. I still have hope though. Once again I’ll repeat a quote from Orchard’s book:
“At so many other critical times in Canadian history, a remarkable individual had emerged.”
- ibid p.110
We have pulled together before with great leaders such as, Frontenac, Carleton, Tecumseh, Brock, Secord, de Salaberry, First Nations, D'Arcy McGee, Macdonald, Cartier, Brown, Riel, Dumont, De Cosmos, Smallwood and thousands of others. And no matter what we decide to do there will always be consequences, and even if we stick our heads in the sands there will always be consequences. Canada is still a land of an abundance of natural resources and we are known as a fair generous people and let us accept the consequences of ensuring our own future and not let others create fear, insecurity and decisions for us. We have no less to fear than other courageous and less advantaged nations who are willing and able to stand up for themselves and discover that the consequences were not as dire as others and their own leaders would have them believe.
Harper says he is "Standing up for Canada" but he is not standing up for most of Canada’s people, he is standing up for someone else. If a majority of us stood up for ourselves, once again we would be a nation deserving of it’s good name in the world. Have no doubt that the consequences will be very difficult but I'll leave this with the Dalai Lama from his book "Ethics for the New Millenium":
"It is also worth remembering that the time of greatest gain in terms of wisdom and inner strength is often that of greatest difficulty. With the right approach - and here we see once more the supreme importance of developing a positive attitude - the experience of suffering can open our eyes to reality."
- p.139
Let us hope that when Harper rolls out the 'red carpet' for His Holiness he can hear above the noise of conflict.
Links:
The Fight for Canada by David Orchard
http://www.davidorchard.com/online/2do-index.html
Ethics for a New Millenium by His Holiness the Dalai Lama
http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/1999/9/13_4.html
A change in emphasis
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1153566043901
Harper's approach, he says, has been very different: more personal, more aggressive, more ideological, less nuanced.
"What this suggests is a real revolution in the way foreign policy is conducted," he says. Nossal sees the shift as significant.
"Harper is willing to take a steely-eyed view and not worry about annoying certain segments of the population," he says. "His first eye isn't on risk avoidance."
Bush sneaking North American super-state without oversight?
Mexico, Canada partnership underway with no authorization from Congress
by Jerome R. Corsi
June 17, 2006
WorldNetDaily.com
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=COR20060617&articleId=2663
Manifest Destiny
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny
Thinking the unthinkable about Canada’s future
by Geoff Olson, July 19, 2006
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=OLS20060719&articleId=2761
Manifest Destiny - America the New Israel
http://gbgm-umc.org/UMW/Joshua/manifest.html
- The Joshua Website
http://gbgm-umc.org/UMW/Joshua/joshua3.stm
This page is an excerpt from Joshua and the Promised Land
copyright © Roy H. May, Jr
Exceptional Americans Manifest Their Destiny: And to Hell with the Consequences...
by Jason Miller
June 20, 2006
GlobalResearch.ca
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MIL20060620&articleId=2677
A pattern emerges….
Afghanistan and Iraq are not aberrations in United States foreign policy. Bush and his Neocons are not “a few bad apples”. They may be more malevolent than their predecessors, but they are not the first to advance American corporate and plutocratic interests through lies, propaganda, invasion, and flagrant crimes against humanity. America’s socioeconomic system has engendered and reinforced such pathological behavior for years.
Stephen Harper: A photo-op too far
http://rabble.ca/everyones_a_critic.shtml?sh_itm=05fb2324b649ccfa1ac3362ca04ca3a9&rXn=1&
PM's pro-Israeli tilt could cost him at polls
Jul. 20, 2006. 01:00 AM
HAROON SIDDIQUI
Finally, the struggle to keep Canada's voice distinct and separate from that of the United States is bred in our bones.
But Harper is "out-bushing Bush," as Opposition Leader Bill Graham says. Whereas several G8 leaders thought of the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon as outrageously disproportionate, Harper found it "measured."
A Canadian prime minister thus did not utter a word of protest against the killing of eight Canadians, let alone of nearly 300 other people and the displacement of about 500,000 civilians and the destruction of civilian infrastructure.
No comments:
Post a Comment