Archive | January 2014

Iceland – ‘A Strong Model for Resistance to the Globalist Technocracy’

The super banks moved in to swallow their prey – ‘the tiny nation of Iceland’

‘Iceland was bankrupt’

The mainstream global media ignored them

The Icelandic Krona (Kr) was losing all its value on the world markets

The Icelanders surrendered in the face of all the challenges; and began paying blackmail money – right?

‘Wrong’

Why? The Icelanders had a ‘higher vision of themselves’ than the one being imposed upon them.

Action: ‘The Icelanders rose up as one’

The Icelanders got up and ran to their parliament in Reykjavik – ‘and threw out their government’

The Icelanders are a strong model for any country responding to the language trickery of the Technocracy

The Icelanders can be your model…

Warning.  First, you need to awaken from your sleep .  Second, you must die to your ego.

Technique: Mobilise (non-violently) in your home city (this is your neighbourhood; your investment)

Note: the challenge is not really the banks; it’s my heart’s love for mammon; and failure to love my neighbour as myself

Decide now – ‘before a loaf of bread costs you a day’s wages’

And Now: Iceland

 
We have to nationalize the banks. We have to get rid of the government. We need to have access to the internet seen as a human right. We need to have a new Constitution,” said Birgitta Jonsdottir, founder of the Icelandic Pirate Party. Jonsdottir, a lifelong political activist and  recently re-elected member of the Icelandic parliament was describing the four central demands of the new political revolution sweeping Iceland since the financial collapse. “We can create power and be the government and be the media. If Iceland can do it, you can do it.”

The struggle in Iceland is ongoing, but the nation’s people have achieved monumental results in a relatively short amount of time due to the nature of their movement building. They managed to arrest and  jail the bankers who wrecked the economy. When the government privatized public banking institutions to their friends, essentially  for free, and made the people pay for their bailouts, the people threw them out of office and  refused to give the banks their money. And since Iceland only recently achieved independence from Denmark  in 1944, their boilerplate constitution had never been updated. The movement in Iceland successfully used direct democracy to  crowdsource a new constitution via Facebook and Twitter, and that crowdsourced constitution was widely supported by the people as the official model for a new constitution.

While Iceland’s politicians have since  ignored the will of the people, a budding new political force in Iceland is building a movement in parliament to change that. We can learn from Iceland and accomplish similar goals here.

1.  Strive For Unity

Even though American and Icelandic cultures are different, the populism recently galvanized by Occupy can achieve the same goals that Iceland achieved if we organize around similar unifying principles. We have to first unite around class lines rather than fake ideological constructs. When we come across divisive issues like guns and abortion, we have to acknowledge that while we may have different opinions, we should instead find ways to agree on more unifying issues.

Example: Strive for unity and solidarity when coming across someone of different ideological leanings. If they say the government spends too much money, agree with them and then add that the U.S. spends way too much on maintaining an imperial military presence, and on an intrusive police and surveillance complex that only serves to violate our civil rights. If they bring up a divisive issue, tell them while you may have disagreeing opinions on that one issue, the other root causes of our problems should be addressed first and foremost. Remind them that it only serves those abusing their positions of power when the people are fighting one another instead of questioning their elected officials.

2.  Turn a Few Central Demands into Goals

To achieve unity, we need to center around just a few key goals. In Iceland, the Pirate Party’s demands were fourfold: nationalize the banks, take back the government, establish free speech and access to the internet as human rights, and a write new constitution. The demands should be similar here – we should nationalize the Fed, declare a constitutional convention, declare this government illegitimate and elect new representatives, and allow free access to information for everyone. These must be part of a new political platform that can unite the political left and right against the corporate and financial interests that are holding our country hostage.

Example: Keep it basic. For starters, let’s agree on a constitutional convention to address the most pressing issues, like corporate special interests and banks owning our government. Let’s agree on an end to the police state that has proven it’s more concerned with violating civil liberties than  preventing terrorism. Let’s agree on an end to private banks  controlling our money supply and economic policy. And surely we can agree that the big banking institutions should be  broken up and banksters jailed for  defrauding millions of people out of their homes and savings. Let’s start there.

3. Be the Banks

Even at the local level, we can take power back from Wall Street by taking over city councils and state legislatures. Any local or state government can issue public bank charters, like  North Dakota has been doing since the early 20th century. With enough initial capital invested by the community, a public bank can store all tax revenues from the government and start to make loans on their initial deposit base. And unlike Wall Street, these banks won’t charge obscene interest rates on an entrepreneur trying to get a small business loan, a student applying for a college loan, or a homeowner trying to get a mortgage. The bank’s profits are returned to the people to be used on schools, healthcare and infrastructure updates.

Example: The community of Vashon Island, Washington, created a public bank that merged with the Puget Sound Cooperative Community Credit Union, and now 16% of the population has  invested $20 million in the public bank. Bill Moyer, cofounder of the Vashon-based  Backbone Campaign, who serves on the board of the new credit union, told me the community embraced it so much that they had even driven a JPMorgan Chase bank out of business several years ago, and those bank employees now work at the credit union. <

4. Be the Government

Birgitta Jonsdottir, Noam Chomsky, and David Cobb of Move to Amend all identify themselves as pragmatic anarchists. They perceive  anarchy as nonviolently questioning the legitimacy of any authority or hierarchy, and empowering people through direct democracy. But unlike hardline anarchists, they see electoral politics as a tool for social change in movement building. In Iceland, Jonsdottir’s movement fought for a central goal of online freedom through grassroots organizing, recognizing inherent value in art, music and creativity, and having a unifying platform for their foray into electoral politics. In the last election, Iceland’s Pirate Party got 5% of the vote and  gained 3 seats in the 63-seat Icelandic Parliament.

Example: Here, we’re already starting to finally hear revolutionary talk in the U.S. Senate. Don’t take my word for it – watch any of the videos of Senator Elizabeth Warren grilling the government’s bank regulators in committee hearings for failing at their jobs. She’s gotten dumbfounded reactions from SEC and Treasury Dept. officials when asking them how HSBC, Europe’s largest bank, didn’t face criminal charges for  laundering money for the incredibly violent  Sinaloa drug cartel in Mexico. She got  Ben Bernanke to say the big banks should be broken up. And she introduced a bill that would make  student loan interest rates drop to the same preferential interest rate that the criminal banks get. She may even seek the presidency.

“I was one of the first people to start saying Elizabeth Warren should run for president,” Rolling Stone investigative journalist Matt Taibbi told me at the 2013 Public Banking Institute conference. “I don’t think she can be bought out.”

Taibbi later talked about his experience with open and transparent government – Bernie Sanders inviting him to come spend a month with him, while he was still a Vermont congressman, to see all of the process for what it was. Sanders has since become one of the most populist members of the U.S. Senate, speaking regularly about the growing  economic inequality in the U.S., and one of the  most outspoken defenders of Social Security.

“I pitched the story to my editor, and he was like, ‘Oh, Bernie Sanders? He’s the one who cares, right?'” Taibbi said.

5. Crowdsource a New Constitution

Birgitta Jonsdottir said she believed in  Thomas Jefferson’s words that it was necessary for every next generation to rise up and revolt, as power is destined to corrupt those who have it. She says this revolutionary mindset also applies to the constitution, because the needs and goals of each new generation are different from the last as the world and its people constantly adapt to new events and face new challenges. Iceland did this by organizing communities at local gathering spots like pubs and cafes. Then they accepted submissions for constitutional revisions via social media, which she says is one of the reasons the internet must remain completely free. The Pirate Party is determined to force Parliament to allow the people’s new constitution to become law.

Advertisements

Detroit is America’s Future

European Austerity Hits America: Time to Suffer

by John Stanton October 7, 2013

“The Government will neither propose nor implement measures which may infringe the rules on the free movement of capital. Neither the State nor other public bodies will conclude shareholder agreements with the intention or effect of hindering the free movement of capital or influence the management or control of companies. The Government will neither initiate norintroduce any voting or acquisition caps, and it will not establish any disproportionate and non-justifiable veto rights or any other form of special rights in privatized companies. No further special rights will be introduced in the course of future privatization projects.”Memorandum of Understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality, 9 February 2012, EU and Greece“Due to the high economic financialization, more than half of the profits in the real economy come from the returns of financial activities. If we exclude the factor of virtual economy, the U.S. actual GDP is about 5 trillion U.S. dollars in 2009, per capita GDP about $ 15,000.”Dagong, Surveillance Report for Sovereign Credit Rating of the United States of America.

“Game Over”, so to speak. The dark times are here in America. You are on your own. The federal-state-local governments are broke. No more benefits for hungry children, homeless veterans and civilians. No more full-time employment with benefit packages. Stagnating wages and income inequality are the norm. But Hey! Let’s cut taxes.

Austerity means that Capital will now be allowed to flow uninhibited through the United States of America. National Parks and forests will be privatized or sold off to financiers. America’s national museums—normally offered free of charge to the public—will be privatized and admission fees instituted. Public schools are for sale. Art is for sale. People are for sale. The infrastructure is for sale.

Just take a look at the plight of Detroit, Michigan right here in the good old USA. You are looking at the future of America.

Like the Locusts described in the Bible, Capitalist Locusts will rape and pillage the United States. They will rejoice in the suffering of the nation. “Then from the smoke came locusts on the earth and they were given power like the power of scorpions of the earth…They were allowed to torment them for five months, but not to kill them, and their torment was like the torment of a scorpion when it stings someone. And in those days people will seek death and will not find it. They will long to die, but death will flee from them.”(Revelation 9:3-10)

There is a bright side though. Since most Americans will be stripped of tax breaks or benefit and denied wage increases they will soon be competitive with low wage workers in Asia and South America. Americans with a steady job and a full health insurance benefits—normally defined as the Middle Class—are fearful of monetary ruin and homelessness. This state of fear is compounded by a broad, anxiety ridden American national security consciousness. The bargain made by Americans with their government over the past 12 war-years goes something like this: “Alright, I will sacrifice some of my rights enshrined in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights if you—US, State and Local government/corporate contractors—can guarantee my security.”

US, State and Local governments are a sham. They and their corporate/private contractors who run the national/economic security machinery are not able to hold their part of the liberty-for-security bargain. Sandy Hook, the Boston Marathon Bombings, and 16,000 homicides a year testify to that. In this dark American environment, as in much of Europe, this question needs to be asked, “Isn’t selling off social programs, cutting wages, robbing pensions, shutting down government programs to help children a form of terrorism?”

The Gun Ownership Debate: ‘Don’t Propagandize Me – I’ll Do My Own Math’

1. Does a ‘Higher’ Rate of Gun Ownership Mean ‘More’ homicides? You decide.

2. The United States has the highest rate of private gun ownership , yet it does not have the highest per capita gun deaths

3. A ‘higher’ proportion of private gun ownship does not mean a higher number of proportionate gun deaths:

Gun Ownership / Gun Deaths Infographic (‘Researchers Only Please’):

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/28/guns-ownership-around-the-world-graphic/

Ignore: ‘Disarm Regular citizens – Gain Monopoly of Force’

Warning: Do not look up ‘Relationship of School Shooters to Pharma Industry’

Useful Sample of Western Countries Private Gun Rates and Numbers:

United States — Gun Facts, Figures and the Law

Federal firearm legislation is limited (below). Many municipalities and all states regulate gun use with their own local law (Go To). More US jurisdictions will be added as resources allow.

Number of Privately Owned Firearms

The estimated total number of guns (both licit and illicit) held by civilians in the United States is 270,000,0001 to 310,000,0002

Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population

The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in the United States is 101.052 3 1 firearms per 100 people

Number of Privately Owned Rifles

In the United States, the number of rifles in civilian possession is reported to be 110,000,0002

Number of Privately Owned Shotguns

In the United States, the number of shotguns in civilian possession is reported to be 86,000,0002

Number of Privately Owned Handguns

There are reportedly 114,000,0002 handguns in civilian possession in the United States

Number of Privately Owned Firearms – World Ranking

In a comparison of the number of privately owned guns in 178 countries, the United States ranked at No. 14

Rate of Privately Owned Firearms per 100 Population – World Ranking

In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 178 countries, the United States ranked at No. 11

Proportion of Households with Firearms

ChartIn the United States, the percentage of households with one or more guns is reported to be
2012: 34.45 6 7 2010: 32.3 2008: 36.0 2006: 34.5 2004: 37.3 2002: 36.4 2000: 34.3 1998: 36.7 1996: 43.4 1994: 44.0 1993: 45.5 1991: 43.7 1990: 45.8 1989: 48.9 1988: 43.4 1987: 48.6 1985: 48.0 1984: 48.5 1982: 48.9 1980: 50.8 1977: 54.0 1976: 49.7 1974: 47.9 1973: 49.1

Proportion of Households with Rifles

ChartIn the United States, the percentage of households with one or more rifles is reported to be
2012: 20.58 2010: 19.4 2008: 25.2 2006: 20.4 2004: 21.0 2002: 22.2 2000: 21.6 1998: 22.5 1996: 25.8 1994: 27.3 1993: 25.7 1991: 27.8 1990: 27.8 1989: 29.6 1988: 27.3 1987: 30.0 1985: 31.4 1984: 29.6 1982: 32.5 1980: 31.2 1977: 33.5 1976: 30.5 1974: 28.4 1973: 30.8

Proportion of Households with Shotguns

ChartIn the United States, the percentage of households with one or more shotguns is reported to be
2012: 21.49 2010: 19.7 2008: 25.4 2006: 20.3 2004: 20.0 2002: 23.2 2000: 20.0 1998: 22.1 1996: 27.2 1994: 27.1 1993: 29.7 1991: 29.0 1990: 28.6 1989: 30.6 1988: 26.4 1987: 30.9 1985: 30.3 1984: 28.7 1982: 32.7 1980: 33.0 1977: 34.8 1976: 30.5 1974: 29.0 1973: 29.0

Proportion of Households with Handguns

ChartIn the United States, the percentage of households with one or more handguns is reported to be
2012: 21.910 2010: 19.6 2008: 26.2 2006: 20.0 2004: 20.7 2002: 21.0 2000: 20.5 1998: 20.5 1996: 23.7 1994: 26.2 1993: 26.1 1991: 22.1 1990: 24.9 1989: 26.8 1988: 24.4 1987: 26.1 1985: 24.1 1984: 21.4 1982: 22.9 1980: 24.9 1977: 21.3 1976: 22.2 1974: 20.3 1973: 20.3

Canada — Gun Facts, Figures and the Law

Number of Privately Owned Firearms

The estimated total number of guns (both licit and illicit) held by civilians in Canada is 9,950,0001

Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population

The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Canada is 23.82 firearms per 100 people

Number of Privately Owned Rifles

In Canada, the number of rifles in civilian possession is reported to be 3,500,0003

Number of Privately Owned Shotguns

In Canada, the number of shotguns in civilian possession is reported to be 2,600,0003

Number of Privately Owned Handguns

There are reportedly 1,100,0003 handguns in civilian possession in Canada

Number of Privately Owned Firearms – World Ranking

In a comparison of the number of privately owned guns in 178 countries, Canada ranked at No. 124

Rate of Privately Owned Firearms per 100 Population – World Ranking

In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 178 countries, Canada ranked at No. 131

Number of Licensed Firearm Owners

The number of licensed gun owners in Canada is reported to be 1,830,5425

Rate of Licensed Firearm Owners per 100 Population

The rate of licensed firearm owners in Canada is 5.426 per 100 people

Number of Registered Firearms

The number of registered guns in Canada is reported to be 7,514,3857

Rate of Registered Firearms per 100 Population

The rate of registered guns in Canada is 22.266 per 100 people

Switzerland — Gun Facts, Figures and the Law

Number of Privately Owned Firearms

The estimated total number of guns (both licit and illicit) held by civilians in Switzerland is 3,400,0001

Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population

The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Switzerland is 45.71 firearms per 100 people

Number of Privately Owned Firearms – World Ranking

In a comparison of the number of privately owned guns in 178 countries, Switzerland ranked at No. 222

Rate of Privately Owned Firearms per 100 Population – World Ranking

In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 178 countries, Switzerland ranked at No. 31

Sweden — Gun Facts, Figures and the Law

Number of Privately Owned Firearms

The estimated total number of guns (both licit and illicit) held by civilians in Sweden is 2,800,0001

Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population

The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Sweden is 31.61 firearms per 100 people

Number of Privately Owned Rifles

In Sweden, the number of rifles in civilian possession is reported to be 1,115,0002

Number of Privately Owned Shotguns

In Sweden, the number of shotguns in civilian possession is reported to be 915,0002

Number of Privately Owned Handguns

There are reportedly 155,0002 handguns in civilian possession in Sweden

Number of Privately Owned Firearms – World Ranking

In a comparison of the number of privately owned guns in 178 countries, Sweden ranked at No. 283

Rate of Privately Owned Firearms per 100 Population – World Ranking

In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 178 countries, Sweden ranked at No. 101

Number of Licensed Firearm Owners

The number of licensed gun owners in Sweden is reported to be 781,5212

Rate of Licensed Firearm Owners per 100 Population

The rate of licensed firearm owners in Sweden is 8.774 per 100 people

Number of Registered Firearms

The number of registered guns in Sweden is reported to be 2,096,7983

Rate of Registered Firearms per 100 Population

The rate of registered guns in Sweden is 23.294 per 100 people

Iceland — Gun Facts, Figures and the Law

Number of Privately Owned Firearms

The estimated total number of guns (both licit and illicit) held by civilians in Iceland is 90,0001

Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population

The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Iceland is 30.31 firearms per 100 people

Number of Privately Owned Firearms – World Ranking

In a comparison of the number of privately owned guns in 178 countries, Iceland ranked at No. 1412

Rate of Privately Owned Firearms per 100 Population – World Ranking

In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 178 countries, Iceland ranked at No. 151

Israel — Gun Facts, Figures and the Law

Number of Privately Owned Firearms

The estimated total number of guns (both licit and illicit) held by civilians in Israel is 500,0001 2

Rate of Civilian Firearm Possession per 100 Population

The estimated rate of private gun ownership (both licit and illicit) in Israel is 7.31 firearms per 100 people

Number of Privately Owned Firearms – World Ranking

In a comparison of the number of privately owned guns in 178 countries, Israel ranked at No. 813

Rate of Privately Owned Firearms per 100 Population – World Ranking

In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 178 countries, Israel ranked at No. 791

Number of Licensed Firearm Owners

The number of licensed gun owners in Israel is reported to be 296,2084 5

Number of Registered Firearms

The number of registered guns in Israel is reported to be 403,0003

Rate of Registered Firearms per 100 Population

The rate of registered guns in Israel is 5.986 per 100 people

Globalist Milner Group Hand-Picked its Own to Guide Canadian Ship

A couple centuries ago, and for some, more recently, your own family would have been ‘illiterate.’ In contrast, you possess skills and resources they could only have dreamed of.  Willing to use what you’ve been given – ‘today’?

The article below is an old yet present world connecting-the-dots we all need to revisit.  For within we learn how the ‘Milner Group’ has influenced both your Canadian society and your identity; including the grooming of our prime ministers; and our governor generals – to meet a desired end.

The article details the use of free education from ‘Rhodes Scholarships’ as a carrot for picking out the cream of each new Canadian generation and then molding them for Globalist servanthood. These grads are then returned to govern over the rest of us. Canada has also been used in an interloping way for bringing the United States, which had won ‘a measure of liberty’ in 1776, back into the Imperial fold. The disappearing away of the Atlantic Ocean and the forming one superstate in North America and merging this with Britain and Europe. See ConFab Banff. One would wish this article was mere sci-fi genre. ‘Yet, as you will find, it is not.’

This article is about a eugenicist circle seeding its own; and using their “green-doctrine” to pied piper us down a road into Malthusian depopulation [genocide] and into the cyber-bio manufacturing of Huxlian supermen.

The relationship between Blood-Eugenics and Environmentalism will become clearer through this reading.

See: “Huxley’s role as President of the British Eugenics Society (1959-1962) also overlapped his co-creation of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).”

You shall see that ‘the mask of democracy’ is being used for the few to rule over the many; and ‘in plain view.’

‘Read and research further to form your own conclusions, if you are not afraid.’

British Dictatorship or the American System Part II:  Milner’s Perversion Takes over Canada

By Matthew Ehret-Kump

As between the three possibilities of the future: 1. Closer Imperial Union, 2. Union with the U.S. and 3. Independence, I believe definitely that No. 2 is the real danger. I do not think the Canadians themselves are aware of it… they are wonderfully immature in political reflection on the big issues, and hardly realise how powerful the influences are… On the other hand, I see little danger to ultimate imperial unity in Canadian ‘nationalism’. On the contrary I think the very same sentiment makes a great many especially of the younger Canadians vigorously, and even bumptuously , assertive of their independence, proud and boastful of the greatness and future of their country, and so forth, would lend themselves, tactfully handled, to an enthusiastic acceptance of Imperial unity on the basis of ‘partner-states’. This tendency is, therefore, in my opinion rather to be encouraged, not only as safeguard against ‘Americanization’, but as actually making, in the long run, for a Union of ‘all the Britains’.” [1]

-Lord Alfred Milner, 1909

Prologue

Canada’s history has remained clouded in misinformation and outright lies for over 200 years, while basic truths which were once well understood by leading statesmen in Canada a century past are now treated as little more than myth or “conspiracy theory”. Yet as the above quote written by the pen of Lord Alfred Milner indicates, the crafting of the Canadian identity has been bought for the price of a national soul. The greatest obstacle to Canadian sovereignty today is found in the fact that Canada’s synthetic identity has been constructed over the past decades with the intention of obstructing the establishment upon this earth of a world of sovereign republics, which was and still is the outgrowth of the success of the American Revolution. To do so, we must investigate how the Anglo Dutch oligarchy has played through such institutions as the Rhodes Trust, Fabian Society, and Round Table Movement. These structures have played a key role in mis-shaping every key standard of economic, political, cultural and scientific behaviour which defines the Canadian System and associated identity to this day.

Part one of our story focused upon the creation of these institutions, and their methods of penetrating their networks throughout influential institutions of Canada from 1865 to 1943, and the evolution of the Round Table into the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA) in 1919. American branches were created in 1920 with the Council on Foreign Relations and Institute of Pacific Relations, while a Canadian branch was established in 1928 with the Canadian Institute for International Affairs (CIIA). Key Canadian patriots resistant to the RIIA’s plans were also introduced in the form of “Laurier Liberals” O.D. Skelton and Ernest Lapointe, both of whom aided in influencing the highly malleable Prime Minister William Mackenzie King towards the Canadian nationalist cause, greater cooperation with American Patriots such as Franklin Roosevelt and away from the RIIA’s plans for world government under the League of Nations. With the mysterious deaths of Skelton and Lapointe in 1941, all such resistance melted away and Canadian foreign policy become fully infected by Rhodes Trust/ Fabian agents of the CIIA.

This second segment will address the important 1943-1972 destruction of humanist potential leading up to the reforms implemented by CIIA-assets Lester B. Pearson and Pierre Elliot Trudeau in their role in advancing Milner’s program for a new synthetic nationalism.

CLICK HERE FOR PART I

The Attack on Post-War Potential Begins 1945-1951

By the end of the war, Canada’s productive capacity had risen to unimaginable heights and the vision of unbounded progress free of imperial monetarism was not far off from realization. The relationship between Canada and the United States was at an all time high, with exploding trade, and purchasing power that had multiplied threefold from 1939 to 1956. The authority and power won by C.D. Howe was continued into the following 12 years of Canadian progress first, as Minister of Reconstruction (1944-1948) then as Minister of Trade and Commerce (1948-1957). When Howe realized that his resistance to Canada’s participation in the unjust Korean war of 1950 would not work, he changed gears, and took advantage of the situation by renewing his broad war powers, once again allowing himself to lead Canada’s economy top down, resulting in the great projects with America such as the St Lawrence Seaway, the Avro Arrow CF-105 supersonic interceptor, the TransCanada-U.S. natural gas pipeline and especially the civilian use of nuclear power shaped by Canada’s unique CANDU technology. [2]

The secret to Canada’s progress during and after the war continued to be the National Research Council (NRC), re-organized and rehabilitated after years of incompetence under its former President General Andrew McNaughton. The NRC was a flexible top down organization run by one of Howe’s brightest engineering students C.J. Mackenzie who went on to become the first President of Atomic Energy Canada Ltd (AECL).

With similar mission-oriented organizational structures having organically formed in the USA during war, the NRC was 8-a-Howe Mackenzie Steacycelebrated and studied as a model for countries the world over. The leaders of this institution fought not only to advance nuclear power in Canada in order to escape the limits of fossil fuels and accelerate the next breakthrough to thermonuclear fusion, but also led the fight to provide their technology to underdeveloped countries such as India and Pakistan which were yearning to break free of their British colonial masters [3]. The NRC also successfully led breakthroughs in radio astronomy, oceanography and industry. Its basic objective can be summarized in the following model:

(1)  Maximize the density of discoveries within a cross country system of self-financed and self-organized intramural NRC laboratories.

(2)  Translate those discoveries into new technological applications and machine tools.

(3)  Apply these technologies as efficiently as possible into the industrial productive system to increase the productive powers of labour.

(4)  Force university curricula and behaviour to adapt by such creative upshifts as quickly as possible ensuring that no fixed/formulaic patterns of thought could encrust themselves upon the minds of students or professors.

Dexter White and Wallace

The Cultural/Economic/Scientific factors of Canada’s post-war dynamic were on a new trajectory of true independence, founded on a commitment to progress which the British Empire now mobilized all of its energy to destroy. The great fear of Lord Milner laid out in 1909 of “union with the United States” guided by unbounded scientific and technological progress was now underway, peaking with a 1948 call for a North American customs union advocated by Howe and leading FDR statesmen in the United States that had not yet been purged by the Cold War witch hunt led by Senator McCarthy. Sadly, now under the vast influence of the British Empire’s mind control, one of Mackenzie King’s last acts in office was the destruction of this proposition. After King’s 1950 death, C.D. Howe continued on as Minister of Trade and Commerce under King’s successor Louis St. Laurent (1948-1957) [4].

8-a-Truman and ChurchillHaving ensured that FDR’s postwar vision for a world of sovereign nation states would not come to fruition after his untimely death in April 1945, the first of a series of ideological barrages was hammered into Canadian and U.S. policy beginning with the installation of Wall Street tool Harry Truman as President, and with him the advent of the “Truman Doctrine” centering on the Rhodes-Milner agenda of Anglo-American Empire guided by Churchill’s design of “British brains and American brawn”. While FDR was still alive, his allies led by Harry Dexter White and Henry Wallace were capable of fending off John Maynard Keynes’ attempts to structure the Bretton Woods agreements according to his own twisted logic of a one world currency steered by the Nazi affiliated Bank for International Settlements and Bank of England (of which Keynes was a Director). However, after FDR’s death, the last major beachhead of resistance to British recolonization melted.

The Anglo-American “special relationship” was quickly established by Truman bringing American foreign policy quickly under the control of the RIIA networks beginning with Truman’s unnecessary utilization of two of America’s only three nuclear bombs on the already defeated Japan which set the foundations for the Korean War [5]. This policy was ushered in by Sir Winston Churchill’s 1946 “Iron Curtain” speech in Fulton, Missouri which officially opened the age of the Cold War, setting a fear based dynamic of tension that resulted in a purging of FDR allies from positions of influence, and an influx of British operatives into high prominence the world over.

The Chicago Tribune’s Cassandra Sounds the Alarm

In 1951, the enormously influential Massey-Lévesque Royal Commission attempted to first launch an attack upon the “American invasion” of media (print, radio, television and cinema) which was taking over the Canadian psyche. One of the primary demands of the 1951 report called for an emergency ban on U.S. media  to keep “dangerous” American cultural influences from contaminating Canada’s British traditions with the following words:

“Few Canadians realize the extent of this dependence… our lazy, even abject imitation of them [American institutions] has caused an uncritical acceptance of ideas and assumptions which are alien to our tradition”.  [6]

What were these types of alien ideas which concerned the British Empire so much at this important period of historical change? To get a sense of the fear which Massey and his British masters felt regarding the “low brow” American journalism being read by Canadians, it is useful to take a sample of a 1951 article written by journalist Eugene Griffin “Canada Offers Fine Field to Rhodes’ Wards” published as one of a series of 16 explosive articles between July 15-31 in the Chicago Tribune:

“Scholars and other British educated Canadians are in a unique position to serve Britain through Canada’s influence on Washington as a next door neighbor of the United States. Canada acts as a connecting link between England and the United States, helping to hold the neighboring republic in line with the dominion’s mother country… When Gen. MacArthur displeased Britain and Canada by his efforts to win the Korean war, Canada’s Oxford educated minister for external affairs, Lester B. Pearson, complained that American-Canadian relations had become “difficult and delicate”. MacArthur was fired the next day… Pearson’s foreign office staff is packed with Rhodes scholars. There are 23 among 183 staff officers, or one out of every eight, who were educated at Oxford university, England, on the scholarships created by Cecil Rhodes, empire builder and diamond mogul who wanted the United States taken back into Britain’s fold [see Box]… Other Canadian foreign office members also were educated in England, although not as Rhodes scholars. Pearson went to Oxford (St. John’s, 1922) on a Massey scholarship, endowed by a Canadian millionaire… Norman A. Robertson, a Rhodes scholar (Balliol, 1923) sometimes called the most brilliant member of the British trained inner circle in the government’s East Block, headquarters of the prime minister and the foreign office, is another important figure in Canada’s relations with Britain and the United States. He is clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the cabinet, and has been undersecretary of state and High Commissioner to Britain.”[see appendix for reprint of entire article].

8-a-Rhodes Scholars and Rhodes

Little could the writers of the Chicago Tribune then know that during the very summer of their writing, a young Fabian, having just returned home from his conditioning under Harold Laski’s mentorship at the London School of Economics was working at his first job in the Privy Council Office (PCO) under the watch of Rhodes Scholar  and Privy Council Clerk Norman Robertson. That young Fabian went by the name Pierre Elliot Trudeau [7]. Working alongside Trudeau at the time in the PCO included his supervisor Gordon Robertson, a young Oxford man named Marc Lalonde and his friend Gerard Pelletier, all three of whom went on to play prominent roles in Trudeau’s powerful inner cabal 20 years later.

8-a-Trudeau Lalonde PelletierUpon returning to Montreal in 1951, Trudeau came under the control of F.R. Scott, Rhodes scholar and co-founder of the League of Social Reconstruction (LSR) 20 years earlier. Trudeau’s celebrity as an enemy of Quebec Premier Maurice Duplessis was cultivated by these Rhodes networks through his publication Cité Libre which served to 1) brainwash young intellectuals according to the journal’s existential Catholic “personalist” philosophy of French philosophers Jacques Maritain and Emmanuel Mounier on the one side and 2) rally a populist attack on the Vatican-influenced Union Nationale (UN) government of Duplessis, Daniel Johnson Sr. and Paul Sauvé on the other [8]. This provincial government had made its renown not only for resisting British control over its destiny, but had also been a beachhead of resistance against eugenics laws then being implemented across the continent [9]. Trudeau worked in tandem with the creepy network of social engineers run from Laval University by Father George Henri Lévesque (co-chair of the Massey Commission), which exploded onto the scene in 1960 as the “Quiet Revolution” overthrow of the Union Nationale after two untimely heart attacks of UN leaders beginning with Duplessis in 1959, then followed by Paul Sauvé a mere nine months later.

Another personality whose celebrity was being created in tandem with Trudeau’s during the 1950s included Trudeau`s schoolboy chum, and British Intelligence asset René Lévesque, whose popular CBC radio show Point de Mire served to rally public opinion against the Duplessis regime and prepare the culture for the radically liberalizing reforms of the Quiet Revolution [10].

Huxley’s UNESCO Doctrine and Eugenics

The guidelines for the post-1945 path to a New World Order were laid out clearly by Sir Julian Huxley in his 1946 UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy:

“The moral for UNESCO [United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization] is clear. The task laid upon it of promoting peace and security can never be wholly realised through the means assigned to it- education, science and culture. It must envisage some form of world political unity, whether through a single world government or otherwise, as the only certain means of avoiding war… in its educational programme it can stress the ultimate need for a world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization.” [11]

To what end would this “world political unity” be aimed? Several pages later, Huxley’s vision is laid out in all of its twisted detail:

8-a-Julian Huxley“At the moment, it is probable that the indirect effect of civilization is dysgenic instead of eugenic, and in any case it seems likely that the dead weight of genetic stupidity, physical weakness, mental instability and disease proneness, which already exist in the human species will prove too great a burden for real progress to be achieved. Thus even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that is now unthinkable may at least become thinkable.” [12]

How could “the unthinkable” application of a practice which Hitler had made repulsive to humanity, become adopted by a society which had a faith in progress and unbounded creativity so incompatible with social Darwinism? Huxley’s own life’s decision to become a founding member of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) in 1961 alongside Bilderberg Group founder Prince Bernhard and Prince Philip provides us a clue. It is no coincidence that Huxley’s role as President of the British Eugenics Society (1959-1962) also overlapped his co-creation of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

The only way such a genocidal policy as eugenics, masquerading as “objective” science, could be readopted by humanity was through the dissociation of mind from matter, via the breaking of “subjective values” from “objective facts”. The method chosen was a worshipping of the ugly and irrational in the aesthetics such that judgement could no longer be governed by a sense of truth and beauty, while the “cold and logical” was separated from the artistic and kept in its own cold dark mechanical universe accessible only through statistical methods of thought. This is how the modern school 8-a-Keynes Massey and Clarksystem has been divided into two different synthetic worlds of Arts and Sciences. The operatives chosen to carry out this policy were Massey’s ally Sir Kenneth Clark and Sir John Maynard Keynes who led the scientific management of culture in Britain [13]. The mental cage chosen to schism “values” from “facts” in managing human affairs was named “systems analysis”.

A major goal of the Massey Commission and its UNESCO design, was to create structures that would elevate the Humanities and Social Sciences to the highest pedestal of knowledge (and financing), paving the road for the later acceptance of systems 8-a-Club of Rome King Pecceianalysis to be used in the management of society. The person assigned to impose “systems” planning into political practice was the Lord President of the British Empire’s Scientific Secretariat Alexander King working through the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC), (later to become the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 1961). Under the OECD, King became Director General of Scientific Affairs and went on to co-found the Malthusian Club of Rome alongside Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei in 1968 [14].

The CIIA’s Royal Commissions Deconstruct and Reconstruct the Synthetic Soul of Canada

The RIIA directed its various branches, and Rhodes Trust networks around the world to implement the New Eugenics project outlined by Julian Huxley in 1946. In Canada, the implementation process occurred between an interval of 24 years and took the form of four CIIA-directed operations whose immense influence cannot be overstated. They were:

1) The Royal Commission into the Arts and Letters (1949-1951),

2) The Royal Commission on Economic Prospects for Canada (1955-1957),

3) The Royal Commission on Government Organization (1960-1963), and

4) The Senate Committee on Science Policy (1968-1972).

Each commission was designed with the effect of establishing new structures of thought upon policy makers in the domain of culture, economic and science policy which induced the blind acceptance of satanic policies of Malthusian eugenics masquerading as “environmentalism”, or the “science” of saving nature from civilization. A society imbued with a moral sense of Judeo-Christian ethic and love of progress, and strengthened by the Roosevelt-led fight against Hitler, would never accept Eugenics. A fact well known to the Anglo-Dutch oligarchy.

A Royal Commission, as the name implies is an invention of the British Empire which has been used for centuries in order to create the perception that top down structural changes in all aspects of government were “scientifically” and objectively achieved. The truth is that conclusions of such Commissions have always been pre-decided by the ruling oligarchy long before the Royal Commission’s experts were even formed. Usually spanning 2-3 years of studies by a clique of pre-selected “experts” in a given field, Royal Commissions produce voluminous data sets, hundreds of thousands of pages of information, and then summarize their findings and prescriptions in the form of several summary reports consisting of a 1-2 thousand pages. The sheer quantity of data associated with such reports is supposed to dissuade anyone from giving any respect to other countervailing opinion which challenge the Commission’s findings, with the assumption that unless everyone commits two years of their lives to a specialized study funded by millions of dollars and thousands of man hours, then their opinion could not be worth anything.

The Massey-Lévesque Commission: The First Wave of Attack 1949-1951

In Canada, Milner-protégé Vincent Massey was assigned the unique responsibility of leading the implementation of this multifaceted program which struck in a series of Royal Commissions organized entirely by agents of the CIIA. Massey’s role was carried out as the chairman of the already mentioned Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences (1949-1951) alongside his co-chairman Father George Henri Lévesque, a social scientist and Dominican priest who is rightly credited as the intellectual godfather of the 1960-1966 “Quiet Revolution” which secularized the province of Quebec and brought in OECD educational reforms. All proposals sought by the end of this two year study were directed by the UNESCO agenda which Sir Julian Huxley laid out publicly in 1946 [15].

8-a-Father levesque Lamontagne LajoieAs Massey’s former assistant Karen Finlay wrote in The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey and Canadian Sovereignty, Massey’s lifelong governing principle was “principle of disinterest” whereby Massey argued that it is “intellectual detachment” which empowers someone to truly judge the aesthetic value of art [16]. Under the logic of UNESCO and Massey’s satanic formula, it is assumed that since personal “subjective” values pollute one’s judgements on “the beautiful and good’, it is only by disassociating oneself from pre-existing values, that we gain the ability to judge “good” and “bad” art in an “objective” and thus “true” fashion.

The severing of the subjective from the objective thusly also forces the denial of any pre-existing standards by which anything could be judged as intrinsically good or bad, and thus a ripe field of moral relativism can be harvested.  Evil may then run wild without any fear of being challenged. In other words, this is a complete denial of the existence of universal physical principles

The structures against universal physical principles which were proscribed in the Massey-Lévesque Commission involved the creation of a more powerful Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, a National Film Board, a National Library, a National Art Gallery, a National Art Bank, a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Federal financing of the education system in the humanities and social sciences, and Canada Council for the Arts modelled on Keynes’ semi-autonomous, government financed British template [17].

The Federal financing of the education system was vital for the Commission since it was the only way which OECD and UNESCO reforms could be ushered in without provincial resistance.  Pre-existing teaching practices emphasizing the Greek Classics, which treated students as if they had a soul, could only be dismantled efficiently under this top down restructuring, applied during the 1960s in which moral relativism, Darwinism, and “new math” increasingly replaced anything of substance. The horrendous explosion of modernist, abstract and banal art generously sponsored under the structures of Massey’s Canada Council (f.1957) gives one a sick sense of the spiritual disease with which the imperialists (and sadly their victims) are infected. Both federal control of education and the arts were necessary to pervert the principles guiding both, and establish the mental/spiritual infrastructure supportive of satanic programs of Malthusian population reduction as the new environmentalist eugenics was designed to be.

To amplify this spiritual disease, the Massey-Levesque Commission even proscribed the creation of a Canadian honours system such that oligarchical habits could more easily be cultivated in Canada [18]. The creation of the Canada Council took much longer than Massey would have liked, and its postponement was due largely to the resistance of the l’Union Nationale government of Quebec and its Vatican-steered Catholic Church. The powerful elements within the Quebec Catholic Church were among the only organized forces on the continent that had competently identified the satanic intentions underlying the OECD-UNESCO reforms being infiltrated into global educational and political systems.

It were for such reasons that Father Lévesque and his ideological offspring of social engineers and technocrats at the University Laval had become the bitter enemies of the Union Nationale government. The implementation of OECD 8-a-IRDPeducational reforms as prescribed by the Massey-Lévesque Commission were a primary focus of the Quiet Revolution. The task of applying the reforms was given in large part to two Rhodes Scholars: Jean Beetz and the creator of the Quebec Ministry of Education, Paul Gérin-Lajoie. Soon-to-become Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau played a key institutional role in this process as well in the Law Faculty at University Laval alongside Lalonde and Beetz.

With the creation of the Canada Council, the “scientific management” of culture, so necessary to elevate the ugly and banal into a position of respectable authority was ensured and the ground was thus laid for the next steps of the fascist takeover of Canada.

The Gordon Commission: The Second Wave of Attack 1955-1957

“Many Canadians are worried about such a large degree of economic decision-making being in the hands of non-residents [because it] might lead to economic domination by the United States and eventually to the loss of our political independence.”

-1957 Gordon Commission Report [19]

The Massey-Lévesque Commission was followed systematically, by the Royal Commission on the Economic Prospects of Canada (1955-1957) chaired by Walter Lockhart Gordon, chairman of the National Executive Committee of the CIIA and head of the largest accounting firm in Canada Clarkson-Gordon Management. The Commission claimed that Canada’s sovereignty was threatened by American ownership of Canadian enterprise, and that drastic action to cut America off from the Canadian economy were absolutely necessary.

As historian Stephen Azzi demonstrated in his 2007 study Foreign Investment and the Paradox of Economic Nationalism [20], the claims made by the report were entirely fraudulent. The massive upshift in quality of life, electricity and social 5-d- Gordon Teachinservices due to American capital in Canada was not even addressed in the voluminous Gordon Commission reports. Thus the only relevant purpose of the report was to cultivate a culture of anti-Americanism, and establish political structures limiting foreign ownership of Canadian markets, and lower the potential living conditions of Canadians [21]. The biggest farce embedded in the Gordon Commission quote above, of course, which Azzi misses, is that there never was any political independence for Canada to lose to Americans in the first place, since it had never freed itself from the political and economic clutches of its British Mother.

Gordon went onto implement his own proposals after leading the cleansing of the Liberal Party of all C.D. Howe Liberals between 1957-1963 [22], becoming Finance Minister (1963-65) under his long-time puppet-on-loan from Vincent Massey, Lester Pearson, whom he himself selected as early as 1955 to run for leadership of the Liberal Party [23]. After his policies as Finance Minister failed, Gordon took over the post of President of the powerful Privy Council Office (1966-68) from his predecessor Maurice Lamontagne.

These two commissions were designed to “sound the alarm bells” against Canadian vulnerability to an imminent American imperial takeover of Canada’s culture and economic resources. Although no evidence was ever presented that American imperialism had any intention to take over Canada, the prescriptions to save Canada from economic and cultural Americanization involved both a negative and positive component: Negatively, each proposed the rapid implementation of quota systems/ tariff systems to limit foreign input of capital and media, while positively, proposing centralized structures to coordinate culture and economic management by a vast London-steered bureaucracy.  The already long controlled mass media outlets of Canada glamorized their findings and created a mass fear in the popular culture.

The effect of these two reports also amplified anti-Americanism to such a feverish pitch that a Canadian identity could be established on a fear-based negation, whereby Massey, Lévesque and Gordon following the prescription laid out by Lord 8-a-Lester Pearson and flag fooleryMilner in 1909 crafted a blueprint for a “New Nationalism”. This counterfeit nationalism was wrapped up with a brand new national anthem and Canadian flag upon Lester B. Pearson’s Liberals becoming the government in 1963.

The Delphic perception of Canada’s sovereign status outside of the actual control of the British Empire had to be established for the next wave of Canada’s post-1963 role in trapping nations into the imperial spider’s web of International Monetary Fund conditionalities.

Unlike the flags of most countries, the noble Maple Leaf, as many Canadians have still yet to realize, has neither now nor  ever signified anything whatsoever.

The Glassco Commission: The Third Wave of Attack 1960-1963

Once the Canadian cultural inferiority complex was amplified sufficiently by fear of American imperialism, the collective neurotic mindset was now ready for the next wave of the CIIA’s onslaught unleashed with the Royal Commission on Government Organization (1960-1963) chaired by Walter Gordon’s partner at Clarkson-Gordon, John Grant Glassco. Glassco was the son of William Grant, and nephew of Vincent Massey. This commission brought in a monetarist/accounting framework for managing a bureaucratic structure under the logic of “letting managers manage”. As its mission statement laid out: “This report examines the adequacy of existing arrangements for making economic and statistical services available for the formulation of policy, for administrative decisions, and for the service and enlightenment of the public.” [24]

A little later, the report laid out the belief that all problems with inefficiency in achieving policy objectives was due to the fact that there are too few economists and social scientists in controlling administrative positions of government: “..very little can be done, or ought to be done, to discourage the movement of economists into higher administrative posts . Talented administrators are just as scarce as economists, and it would be a mistake for the public service to deny itself any fruitful source of good administrators .” [25]

In preparation for Finance Minister Walter Gordon’s 1963-65 implementation of his 1957 Royal Commission financial proposals, Glassco laid out the new necessary controlling structures to allow Gordon to cut off Canada from American investments, and choke off as much of America from Canada as possible when he wrote:  “The immediate concern is the development of a competent central economic staff within the Department of Finance, not to take over work done elsewhere but rather, under the direction of the Minister of Finance, to attend to the development of general economic policy for the government as a whole .” [26]

Finally, Glassco pushed for the UNESCO policy of amplifying the social sciences while attacking the “hard” sciences like physics and biology with the following: “The relatively slow development of economic research in Canadian universities, due to shortage of funds, bears on both the quantity and quality of the future supply of trained economists. While the government is spending scores of millions annually to support research in physics and biology, little financial assistance is given to research in the social sciences” [27]

The edict of “letting managers manage” was necessary if the appearance of democracy were to be maintained while the absolute control of society by an accounting priesthood was to be preserved. The commission’s reports called for the adoption of “horizontal” (aka: bottom up) planning which was to replace the archaic belief in “vertical” (aka: top down) intentions from elected officials to the process they were elected to preside over, as was the common practice of the NRC and its administrators.

Ironically, while bottom up planning according to accounting standards was pushed, central control through the Treasury Board was also promoted by Glassco. This prescription would ensure that only a small coterie would ever fully have their minds on the whole, while every other department were too busy focusing on hyper-specialized compartmentalized parts to think about the whole.

While the NRC and its leadership such as C.J. Mackenzie, the student of the late C.D. Howe and the late Dr. E.W.R. Steacy were vigorously attacked by the Glassco Commission, the overhaul which Glassco prescribed involved the centralized planning of science policy according to budgetary constraints under the Treasury and a Science Secretariat. These positions were to become completely subservient to the control of bureaucrats specialized in accounting and monetary economics degrees advanced through the “social sciences and humanites” programs outlined by UNESCO. With this new system of management and its anal adherence to Planning-Programming-Budgeting (PPB), the problems associated with the governments such as those of C.D. Howe and later John Diefenbaker (1957-1963) which intended to actually get something done for the improvement of the nation, could not occur [28]. This systemic reform was not an end in and of itself however, and was merely a necessary stepping stone towards actualizing a system of thinking which would accept the linear language of “Systems Analysis” as a guide for conceptualizing the management of humanity under laws of entropy, constrained by the limits of fixed resources.

The Glassco Report’s prescriptions for policy overhaul were to be implemented fully by Trudeau several years later.

As a reward for a job well done, Glassco was promoted from Executive Vice-President of Brazilian Traction, Light and Power Co. to President in 1963.Under this position, the overthrow of the nationalist Brazilian President João Goulart  was effected via a military coup d’état [29]. The free market pillaging of Brazil created a model applied even more aggressively a decade later with Henry Kissinger’s orchestration of the Pinochet regime’s coup in Chile.

The Lamontagne Commission’s 1967-1973 Program for Genocide

The last wave of this CIIA-run Milner Project for a new nationalism (at least insofar as major structural reforms were concerned), took the form of the Senate Special Committee on Science Policy (1967-1972), more popularly known as the Lamontagne Commission after its chairman Senator Maurice Lamontagne [30]. This commission had the distinction of being the most transparent in its satanic intention to ban creativity and impose Malthusian constraints un-naturally upon the management of human affairs. The report is especially relevant as it begins with the acknowledgement of the American System of Political Economy, which it then attempts to destroy by lies and ridicule:

“During the early part of the 19th century, Great Britain and to a lesser extent France were fast developing industrial technology and finding ways of fruitfully exploiting science. Later on the United States moved from technical backwardness to such a level that it could begin exporting to the “advanced” European countries manufacturing techniques and machine tools so different that the whole approach became known as the “American System”. An English productivity team that visited the United States in 1853 to study this ‘system’ concluded that “men served God in America, in all seriousness and sincerity, through striving for economic efficiency.” [31]

By identifying the fact of creativity’s relationship to technological advance, and technological advance’s relationship to increased growth and productivity, embedded self consciously in the American System founded by U.S. Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton and his mentor Benjamin Franklin, Lamontagne, a student of George Henri Lévesque and key member of the Gordon Commission twelve years earlier, established his commitment to defend the principle of empire. The current leading defender of the American System Lyndon LaRouche has subsequently described contrast 8-a-Franklin Hamiltonbetween the forces active today the following terms:

“The most readily accessed example of the contrast of good to evil in modern times, has been typified not only by the goodness of the anti-monetarist principle on which the original Constitution of the United States of America was premised; it was also the same principle which had been adopted earlier by the Massachusetts Bay Colony. That principle, which modern society should trace back to such Renaissance geniuses as Nicholas of Cusa, has been demonstrated through the crucial quality of a leading contributing role specific to the included role of U.S. Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton.” [32]

Lamontagne’s allegiance to the monetarist forces opposing the American System, can be clearly seen when Lamontagne let his true intention shine forth when he wrote in vol. 2 of his 3 volume report:

“It is becoming apparent, however, that nature is not as passive as we thought, that it has its own laws and can revenge itself, once its own equilibrium has been disrupted… Nature imposes definite constraints on technology itself and if man persists in ignoring them the net effect of his action in the long run can be to reduce rather than to increase nature’ potential as a provider of resources and habitable space… But then, an obvious question arises: How can we stop man’s creativeness?” [33]

Thus, Lamontagne has established that it is man’s creativity itself that must be stopped if the supposed “fixed” equilibrium of nature will remain unchanged by technology! This is the root morality of the current global environmentalist religion which Lamontagne was at the forefront of unleashing.  Since Lamontagne admits that his “ideal” solution of destroying man’s creative impulse is itself an impossibility, like the Zeus of Aeschylus’s Prometheus Bound, he never the less finds a resolution to this problem by introducing a perverse alternative when he wrote:

“How can we proclaim a moratorium on technology? It is impossible to destroy existing knowledge; impossible to paralyze man’s inborn desire to learn, to invent and to innovate… In the final analysis we find that technology is merely a tool created by man in pursuit of his infinite aspirations and is not the significant element invading the natural environment. It is material growth itself that is the source of conflict between man and nature” [32]

Thus creativity and its fruits of technological progress are acceptable only IF they reduce the assumed conflict between man and nature posited by Lamontagne!  “Bad” technology in Lamontagne’s formulation, has the effect of increasing humanity’s powers of productivity and thus increase the entropy in his fixed ecosystem-based economy. If, on the other hand, we promote technologies of a low energy flux density form, such as windmills, solar panels and biodiesel, which lead to the reduction of man’s powers to exist, then technology can be defined as a “good” thing.

8-a-Anti EntropyThis is the genocidal intention of the British Empire expressed in all its nakedness, which has been the primary target of American statesman and founder of the science of Physical Economy, Lyndon LaRouche. By the time of the Lamontagne Commission, LaRouche had already risen to world prominence as the only effective challenger to the British monarchy`s genocidal agenda of lowering the energy flux density underlying society`s material and intellectual existence. LaRouche has subsequently fought for 50 years to defend the truth of mankind`s scientifically verifiable relationship to the universe, as being governed by everything which Lamontagne and his Anglo-Dutch masters hate: mankind`s necessity for unbounded scientific and technological progress expressed as the unending obligation to increase the productive powers of labour.

The concept which LaRouche has used to guide mankind`s mandate for progress, is the increase of energy flux density of cycling of atoms through the biosphere and human economy, shaped by upgrades of new platforms of technologies. Compare LaRouche`s view on energy-flux density with the cynical rubbish promoted expressed by Lamontagne above:

“The rates of increase of energy-flux density in the concentrations of increasing rates of intensity of power per capita, must be now be restarted, and also accelerated; otherwise, the death-rates throughout the world are now already accelerating at rates which must be identified as a global trend in planetary human genocide… The nominal trend in rising rates of genocide is not the only aspect of this threatening trend. The inability to maintain a correlated set of rates of increase of the energy-flux density of the human persons per capita, must be correlated with the falling rate of intellectual development of the typical U.S.A. or European citizen. The so-called “green doctrine” is a doctrine of practice which results in not only human genocide, but a decadence in the mental powers, and also the relative sanity, of the individual human being.” [34]8-a-Pop Growth

What LaRouche is describing is the simple fact that without a constant increase of energy-flux density of the system and each individual within that system, then the domination by a green doctrine which sets “value” upon forms of energy and behaviour which reduce mankind’s power to accomplish work is destined to exterminate the population trapped within that system. The effect of destroying the means to increase the energy flux density of the system (ie: Creativity) means that a policy of genocide is the only alternative for a ruling oligarchy!

How would such a logic of genocide be accepted by citizens and administrators who are animated by the inspired faith in scientific and technological progress as was still largely the case during the late 1960s? For this task, Lamontagne had already let the cat out of the bag when he wrote in vol. 1:

“If general science policy is to accomplish its crucial role effectively, it must also develop a system of control, to make sure that the strategy will be respected in the detailed decision-making process and review mechanisms… Perhaps more than any other sector of policy, science policy requires the careful application of systems analysis.” [35]

With the linear language of systems analysis, the minds of those trying to manage any intrinsically non-linear process became sufficiently crippled with statistics and compartmentalization that their ability to see either 1) a whole top down process, or 2) the tragic consequences of their own foolish beliefs, was destroyed. Similar to the logic adopted ten years earlier with the state-run Canada Council which provided top down grants to “certain types” of art, music and social theories compatible to an oligarchy, though abhorrent to natural human sentiment, the Lamontagne Commission called passionately for a centralized financing and planning body in order to fund those “types” of applied technologies and pure research which were compatible with the genocidal aims of an oligarchy, but would never be accepted by a society imbued with even a little common sense and human compassion. In this spirit Lamontagne exclaimed that:

“The creation of a dynamic and balanced science organization is an urgent necessity. A main center of coordination and financing of science policy is extremely desirable. The time has come to create a federal department of scientific affairs”. [36]

Lamontagne is referring of course to the creation of the Canadian Ministry of State for Science and Technology (MOSST) which was modelled on the British system, and kept under the full control of the Treasury Board and its balanced accounting system. MOSST and the Treasury Board redirected Canadian science into the dark ages and its new emphasis on “ecosystems management” and “conservation” instead of nation building. The “new wisdom” advocated by Lamontagne demanded that science now be shackled to “market demand” instead of future orientation.

Enter Trudeau’s Club of Rome

After the Rhodes Trust-directed ouster of the well intentioned, but incredibly naïve Conservative Prime Minister John Diefenbaker in 1963 [37], all of the measures proposed by these four Commissions were enforced vigorously by Lester B. Pearson and the Rhodes Trust/CIIA networks that had risen to prominence under him, and then fully by Pearson’s replacement… the former Justice Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau in 1968. Along with Trudeau came fellow CIIA-assets from the Privy Council Office Gerard Pelletier, and another disciple of Father Lévesque named Jean Marchand, both of whom were active with Trudeau’s Cité Libre. The `new reformers` of Quebec became the `new reformers` of Canada.8-a-Trudeau new reformers

Under Trudeau, the application of “systems analysis” as a cover for population reduction and fascism were fully carried into the top down management of government on all levels, and the Club of Rome of Alexander King, and his Canadian collaborators such as Maurice Strong, Maurice Lamontagne, Roland Mitchener (former Governor General) [38], Michael Pitfield (Personal Aid to Trudeau and head of Privy Council Office), Alastair Gillespie (Rhodes Scholar, and 1st MOSST), C.R. Nixon (Privy Council Office), Marc Lalonde (Rhodes Scholar, Trudeau advisor and head of Prime Ministers Office), Ronald Ritchie (National Advisor), Rennie Whitehead (Asst. Sec. to MOSST), and Ivan Head (head of Prime Minister`s Office) had set its putrid roots firmly into Canadian soil officially when the Canadian Branch was established informally in 1970 [39].

This nest was directly responsible for the creation of Environment Canada, which had applied systems analysis in order to transform what was once a policy of water and energy development, centered around a national mission, towards

“ecosystems management”. A strict dualism between civilized humanity characterized by change and the “unchanging pure equilibrium” of nature was assumed as law, and with this assumption, a new green religion arose masking its fascist intentions behind a “new Canadian nationalism” centered not around a love of freedom or development, but around a fear of both American and Russian aggressors and unfortunate admiration for Britain.

How the Present Comes from the Future: The Free Choice of the Will is a Matter of Mind

The lies of the past are looking pretty ugly. Shall we find the strength within ourselves as Canadians to look upon this disfigured ugliness which we are told is our heritage, in order to recapture the vision of Canada’s sovereign potential as a great pioneering nation which held the imaginations of men such as Wilfrid Laurier, O.D. Skelton, C.D. Howe and John Diefenbaker? Shall we pick up upon the organic creative evolution that was so scarred and disfigured when Franklin Roosevelt died, and build such long overdue projects as the North American Water and Power Alliance, championed by the Kennedy brothers in the 1960s and Lyndon LaRouche today? Shall we rebuild our destroyed infrastructure along upgraded magnetic levitation train technology powered by advanced fourth generation nuclear thorium reactors and begin to taste the breakthrough of fusion? Shall we let go of the false genocidal notion of unchanging ecosystems and allow ourselves to see human beings as a species above and beyond everything else known in the biosphere, in that we are unique in our power to comprehend, and willfully transform those processes of nature in a way that improves and speeds up their evolutionary progress towards ever higher states of energy-flux density?

That really depends on you.

End notes

(1) Milner to J.S. Sanders, 2 Jan. 1909 cited in “The Round Table Movement and Imperial Union” by John Kendle, University of Toronto Press, 1975, p.55

“(2) CANDU stands for CANadian Deuterium Uranium reactors which use heavy water (in which each atom of oxygen is combined with two atoms of the heavy isotope of hydrogen, deuterium) to slow the fast moving neutrons enough for appreciable absorption and splitting of the nuclei of unstable (“fissile”) isotopes such as uranium-235, without the need to enrich the uranium-235 above its low natural abundance of 0.7 % relative to the non-fissile uranium-238. The absorption of neutrons by the nuclei of relatively stable “non-fissile” isotopes, such as the much more abundant isotopes uranium-238, or thorium-232, transmutates these heavy elements into the chemically distinct but fissile isotopes, plutonium-239 and uranium-233, which vastly expand the potential of nuclear power for mankind.

(3) Canadian scientists such as C.J. Mackenzie and E.W.R. Steacy were integral in shaping the Colombo Plan which served as a conduit in its early days for technology transfers to underdeveloped countries. After America, Canada was the 2nd country in the world to have civilian nuclear power in the form of its NRX research reactor. In the context of President Dwight Eisenhower’s 1953 “Atoms for Peace” program, Canada provided large scale transfers of its nuclear technology to developing countries., first to India, with a contract signed in April 1956 with the CIRUS research center (constructed in 1960), and then soon after to Pakistan with the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant design supplied by G.E. Canada in 1966. Canada helped India  construct two other reactors named RAPP-1 and RAPP-2, but contracts were soon ended for decades due to the creation of nuclear weapons by both countries as an effect of British-manipulated conflict. By the late 1960s, the emphasis on development was shifted from technology sharing and real nation building, towards external monetary aid, and “appropriate technologies” that wouldn’t change the supposed “fixed cultural patterns” of indigenous peoples.  In Canada this imperial re-orientation was overseen by Sir Maurice Strong who was assigned to create the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) in 1968 for this purpose.

(4) St. Laurent and Howe attempted to keep Canada’s dynamic of growth and close relations with the United States as strong as possible throughout their time in office until they were overthrown in a CIIA-run coup of the Liberal Party. St. Laurent shared the Laurier Liberals’ mistrust of the Rhodes Trust networks from an early point in his career, having been one of the first Québécois’ to be offered the Rhodes scholarship in 1907, and rejected “the honour” favouring a Quebec-based education instead.

(5) L. Wolfe, The Beastmen Behind the Dropping of the Bomb, 21st Century Science and Technology, 2005

(6) Massey Report quote cited in Karen Finlay’s “The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey and Canadian Sovereignty”, University of Toronto Press, 2004, p. 218

(7) Trudeau had just returned to Canada from a 500 day long world tour instigated by Harold Laski, a recruiter of young talent and law professor at the London School of Economics who had mentored young Trudeau from 1947-49. Laski was also a leader of the Fabian Society at this time serving as the Head of the National Executive of the British Labour Party.

(8) Maritain and Mounier were part of the “Catholic” variety of the discrete collaborators with Vichy during WWII, after the integrist Pope, Pius XII, had signed a Concordat deal with Hitler. Maritain was an Ultramontane integrist type of fascist who revived Thomas Aquinas with the purpose of instituting a “New Middle Ages” with the collaboration of the Dominicans. Maritain and Mounier were the leaders of the very Catholic “Ordre Nouveau” under Vichy. (See Pierre Beaudry’s Synarchy report on the DOMINICAN FASCIST YOUTH MOVEMENT in Book II: The Modern Synarchy Movement of Empire www.amatterofmind.org/Pierres_PDFs/SYNARCHY_I/BOOK_II/2._SYNARCHY_MOVEMENT_OF_EMPIRE_BOOK_II.pdf .) Maritain was the most important French philosopher of the war years in France and later in America. The entire Maritain, Mounier, and Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange salon at Meudon was anti- De Gaulle, during and after the war. They were “Catholic personalist communitarians” who oriented against individualism and materialism for the benefit of the Revolution Nationale of Petain.

(9) The March, 1946 issue of Eugenical News featured an article called “The Present Status of Sterilization Legislation in the United States” which demonstrates the eugenicists’ anger with the Quebec Church: “The opposition of the Roman Catholic leaders constitutes the greatest obstacle that is encountered in applying, or in acquiring this therapeutic protection. From Maine come complaints that the Catholics of Quebec are moving southward and obstructing the proper use of their sterilization law. From Arizona we hear that no use has been made of their law ‘because of religious objections.’ Three States, Arizona, Arkansas, Nevada, have no institution for the feebleminded or epileptics, though some are cared for in the mental hospitals. Connecticut’s population has a greater proportion of Catholics than any other State having a sterilization law. This accounts in part for the fact that only an occasional operation is being done there.”

(10) Both Trudeau and Lévesque had prominent roles in the 1960-1966 operation with Trudeau working in the Institute for Research into Public Law under Rhodes Scholar Jean Beetz at Father Lévesque`s Université Laval and René Lévesque working as a Cabinet Minister of the Liberal government of Jean Lesage. For more on René Lévesque`s recruitment to British intelligence during WWII, see The Canadian Patriot #5, Feb. 2013.

(11) Julian Huxley: UNESCO Its Purpose and Its Philosophy, 1946, p.13

(12) Huxley, Ibid., p.21

(13) During the War, Britain had centralized its cultural control via the creation of the Council for the Encouragement of Music and Arts (CEMA) founded and led by the Director of Britain’s National Art Gallery, Sir Kenneth Clark. Upon receiving his assignment after serving as fine arts curator at Oxford’s satanic Ashmolean Museum, Clark was made Knight Commander of the Bath in 1938, one of the highest honours bestowed upon high ranking prostitutes of the oligarchy. After the war, CEMA became the Arts Council of Britain, chaired by John Maynard Keynes, a director of the British Eugenics Society until his death. Keynes is on record mere months before his death, exclaiming at a Galton Lecture in 1946 that eugenics is “the most important, significant and, I would add, genuine branch of sociology which exists” [“Opening remarks: The Galton Lecture”. Eugenics Review vol 38 (1): 39–40.] These networks drove the counter-culture operation known as “The Congress for Cultural Freedom’ (CCF)-sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation, the CIA and directed by British Intelligence beginning in 1949. For more on the CCF, see The Congress for Cultural Freedom: Making the World Safe for Post-War Kulturkampf, by Jeff Steinberg and Steve Meyer, published in the June 24, 2004 issue of Executive Intelligence Review, downloadable on http://www.larouchepub.com

(14) In laying out the strategy for his life’s work with the Club of Rome, King wrote in the forward to his 1991 book The First Global Revolution; “The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

(15) Zoe Druick, International Cultural Relations as a Factor in Postwar Canadian Cultural Policy: The Relevance of UNESCO for the Massey Commission, published by Simon Fraser University

(16) Karen Finlay, “The Force of Culture: Vincent Massey and Canadian Sovereignty“, University of Toronto Press, 2004

(17) Anna Upchurch, Vincent Massey: Linking Cultural Policy from Great Britain to Canada, International Journal of Cultural Policy, Feb. 15, 2008

(18) This came to be known as the Order of Canada, instituted in 1967, and quickly followed by a succession of other Canadian honours in the years following. It is vital to understand that the origin of the honours’ authority is derived directly from the British Monarchy, which is legally acknowledged as being the “Fount of All Honours”. This is the fundamental source from which all efficient authority springs up within both the public and shadow governing functions of the British Imperial system.

(19) Preliminary Report Royal Commission on Canada’s Economic Prospects, Toronto: Cockfield, Brown p. 83

(20) Stephen Azzi, Foreign Investment and the Paradox of Economic Nationalism, published in Canadas of the Mind: The Making and Unmaking of Canadian Nationalism in the 20th Century, McGill-Queens University Press, 2007

(21) While Finance Minister Gordon’s measures to impose foreign takeover taxes of 30%, and incentives for Canadian ownership of the economy in order to cut off American capital flows into Canada, the devastating effects to the economy could not be ignored and they were soon disbanded. Many of Gordon’s propositions such as the Canadian Development Corporation to pool capital and buy back Canada would only go into effect during the Trudeau administration 10 years later.

(22) One of those who suffered the purge was C.D. Howe-ally Henry Erskine Kidd, General Secretary for the Liberal Party who refered to the process led by Gordon as “a palace revolution”, as referenced in Stephen Azzi, Walter Gordon and Rise of Canadian Nationalism, McGill-Queens University Press, 1999, pg. 71

(23) “I have a feeling that people would like to follow your star in droves – if and when you decide the time is right to give them the nod.” Cited in Walter Gordon and the Rise of Canadian Nationalism by Stephen Azzi, p.70

(24) Glassco Commission Royal Commission Report on Government Organization, Queen’s Printer, Ottawa Canada, 1962, vol. 3, part 1, p.22

(25) Ibid. p. 22

(26) Ibid., p.33

(27) Ibid., p.33

(28) During a confrontation with the Lamontagne Senate Committee, Secretary of the Treasury Board Simon Reisman described the problem of PPB thus: “PPB may, for all I know, have considerable merit when applied to business operations… the PPB system, however, in more complex situations such as science, breaks down by reason of the general error of its assumption that the outcome of experiments is predictable.” [excerpted from F.Roland Hayes’ Chaining of Prometheus: The Evolution of a Power Structure for Canadian Science, University of Toronto Press, 1973, p.19]

(29) Robert Chodos, Let Us Prey, Jarmes Lorimer and Company publishing, 1974, p.26

(30) Lamontagne, a disciple both of Father Levesque at Laval University and Joseph Schumpeter at Harvard, collaborated with Walter Gordon as a member of the 1955 Royal Commission on Economic Prospects for Canada before going on to become personal secretary to Lester Pearson in 1958. Previous to his chairmanship of the Senate Committee, Lamontagne was President of the Privy Council Office (1964-65), before being made Senator by Lester B. Pearson.

(31) Maurice Lamontagne, Report of the Senate Special Committee on Science Policy, vol. 1, p.22

(32) Lyndon LaRouche, On the Subject of Oligarchy, Executive Intelligence Review, July 26, 2013

(33) ibid.

(34) Report of the Special Senate Committee on Science Policy, vol. 2, p.33-34

(35) Maurice Lamontagne, Report of the Senate Special Committee on Science Policy, vol. 1, p.240

(36) Lamontagne, 29 March 1969, Senate Debates, cited in F. Roland Hayes’ The Chaining of Prometheus, pg.186

(37) Matthew Ehret-Kump, Diefenbaker and the Sabotage of the Northern Vision, The Canadian Patriot #4, Jan 2013

(38) Former Governor General Roland Michener, himself a Rhodes Scholar, also received the Royal Victorian chain by Queen Elizabeth II for services rendered to the British Empire. This honour is the highest given out by the Monarchy, of which only 14 have ever been distributed, and only two in Canada`s history. The other chain was given to Vincent Massey.

(39) The official formation of the Canadian Club of Rome took place only in 1974. Although Trudeau was an enthusiastic participant at Club of Rome meetings, even sponsoring the 1971 Conference in Montebello, Quebec which gave birth to the work “Limits to Growth” the following year, he did not become an officially registered member until out of office. Trudeau remained close friends with Alexander King, and according to former U.S. Ambassador Thomas Enders, Trudeau referred “frequently to Club of Rome thinking on the need for new political and moral approaches”. Trudeau’s renown as a Club of Rome representative was so great that after Aurelio Peccei’s death in 1984, Rhodes Scholar J. Gordon King revealed that Trudeau was even asked to become Peccei’s replacement… a post which he turned down due to political reasons at that time. [see The Limits to Influence: The Club of Rome and Canada 1968-1988 by Jason Churchill, Waterloo, Ontario, 2006, p.138.]

Appendix 1

Cecil Rhodes Calls for the Recapturing of America

In 1877, while laying out his agenda for the formation of a secret society to recapture Britain’s lost colony of America and the submission of “inferior” races (ie. non anglo-saxon) under the control of a renewed British Empire, Cecil Rhodes, wrote his Confessions of Faith in which the following explicit mission statement can be read:

“I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race. Just fancy those parts that are at present inhabited by the most despicable specimens of human beings what an alteration there would be if they were brought under Anglo-Saxon influence, look again at the extra employment a new country added to our dominions gives. I contend that every acre added to our territory means in the future birth to some more of the English race who otherwise would not be brought into existence… I look into history and I read the story of the Jesuits I see what they were able to do in a bad cause and I might say under bad leaders.

Why should we not form a secret society with but one object the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilised world under British rule for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire…

We know the size of the world we know the total extent. Africa is still lying ready for us it is our duty to take it. It is our duty to seize every opportunity of acquiring more territory and we should keep this one idea steadily before our eyes that more territory simply means more of the Anglo-Saxon race more of the best the most human, most honourable race the world possesses. To forward such a scheme what a splendid help a secret society would be a society not openly acknowledged but who would work in secret for such an object.”

Rhodes’ agenda had manifested itself upon his death in 1902 with the creation of the Rhodes Scholarship Trust whose trustees included Lord Rothschild, and Lord Alfred Milner. The Canadian imperialist George Parkin had even left his post as headmaster of Upper Canada College in Toronto, in order to serve as the 1st head of the Scholarship Trust from 1902-1922. Both Parkin and Milner went on to mentor a young Vincent Massey.

Work Camps of 1930s Canada – ‘Returning Soon’

 https://i0.wp.com/0.tqn.com/d/canadaonline/1/0/C/C/gdwasootchcamp.jpg

Wasootch Unemployment Relief Camp

At the height of the Great Depression, thousands of jobless men were shunted off to federal relief camps in the Canadian wilderness. The camps became a focal point for a generations anger and a lasting legacy of a government’s ineffectiveness during the era.

“The Tory government of R.B. Bennett had decided a role for the single unemployed. They were to be hidden away to become forgotten men, the forgotten generation. How naïve of Mr. Bennett.”

Like Liversedge, thousands of young, single men had few options during the economic crisis of the 1930s. Many of them criss-crossed the country by train looking for work or a decent meal.

By 1932, there were an estimated 70,000 unemployed transients. Many of the men congregated in cities and frustration was growing among their ranks.

As the number of jobless transients grew, the federal government feared they could threaten public order. Bennett’s military chief, General Andy McNaughton, warned that the unemployed could launch a Communist revolt.

“In their ragged platoons, here are the prospective members of what Marx called the ‘industrial reserve army, the storm troopers of the revolution.'”

McNaughton suggested that the men be sent to rural relief camps where they could neither vote nor organize. The camps were voluntary, but those who resisted could be arrested for vagrancy.

Run by the Department of Defence, the camps were located in remote areas such as northern Ontario and interior B.C. The men cleared bush, built roads, planted trees, erected public buildings in return for room, board, medical care and 20 cents a day. They were paid one-tenth of what an employed labourer would make doing the same work.

While the Bennett government hoped the camps would ease the unrest, they became a focal point for the men’s anger. The young men were frustrated that the government could not provide them with meaningful work.

Militancy increased in the camps.

“In those bunkhouses,” Liversedge wrote, “There were more men reading Marx, Lenin and Stalin than there were reading girlie magazines.”

Bennett had unwittingly provided basic training camps for the army of unemployed.

In April 1935, the men’s unhappiness boiled over. Fifteen hundred men from the British Columbia relief camps went on strike and congregated in Vancouver. The move launched months of cross-country protests, which culminated in a riot in the streets of Regina.

A year later, with a change of government, the unpopular relief camps were shut down. Some of the men found temporary work but most returned to their wasted lives in the cities.

In all, 170,248 men had stayed in the camps.

What Will P3s Mean for Canada? ‘New Zealanders Can Tell You’

We revisit the past exploring the matter of P3s (PPP/ Public-Private Partnerships) given all three governments levels in Canada are constantly discussing P3s as a ‘cure-all’ for ubiquitous budgetary cash shortages.
 
P3s are not a new idea; they have been suggested as a way for various governments to pursue various projects and invite cash from corporations to get the ball rolling.
P3s are marketed as a cost-efficient and productive mechanism in which to build and grow municipal, provincial and national interests; yet without paying the full tag for the overall costs of those project dreams.
Yet as we allow government staffs to bring out their blueprints, have we the electorate been told of what P3 has resulted in – in other countries?
 
Let us quickly journey back to this documented ’15 year Free-Market Experiment’ in New Zealand :
 
 
Published on Tuesday, August 15, 2000 in The National Post (Canada)
New Zealand’s Vaunted Privatization Push Devastated The Country, Rather Than Saving It
by Murray Dobbin
 
It has been so long since anyone in the business press has praised the New Zealand “miracle,” it’s almost as if we imagined the whole thing. But, of course, the current silence is really no mystery. The 15-year free market experiment has been an unmitigated disaster. The suffering caused among ordinary New Zealanders is well known: the highest youth suicide rate in the developed world; the proliferation of food banks; huge increases in violent and other crime; the bankruptcy of half the farms in the country; the economic disruption of hundreds of thousands of lives; health care, education and other social services devastated by the mad marketplace scientists.But, of course, neo-liberal ideologues don’t hold much truck with the human consequences of their experiments. So let’s examine those things they do care about. The revolutionaries promised to tear down the “debt wall,” unleash spectacular economic growth, spur foreign investment and productivity, create enormous new wealth and new and better jobs.

They failed on every count. Instead of a brave new economy, they delivered an economic version of Frankenstein’s monster. The initial wave of changes — deregulation, privatization, tariff elimination — was justified by the infamous debt crisis. This was a ruse all along. Even Sir Roger Douglas admitted this when I interviewed him in 1992. The “crisis” New Zealand faced post-election in 1984 was a currency crisis brought on by Mr. Douglas himself.

As for the debt in 1984, it was NZ$22-billion, but after 10 years of experimenting, it had doubled to NZ$45-billion — in spite of the sell-off of NZ$16-billion in state enterprises. Today, it has finally returned to 1984 levels, but only through more Crown asset sales.

And economic growth? In the years 1985-92, average economic growth in the OECD countries totalled 20%, while in New Zealand it was negative, at -1%. The promised creation of enormous new wealth went into reverse: Real GDP in 1992, at 5%, was below the 1985-86 level. A burst of growth from 1993 to 1995 petered out, and the economy steadily declined until it dipped into negative territory in 1998, posting the fourth-worst growth in the OECD.

The transformation of the economy was supposed to spur foreign investment, but it mostly meant a feeding frenzy on domestic corporate assets. In 1993, the proportion of GDP in investments was just 70% of what it was in 1984.

The restructuring of the economy failed most dramatically on the unemployment front, and the country has never managed to get back to anywhere near the 1984 level of 4%. The “workless and wanting work” figure peaked at more than 18% in 1993. In 1999, that figure had been reduced only to 11.2%.

The radicals also promised increases in productivity, but again, they failed to deliver. After eight years of restructuring and massive labour deregulation, New Zealand’s productivity began a steady decline in comparison with its neighbour, Australia. From 1978 to 1990, the rates had been similar. The gap steadily increased between 1990 and 1998, with Australia posting a 21.9% increase and New Zealand just 5.2%.

Only the wealthy in New Zealand could see any benefit from this destructive exercise in social engineering. Between 1984 and 1996, the top 10% of income earners measurably increased their share of total income. The lowest 10% lost 21.6% of their 1984 income. More than 50% of the total working population had lower real income in 1996 than in 1984.

There are lessons from New Zealand, but they do not involve adopting that tortured country as a model.

The first lesson is that the unfettered application of ideology is inevitably destructive — not just to democracy, social peace and equality but to the economy. Even as the revolution continued to deliver disastrous results, its promoters claimed it was because it had not gone far enough.

The second lesson is that parliamentary democracy Anglo-Saxon style has proven extremely vulnerable to the ravages of ideology. A virtual executive dictatorship can implement policies that are never even debated during elections — as happened in New Zealand in 1984. The only thing that stopped the zealots from going even further was the introduction of proportional representation in the early 1990s and the subsequent election of minority governments.

And that leads to the last lesson: Globalization is not inevitable, nor is it irreversible. The current New Zealand government (a coalition of a chastened Labour party and the left-wing Alliance) is unfortunately still committed to signing free trade and investment agreements. But it is reversing many of the most destructive policies. Included in this rethink are a reversal of the privatization of Accident Compensation Insurance; an immediate rise in pensions; a halt to the sale of public housing and a commitment to rebuilding the public housing stock; the appointment of a review committee on electricity pricing; the freezing of tariffs on clothing and footwear; and the re-recognition of unions.

The pity is that New Zealanders had to suffer through so much in the first place.

Murray Dobbin is a freelance writer and author based in Vancouver.