Another Trudeau Essay, Research Paper
Pierre Trudeau, former Prime Minister of Canada, was once
described as "A French Canadian proud of his identity and
culture, yet a biting critic of French-Canadian society,
determined to destroy its mythology and illusions". He has
also been identified as "A staunch, upholder of provincial
autonomy holding the justice portfolio in the federal
government". Such cumulative appraisal and observation
made by past fellow bureaucrat provides high testimonial for
the ex-Democratic Socialist. This critique will establish and
dispute the prime directives that Trudeau had advocated in
his own book written during the years 1965 to 1967. The
compilation of political essays featured in his book deal with
the diverse complexities of social, cultural and economical
issues that were predominant in Canadian politics during the
mid 1960’s. However, throughout my readings I was also
able to discover the fundamental principles that Trudeau
would advocate in order to establish a strong and productive
influence in Canadian politics. Born in 1921, Trudeau
entered the world in a bilingual/bicultural home located in the
heart of Montreal, Quebec. His acceptance into the
University of Montreal would mark the beginning of his
adventures into the Canadian political spectrum. Early in his
life, Trudeau had become somewhat anti-clerical and
possessed communist ideologies which were considered
radical at the time. Graduating from prestigious institutions
such as Harvard and The School of Economics in England,
Turdeau returned to Canada in 1949 and resumed his social
science endeavors. At this time in Quebec, the province was
experiencing tremendous cultural and political differences
with the rest of the country. The Union Nationale had taken
possession of political matters in Quebec and was steadily
dismantling the socialist essence imposed on the province by
the Federal government. The current Prime Minister,
Maurice Duplessis, found himself battling a religious
nationalist movement that corrupted the very fabric of
political stability in Quebec. The Duplessis faction maintained
their conservative approach towards political reform but
failed to sway the majority of the population into alleviating
with the demands of the Canadian government. The citizens
of Quebec revered their clerical sector as holding ‘utmost
importance’ towards preserving French cultural values and
this did not correlate with the Federal government’s policies
and ideals. Francophones were under the impression that
their own Federal government had set out to crush and
assimilate what had remained of their illustrious heritage in
order to accommodate economic and political tranquility.
Trudeau himself had decided to join the nationalist uprising
with his advocation of provincial autonomy. Ultimately, he
and other skilled social scientists attempted to bring down
the Duplessis party in 1949, but failed miserably in their
efforts. Duplessis buckled underneath the continuous
pressure of French patriotism and was rewarded for his
inept idleness by winning his fourth consecutive election in
1956. Although nothing of significance had been
accomplished, Quebec has solidified its temporary presence
in confederation at such a time. This prompted Trudeau to
involve himself in provincial diplomacy as he would engage in
several media projects that would voice his displeasure and
disapproval with the ongoing cultural predicament in Canada
(this included a syndicated newspaper firm, live radio
programs). "If, in the last analysis, we continually identify
Catholicism with conservatism and patriotism with
immobility, we will lose by default that which is in play
between all cultures…". By literally encouraging a liberal, left-
wing revolution in his province, Trudeau believed that
Democracy must come before Ideology. Gradually, his
disposition would attract many politicians and advocates of
Socialism, and thus it allowed him to radiate his ideology
onto the populace of Quebec. Trudeau makes it clear in his
book that during the early years of the Duplessis
government, he was a staunch admirer of provincial
autonomy, but with the archaic sequence of events following
the conflicts that arouse between Federal and Provincial
matters in Quebec, he had taken a stance on Federalism that
involved security, economic prosperity and centralized
authority. It wasn’t until 1963 when the newly appointed
Premier of Quebec, Rene Levesque, warned that there must
be a new Canada within five years or Quebec will quit
confederation. It was not until 1965 that a man named Pierre
Trudeau entered politics. It is at this point in his anthology
that I was able to surmise the radical and unorthodox
political convictions that the soon-to-be Prime Minister
would incorporate into Canada. His thesis is focused around
pertinent issues which demanded attention at the time. After
he elaborates on the importance of Federalism and how it is
associated with Quebec, the reader begins to interpret the
resolutions he offers and then finds himself comprehending
the dilemma
wake of a constitutional referendum, such knowledge can be
viewed as ironically significant. A defender of civil rights and
freedoms, Trudeau, even as a teenager, was adamantly
opposed to supporting any political theory based on ethnic
tendencies; he makes this clear on an essay in the book
entitled: "Quebec and the Constitutional Problem". He was
convinced that not only the divided jurisdiction of a federal
state helped protect the liberty of its citizens but also that in
fact the economic, social and cultural goods of Quebec can
best be achieved with a Canadian federal state. It seemed
that an archetypal Trudeau Federal infrastructure would be
one where each level of government would function on its
own jurisdiction. In doing so, Trudeau would voice his
admiration for the Bill of Rights and how he would
concentrate on developing a Federal government for the
individual. It was not until 1962 that Trudeau actually began
defending Federalism for what it represented to the average
labourer, but the fact that Quebec seemed to convert
provincial autonomy into an absolute forced him to
reconsider his political stance. Joining the struggling Liberal
party in 1965, his only coinciding proposition with that of his
party was the advocation of an open Federal system.
Nonetheless, it marked the beginning of a political career
that would take him to the heights of power in his dominion.
"My political action, or my theory – insomuch as I can be
said to have one – can be expressed very simply: create
counter-weights". The measure of a man can be traced to his
ideological convictions, and in doing so, I have only started
to realize the prominent role that Trudeau has played in
Canadian politics. He was heralded as a radical, somewhat
of a usurper and definitely a socialist mogul, but what was
clear about Trudeau was his respect and admiration for
liberties of the common man and how they were preserved
from the clutches of Federal policies. This respect would not
be replaced at any cost during his tenure and as he
forecasted the ensuing constitutional dilemma with a very
impartial, non-partisan outlook, he would primarily
concentrate on two factors (economic and linguistic) which
offered practical conclusions without chaotic implications.
Trudeau envisioned himself in power, speculating two
choices he would offer to Quebec; full sovereignty or
maximized integration into the American continent. But what
Trudeau avoided treading upon was the infringement of state
policies on the individual’s rights and freedoms. Many
members of the Federal government believed that Trudeau
did not speak on behalf of French Canadians but that he
substituted their cultural plight with his own theories. This
generated the following response: "If the party does not
agree with my opponents, it can repudiate me; if my
constituents do not, they can elect someone else". Trudeau
maintains that he dedicated his anthology in order for others
to understand the problems that French Canadians faced in
terms of cultural progress, and I am compelled to conclude
that his involvement with the Federal regime may have saved
the country for twenty years…unfortunately, he was unable
to complete the affirmation of his ideology into the French
Canadian scope and thus Canada today is contemplating the
outcome of another constitutional referendum. His failure to
absolve the constitution of any future repercussions with the
masses should not be viewed as a political error, but as an
ideological truth which he exhibited since 1965 (the addition
of the "notwithstanding" clause). Trudeau’s book covers an
immense amount of historical and idealistic content.
Published in 1965, it is fascinating to read and discover how
intently and closely he would follow his ideologies as he
would eventually ascend to the position of Prime Minister.
His reliability would be questionable at the time (based on
limited experience as a politician) but the fact that he had
submerged himself into a field which required innovative and
pragmatic thought led me to believe that his Federalist stance
would eventually be justified in Canadian history. With a
superlative writing style, his use of vocabulary and
terminology aided the reader in understanding his
convictions. Not even this reader expected such a barrage of
political jargon. Recent events in Canada have somewhat
curtailed the ambience dealing with this critique in respects to
the opinions exhibited on behalf of the author and reviewer.
Trudeau takes obvious pride in his ideological perspective of
multicultural Canada, and in doing so one might expect a
partisan, biased array of resolutions. This, however, is not
the case. This book leaves room for educational prowess
without any noticeable weaknesses. Federalism and the
French Canadians is an insightful, ideological anthology that
could be found especially useful to other politics students
who wish to examine the importance of cultural and social
values in a country missing a stable political doctrine (and
perhaps a leader, no less).