grow by reducing the capacity of one or more of its communities regions.
Federalism and Canada’s Goals
The Government of Canada believes, as we are sure virtually all Canadians do, that this country can achieve its goals only under a federal system. Pioneered on this continent, and increasingly accepted throughout the world, modern federalism is a system which enables small and exposed communities to combine into states for their mutual well-being and development — states which are large enough to exist and to flourish in today’s world, while at the same time preserving the integrity of their member communities. Federalism is Canada’s response more than ever before to the challenges of today, as the technology of scale and the limitations of interdependence have come increasingly to threaten the real freedom, the real independence of any community which is small or isolated or exposed. Only men who fail to perceive the compelling pressure upon our country of these external forces would advocate Canada’s dissolution in favour of smaller and more exposed entities.
The Government of Canada rejects both centralization and fragmentation as alternatives to federalism. Centralization, a trend toward a unitary state, would be inconsistent with Canada’s character — with its cultural diversity, with a geography which calls for the extensive decentralization of government, and with the freedom which is characteristic of states where the powers of government are not concentrated in the hands of a few.
The opposite course — a loose association of political units in which the effectiveness of the national government is dependent upon the will of provincial governments — is equally incompatible with Canada’s goals. It would jeopardize the ability of the federal government to contribute to rising living standards for the people of Canada; it would weaken the willingness of individual Canadians to contribute toward the well-being and progress of their fellow citizens in other provinces; and it would threaten the very existence of our country in a world where size as well as excellence count in the struggle for economic, technological and cultural achievement.
Canadian federalism must be a balance between these extremes, and we should expect to find this sense of balance expressed in our constitutional arrangements. We should expect to find a sense of balance in the constitutional guarantees of the rights of Canadian citizens including their linguistic rights — balanced as to the rights of individuals and their obligations to one another and to society, and balanced as to their rights as members of one of Canada’s linguistic communities and their concern for those who are members of the other. We should expect to find central institutions of Canadian federalism capable of ensuring a balanced repre-
16
“Only men who fail to perceive the compelling pressure upon our country of these external forces would advocate Canada’s dissolution in favour of smaller and more exposed entities.” In fact, only traitors would “envision” it; because the “dissolution” of the country by any means is unconstitutional and high treason. Pearson (and Trudeau) moreover intend to “dissolve” it by mass immigration to dilute the major founding communities out of existence. This is a form of dissolution, and is treason.
“[T]his country can achieve its goals only under a federal system” — notice the indefinite article “a federal system”. Pearson is not talking about the Constitution under which he usurped office; he is talking about “a” constitution, any constitution, and “federal-ISM”, a form of government, as wide and vague as the wind, because he and Trudeau and their fellow Reds are restructuring Canada to fit into the new “interdependent” Communist world government.
“[W]ith a geography which calls for the extensive decentralization of government” — Pearson is apparently referring to intended future “extensive decentralization” into “radically revalorized” “municipal institutions” as planned in the Communist PQ’s 1972 manifesto. His pretense elsewhere of not “dissolving” Canada is a farce.
Notice Pearson’s repeated use on this page of the word “balanced”. Balance or “proportionality” will come to be the new factor imposed on Canadian social, legal and political life by the incoming Charter (which appears to be Communist boilerplate) and is JEWISH, not a principle of British-Canadian nor of French-Canadian institutions.