Wednesday, March 6, 2024


The Digital Revolution of Artificial Intelligence: Beneficial Economic Creative Destruction or Systemic Dehumanization

 Wednesday March 6, 2024

By Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay, 

Emeritus professor of economics and international finance, Université de Montréal, and of the book about morals "The Code for Global Ethics" and the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire")

"The opening up of new markets, foreign or domestic, and the organizational development... incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one. That process of creative destruction is the essential fact about capitalism."  Joseph Schumpeter (1883-1950), American economist and political thinker of Austrian origin, in his book Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1942.

"Every change is a menace to stability.  That's another reason why we're so chary of applying new inventions. Every discovery in pure science is potentially subversive; even science must sometimes be treated as a possible enemy. Yes, even science." Aldous Huxley (1894-1963), British author of the 1932 futuristic novel Brave New World, ch.16.

"Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards.Aldous Huxley (1894-1963), British author, in his essay 'Adonis and the Alphabet', 1956.

"Our entire much-praised technological progress, and civilization generally, could be compared to an axe in the hand of a pathological criminal.Albert Einstein (1879-1955), German-born theoretical physicist, 1917.

"Artificial Intelligence (AI) is probably the most important thing humanity has ever worked on. I think of it as something more profound than electricity or fire.Sundar Picha (1972- ), chief executive officer (CEO) of Alphabet Inc. and of its subsidiary Google, in 2018.

• Introduction

The digital revolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI), currently evolving very rapidly, is a technological innovation that uses complex computer programs and sophisticated mathematical algorithms. These robotic systems and AI-based models, powered by AI chips and using super computers, can automate repetitive tasks, produce texts and quickly process vast quantities of data, in complementarity with humans.

However, beyond the economic benefits that would result, there is the threat of a gradual replacement of human beings by intelligent robots, in a number of functions and activities that lend themselves to such a substitution.

Such technological advances have great potential to profoundly upend national economies, businesses and societies in decades to come, when new capital investments replace older obsolete capital investments, and some categories of workers would be replaced by intelligent machines that require more specialized workers.

This could even possibly lead to a dystopian 'Brave New World', if autonomous brain-machines, in the next futuristic era, are capable of self-improvement and are able to think by themselves, and possibly, could even learn to program other brainy machines, with hardly any human input.

The global impact of industrial revolutions

All technological inventions produce positive advances but can also be accompanied by various disruptions and negative effects.

For example, the invention of the knife, which can be used to cut bread; but it also enables one to cut someone's throat. Likewise, the invention of dynamite and explosives helped the mining industry, but it also made wars deadlier and increased the destructive power of terrorists tenfold.

The same is true of the discovery of the fission of the atom, which led to the development of nuclear energy. This invention made it possible to produce electricity; it also made it possible to build atomic bombs and destroy entire cities and their inhabitants.

It is difficult to know precisely, in advance, what purpose a new technology will serve, for good or for evil, for economic progress or for human regression.

Questions raised by Artificial Intelligence (AI)

As with any new technology, the AI applications today and their generalization in the future will undoubtedly create winners and losers, and not only in the economic field, but also in politics, geopolitics, social affairs, biology, in arts and even in military conflicts. It is therefore important to assess whether the winners will be more numerous than the losers, or whether it will be rather the opposite, with a small number of successful operators and a large number of expendables.

For instance, what will be the consequences of so-called generative AI models, like Nvidia's AI systems or those of pre-programmed conversational robots, such as those of ChatGPT (Open AI), Copilot (Microsoft) or Gemini (Google), which can generate text, images or other creations? Will they improve the standard of living and the quality of life of the greatest number, or will they allow some to get rich, but render entire categories of workers obsolete and impoverished? In such case, they could end up increasing income and wealth disparities.

Indeed, each new industrial revolution in the past made some successful capitalist pioneers ultra rich. For instance, there was a period in the United States, in the late 19th century, called the era of the Robber Barons. It was a time characterized by rich monopolists (Carnegie, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Mellon, etc.), in the industries of steel, oil, railroads or finance, who crushed competitors, rigged markets, and corrupted governments.

At the political and geopolitical levels, is it possible nowadays that some malicious oligarchies could use such digital machines to better monitor and control people and to more easily launch wars in the future?

All of this is far from being of purely theoretical concerns. The U.S. Pentagon is already planning to use intelligent robots and drones, controlled by Artificial Intelligence, to wage the wars of the future.

The short and medium term and longer term economic effects of AI and the four industrial revolutions since 1760

In economics, the notions of short-term (1-4 years), medium-term (4-9 years) and long-term (10 years or more) can vary, depending on the economic and financial sectors. For the economy as a whole, it is possible to refer to short, medium and longer term economic business cycles. For example, many years passed between the invention of the first giant computer, as large as a building, in 1946, and the innovation of the portable computer on the computer market, in 1977, and then the arrival of Apple's Macintosh computers, in 1998.

The first industrial revolution (1760-1870) began in the mid-18th century in Britain, in the textile industry. For the first time in history, overall production and consumption in a country could grow faster than population, thanks to the productivity gains that technological innovations and production techniques made possible.

The discoveries of new sources of energy, such as those coming from gas and oil, in addition to that of coal, as well as electricity, were at the center of the second industrial revolution (1870-1914). This led to innovations in means of transport (railway, steamboat, automobile and airplane). Increased industrialization then caused a demographic migration from the countryside to the cities, which accentuated the phenomenon of urbanization, resulting in the creation of large cities and mega-metropolises with high population density.

The third industrial revolution (1930-2010) is characterized by the innovation of nuclear energy and the advent of the information age, mainly during the second part of the 20th century. It was made possible by the invention of the microprocessor and by the creation of the first computers, followed by the innovation of the Internet, satellites and wireless communication.

As for the ongoing fourth industrial revolution (arising from applications of Artificial Intelligence, an expression first introduced in 2011, at a conference held in Germany to design a new industrial policy for that country based on high technology strategies), it would be wise to distinguish an initial period of shock and transition, and a longer period of gradual acceptance and maturity, which can extend over several decades, even a century or more.

• A difficult transition of layoffs, in the short and medium term, for workers in the tertiary sector most threatened by digitalization and automation

Already, institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Goldman Sacks investment bank, among others, have attempted to quantify the net effect that applications of Artificial Intelligence will have on different categories of workers. For the IMF, 40% of jobs in the world could be affected, in one way or another, by the development of AI. These will mainly be jobs in the tertiary service sector, which risk being replaced, or affected to varying degrees, by intelligent robots. Indeed, we can classify jobs likely to be affected in one way or another by AI systems in three categories:

1- jobs potentially substituted or replaced, (such as support or secretarial jobs in banks, insurance companies, accounting offices, libraries, etc.);

2- jobs not threatened by AI because they are performed either outdoors or because they require physical activity ( e.g. carpenter, plumber, electrician, painter, roofer, hairdresser, etc.);

3- the vast majority of jobs will be influenced to a certain degree by AI, particularly in finance, education, health, medicine, engineering, administration, cybernetics, video games, etc.

For example, in a study published in March 2023, Goldman Sacks estimated how much Artificial Intelligence could influence employment for the entire American economy. Their conclusion was that AI could replace 7% of current jobs, mainly jobs of office and white-collar workers, in years to come. However, the majority of jobs, 63% of the total, can be expected to be complementary to AI, would benefit from productivity gains and could even increase in importance. On the other hand, some 30% of jobs, mainly manual jobs, would hardly or not at all be affected by AI.

The role of politics, supervision and regulation of applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The Artificial Intelligence revolution can undoubtedly both replace and create jobs, and, by increasing labor productivity, create wealth. However, this risks causing some upheaval in certain labor markets and resulting in significant layoffs of workers in some industries.

This is why governments, responsible for the general interest, must ensure that there are no major economic and social excesses and adapt educational programs to the qualifications required in the future. They must also ensure that workers potentially penalized by layoffs are compensated and that the new wealth thus generated can benefit society as a whole, and not just a handful of operators. This will not be an easy task because there is international competition between countries to monopolize the beneficial impacts of the new technologies.

Currently, the countries that are at the forefront of regulating Artificial Intelligence technologies and AI systems are the European Union, China, the United States and the United Kingdom. The EU has put forward a preliminary regulatory and digital strategy framework called the AI Act. The objective is to identify acceptable and unacceptable risks that will arise from the applications of new digital technologies. Likewise, in June 2022, the Canadian federal government introduced the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (LIAD) as part of bill C-27, i.e. the Digital Charter Implementation Act of 2022. The purpose is to guide AI innovation in a positive direction and to encourage a responsible adoption of AI technologies by Canadians and Canadian businesses.

Conclusions

Does the advent of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution herald an extraordinarily promising breakthrough for humanity, or does it rather carry a risk of great confusion and civilizational regression?

Indeed, many questions come to mind: will humans master the various Artificial Intelligence systems so that they serve not only the private economic and industrial interests behind their applications, but also that of displaced workers and the common interest? Is it possible that these systems will become so pervasive and so powerful that they could end up becoming forces of control, dehumanization and enslavement for large numbers of people?

A first conclusion is that no one can definitely answer these questions with precision and with full knowledge of the facts. And if we ever do get the answers, it may be too late. Consequently, everything will depend on the uses that we make of this new technology.

The digital revolution of Artificial Intelligence therefore raises more questions than it gives answers, as it is a technology that is expected to evolve and find new applications, good or bad, over time.

A second conclusion is that countries and economies that fall behind in adopting the AI technology could experience economic difficulties in the years and decades to come. Even those economies in the forefront of the new industrial revolution could expect an increase in incomes and wealth disparities.

A third conclusion is that the innovation of intelligent robots driven by Artificial Intelligence certainly opens up a new field for gains in labor productivity through creative destruction,  in a certain number of professions and industries. However, it is rightly a cause for concern, as it could also facilitate cheating, falsification, confusion and dehumanization of human beings in many areas.

_________________________________________________

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals "The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles" of the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire", and the recent book, in French, "La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018". He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University.

Please visit Dr. Tremblay's site or email to a friend here.

Posted Wednesday, March 6, 2024, edited Sun. March 10, 2024.

*** To receive new postings of Dr. Tremblay's articles, 
please send Subscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
To unsubscribe, please send Unsubscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
_______________________________________________________

© 2024 Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay



Wednesday, February 7, 2024


Why Western Economies are at Risk of Entering a Period of Slower Growth and Impoverishment in the Coming Years

By Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay,

Emeritus professor of economics and international finance, Université de Montréal, and of the book about morals "The Code for Global Ethics" and the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire")

"Economic thinking about immigration is generally quite superficial. It is a fact that in different [rich] countries, reproducible national capital is on the order of four times yearly national income. As a result, when an additional immigrant worker arrives, in order to build the necessary infrastructure (housing, hospitals, schools, universities, infrastructure of all kinds, industrial facilities, etc.), additional savings equal to four times the annual salary of this worker will be needed. If this worker arrives with a wife and three children, the additional savings required will represent, depending on the case, ten to twenty times the annul salary of this worker, which obviously represents a very heavy burden for the economy to bear."  Maurice Allais (1911-2010), 1988 Nobel Prize in economics, 2002.

"What is the role of the Canadian government [in regards to immigration]? If it follows the recommendations of immigration advocates, it makes policies to maximize world welfare and its goal should be high, if not unlimited immigration. If its policies are to maximize the welfare of the native (Canadian) population, immigration policies should be designed to eliminate the fiscal burden (of between $20 and $26 billion a year) so that only positive economic benefits occur through  immigration." Hebert Grubel (1934- ), Emeritus professor of economics, Simon Fraser University, 2013.

"You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state.Milton Friedman (1912-2006), Professor of Economics, University of Chicago, 1999.

There's no magic in economics.

To consume, you must produce, and to produce, you must save (income minus consumption expenses) and invest in productive capital, in infrastructure and in other means of supporting production. A stock of productive capital (businesses, factories, machinery, equipment, infrastructure) is required, plus innovations, technical progress, knowledge, management, reliable sources of energy and, above all, qualified workers, capable of contributing to increasing productivity and to raising the annual output of goods and services per capita.

That is how living standards and the average person's well-being rise in some economies and why living standards remain stagnant or increase slowly in other economies.

This is explained in some economies by the lack of savings and productive capital relative to the numbers and skills of workers as well as other factors. Indeed, other economic indicators of human development do take into account the quality of life (economic and political stability, public health, education, individual security, etc.) of a population, beyond just the average of domestic output of goods and services per capita, the latter possibly distributed in a very unequal manner.

Nowadays, the so-called 'advanced' Western economies are considered relatively productive and their populations enjoy a relatively high standard of living, as measured by the average gross domestic product per capita. This is essentially because their stock of productive capital is high and because they benefit from technical progress, cheap energy sources and have access to a qualified labor force.

However, such relative success is not necessarily permanent and a foreclosed conclusion, if the conditions for economic growth atrophy or are replaced by other less efficient factors. A decline in living standards is not inevitable, but it can become possible, or even likely, if public policies are poorly designed.

Indeed, there have been structural changes taken place in Western economies, over several decades now, in Europe and North America. These has been a slowdown in new productive investments, a relative expansion of the services sector, an influx of low-skilled workers resulting from illegal immigration, the adoption of energy transition policies to encourage an increased reliance on more costly and less reliable energy sources and a chaotic geopolitical environment that has enhanced the possibility of hegemonic wars.

1- A simple model to understand the sources of real economic growth in the long term

Let's start with a simple model of the real economic growth, i.e. the Solow model.

This model states that an economy's long-run economic output growth depends on its stock of productive capital, resulting from savings, technological progress and the supply of labor.

The higher the stock of capital available in an economy, the more abundant the yearly domestic output of goods and services will be, for a given population.

If we consider that the living standard of a population ultimately depends on the stock of accumulated capital and that the annual growth of gross domestic product (GDP) depends largely on this capital, it follows that the more workers are qualified and the more they have access to capital (businesses, factories, machinery, equipment), the more productive they are, and the higher the living standard of the entire population will be.

2- An industrialized economy relies on more capital than a less developed economy

It has been observed that for an industrialized economy, it takes an average value of about $4 of capital to generate an annual domestic output of $1, at a ratio of 4:1. In a subsistence or stagnant economy, conversely, where the living standard is low, the capital/annual production ratio is low, possibly not exceeding the ratio of 1:1.

This may explain, to a large extent, the tendency towards large-scale population migrations, originating from countries with low living standards and a high demographic growth, towards countries with high living standards and highly capitalized.

In the short- and medium-term, such a migratory phenomenon is not necessarily to the advantage of advanced economies, which may see their rate of economic growth decline and the living standard of their population fall, if enough new investments are not added to the existing stock of capital.

3- Economic growth vs. population growth

One thing to understand is the following. If the population increases in an industrialized economy, either through the natural process or through a high influx of immigrants, it is then necessary that the stock of productive capital and the infrastructures of such an economy increase also, in a ratio of 4:1, (in the absence of technological progress), so as to maintain the standard of living of the entire population.

In other words, if the level of capitalization of a country with an advanced economy does not increase in proportion, and at the same time, as a strong demographic expansion takes place, a decline in income per capita and a general lowering of the living standard can be expected.1

It has become trivial to say that Western economies have become consumer societies. They are economies in which the percentage of goods and services produced and consumed occupy more than sixty percent of total production.

It is a complex evolution which is linked to the phenomenon of deindustrialisation that has been observed for half a century in most Western economies. It is measured by the decline of the part of industrial added value and industrial jobs, in GDP and in total employment.2

Such a phenomenon is accompanied by a national relocation of certain high productivity industries towards emerging economies, under the influence of economic globalization. This has meant a relative expansion of the production and consumption of private services (commerce, finance, transport, catering, entertainment, etc.) and of public services (teaching, health care, administration, etc.), a sector generally less likely to record important productivity gains.

5- Structural dissavings of governments through debt

Relative deindustrialization and the shift to a service economy in Western economies has forced governments to increase their budgetary deficits, pushing some countries into a level of total public debt that currently exceeds the level of their gross domestic product.

Those advanced economies with the highest levels of national debt relative to their annual gross domestic product, in 2023, as measured by the percentage of public debt to annual GDP, are:

Japan =                255,24%

Greece =              241,55

Italy =                   143,73

United States       123,28

France =               110,03

Portugal =             108,35

Spain =                 107,28

Canada =              106,38

Belgium =             105,98

United Kingdom   104,14

________________________________

P.S. : Japan is a special case because of its high household saving rate. Personal savings in Japan averaged 13.09% from 1963 until 2023, reaching an all time high of 62.10% in June of 2020. Moreover, Japan's public debt is nearly all domestic.

________________________________

For a more complete picture, one must add to the current public dissavings of governments the increasing waste of resources devoted to the global arms industry and to recurring ruinous and polluting wars, some of which could eventually lead to a catastrophic nuclear war.

6- Global warming and the energy crisis

There is a great complementarity between productive capital and energy. Indeed, when energy sources were abundant and could be considered unlimited, they were considered a given. Since pollution resulting from the burning of fossil fuels is one of the causes of global warming, this cannot be the case in the future.

Moreover, the global warming crisis has persuaded several governments to take drastic measures to reduce the combustion of fossil fuels, which are relatively abundant but non-renewable, easy to exploit and highly energy efficient (coal, oil, natural gas, etc.). The goal is to gradually replace them, over the coming decades, with less abundant renewable energy sources (solar, wind, hydraulic, etc.), some of which are intermittent and less reliable, in addition to being expensive to exploit. 

The nuclear sector falls between these two categories of energy sources. Nuclear power accounts for about 10% of electricity generation globally. Nuclear power has advantages and disadvantages, but it is very expensive to produce. However, certain countries lacking alternative energy sources, such as France, will not have much choice but to resort more to it in the future.

7- Energy has played a big role in the rapid rise in living standards

Since the first Industrial Revolution, from 1750 to 1900 in Europe, and its acceleration in the 20th century, the availability of abundant and inexpensive energy sources of fossil fuels has been an important factor that has propelled industrial and commercial civilization upwards. Indeed, this is what has transformed economies that, for millennia, had been agrarian and artisanal, into urbanized industrial and commercial economies, like those of today.

In the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the advent of machines in the textile industry as well as in agriculture, followed by electrification and the subsequent multiplication of the means of transport, helped to multiply the physical and manual labor of workers and increase the production and distribution of products on a high scale. This resulted in considerable increases in labor productivity and in real GDP growth. GDP per capita followed, propelling upward the standard of living and the wealth of nations, as well as the quality of life of their populations.

For example, during the forty years between 1960 and 2000, a period of strong economic growth and relative international peace, French researcher Simon Yaspo estimated that GDP per capita in France, Germany and in the U.S. grew by more than 250 percent.

Such a rise has never been seen before in the history of the world. It is possible that humanity might never again experience such a long golden period of economic growth, with such a rapid rise in living standards.

8- Government policies and the energy transition

There is currently, in certain government circles, great optimism regarding the possibility of decarbonizing some national economies over the next quarter of a century, that is to say by the year 2050. This is based on the belief that substitution policies can be designed to promote a relatively rapid shift, from more polluting energies to cleaner ones. The objective is to limit the rise in global warming to 1.5℃ by the year 2050 and to keep it below 2.0℃ by the year 2100.

However, numerous economic and political obstacles could stand in the way of such an otherwise very laudable scenario.

The 2023 energy report, published by the International Energy Agency (IEA), is somewhat less hopeful that a quick reduction of fossil energies can occur before 2050. Indeed, according to the organizations's most recent energy forecasts, global consumption of oil and natural gas, which is expected to peak during the current decade, is seen to remain more of less around that level, until the year 2050. This is a consequence of the inertia and synergy that exist in energy systems. In other words, the development of new energy sources requires the use of fossil energies.

However, IEA is optimistic about a rapid reduction in the global consumption of coal, the most available and cheapest energy source. It predicts that such a consumption, after a peak reached also during the current decade, will quickly fall by 40% by the year 2050, which could bring it back to the level observed in the year 2000.

Nevertheless, coal and charcoal wood play a major role in heating, cooking and electricity production in several emerging and developing countries. The Chinese economy alone, for example, is responsible for 50% of global coal consumption. In Africa, coal represents 70% of the continent's total energy consumption. Some resistance to switching from coal to more costly sources of energy could be expected from these regions.

Moreover, even in Western nations, some political resistance could be expected about the negative economic effects that an imposed energy transition could have on living standards and on the quality of life of populations. Some governments, seen as being too hasty on the issue or ill-prepared to mitigate its consequences, could be overthrown and be replaced by political leaders more inclined to resort to adaptation measures rather than to simple suppression, concerning energy production and consumption of various sources of energy.

Conclusions

The Great Recession of 2007-2008 may have served as a warning sign that the sources of economic growth in Western economies were beginning to fade. That deep recession forced major central banks to push interest rates way down, even towards zero, in order to stimulate growth.

In the coming years, Western economies will have to face structural developments even riskier to their future prosperity.

Indeed, Western economies risk suffering, all at the same time, from: 1- a slowdown in productive investments and productivity gains, the results of deindustrialization and the transition to a service economy; 2- a pressure from largely under-qualified illegal immigration, which could lower the ratio of productive capital per capita and accentuate the push towards consumption of public and private services; 3- public dissaving, the result of high public budgetary deficits and a resulting public over-indebtedness; 4- a waste of resources due to the expansion of the unproductive arms sector, in a global context of geopolitical instability and wars; and, 5- an energy transition that will be difficult to achieve, with policies aimed at penalizing inexpensive fossil fuels, in favor of more costly and less reliable alternative energies.

With these economic headwinds interacting and reinforcing each other, western economies could face lower economic growth rates ahead. This could also translate into a relative drop in standards of living, and also possibly, in people's quality of life, over the coming years and coming decades.

In fact, in a not too far away future, the main limiting factor to economic growth in Western economies could likely come from more expensive sources of energy, which are less reliable than in the past. Likewise, demographic growth rates that are too rapid in relation to the stock of available productive capital, the result of uncontrolled immigration, could also become a cause of economic impoverishment.

_________________________________________________________________

NOTES

1. The decline and fall of the Western Roman Empire, in the 5th century AD, is probably the most complex and most important historical phenomenon of an economic, political and military system that collapsed under the effect of several causes, but notably following a fall in income.

2. For example, the share of industrial jobs in total employment dropped by more than half in advanced economies, from 1970 to 2016.

The share of industrial jobs in total employment went from 46% to 17% in the U.K., from 31% to 17% in the U.S., from 39% to 18% in France, from 45% to 17% in Belgium. In Canada, the share of manufacturing jobs in total employment fell from 19.1% to 9.1%, from 1976 to 2019.

(For Quebec and Ontario, during the same period, the share of manufacturing employment, in total provincial employment, dropped from 23.2% to 11.5%, in the first case, and 23.2% to 10.2%, in the second case.

_________________________________________________

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals "The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles" of the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire", and the recent book, in French, "La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018". He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University.

Please visit Dr. Tremblay's site or email to a friend here.

Posted Wednesday, February 7, 2024.

*** To receive new postings of Dr. Tremblay's articles, 
please send Subscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
To unsubscribe, please send Unsubscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
_______________________________________________________

© 2024 Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay

Thursday, January 11, 2024


Two Big Risks in 2024-20225: an Economic Slowdown and Expanding Hegemonic Conflicts

By Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay,

Emeritus professor of economics and international finance,

 Université de Montréal

"When every country turned to protect its own private interest, the world public interest went down the drain, and with it the private interests of all."  Charles Kindleberger (1910-2003). American economic historian, (in his book "The World Depression 1929-1939", 1973)

"The world is a dangerous place to livenot because of the people who are evil but because of the people who don't do anything about it." Albert Einstein (1879-1955). (As quoted in the book by Josep Maria Corredor "Conversations avec Pablo Casals", 1955)

"I think it is the beginning of a new Cold War... I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else." George F. Kennan (1904-2005). American diplomat and historian, (in The New York Times, May 2, 1998, about the U.S. expansion of NATO toward Russia.)

While defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy—or of a collective deathwish for the world.“ John F. Kennedy (1917-1963), 35th U.S. President, 1961-1963, (in an important speech on Monday, June 10, 1963)

In 2024, most economies are expected to face economic headwinds. Indeed, that is why in many countries, especially in Europe and in North America, polls indicate that people's main preoccupations are economic topics, such as the lingering inflation, high personal and public debts and the likelihood of a more or less severe economic recession.

An economic-social issue such as the influx of hordes of illegal immigrants will also be a source of concern, especially in Europe and in NorthAmerica, especially if the rates of unemployment increase.

Similarly, the ongoing bombing wars in Ukraine and in Palestine, as well as the growing tensions between the United States and China and those between the U.S. and Iran, are foreign policy issues that could raise concerns.

Important economies according to their GDP vs. smaller rich economies per capita

According to World Bank data, the gross domestic product (GDP) of the United States, at mid-year 2023, was $25,463 billion. This places the U.S. economy number one with 24.3 percent of the world economy.

The economy of the European Union (EU), a bloc of 27 countries, represents 21.7 percent of global GDP and is the second largest in the world. China's economy follows in third place, with 15.0 percent of global GDP.

However, in terms of living standards (GDP per capita), small economies dominate the list, with Luxembourg ($127,580) in the lead, followed by Norway ($106,328), Ireland ($103,176) and Switzerland ($92,381).

An overview and expectations

The economic cycles of the major economies do not coincide perfectly, and vary somewhat depending on their economic structures and the economic policies followed by their governments.

The central question today is whether or not the coming economic year will be one in which major economies will be able to avoid a full-fledged economic recession.

The exuberance in the stock and bond markets seems to indicate that they are anticipating a gentle economic slowdown, driven by a marked decline in inflation and multiple cuts in interest rates to come.

The alternative situation to consider, contrary to the general optimism, could be that of a year characterized by a classic economic recession, more or less severe, a consequence of economic and financial imbalances accumulated in the past. It could be caused also by unexpected economic, financial and geopolitical shocks to come.

Currently, the general economic consensus is that the fight with higher interest rates that the main central banks are waging against inflation, (which was generated by large public deficits and by excessive monetary creation to counter the harmful economic effects of the 2020-2022 pandemic.), will succeed.

Thus, the central question boils down to whether the coming year will witness a very manageable mild economic slowdown or that many countries could rather have to go through a longer and more severe economic recession, with a minimum of two successive quarters of contracting GDP.

The American economy

Even if the U.S. economy is presently the most resilient of all, being at a virtual full employment level, with an official 3.7 percent unemployment rate, and with a rising consumer confidence, there are nevertheless some cracks appearing.

For example, the Conference Board's leading economic index is still declining and forecasting a mild economic recession in the United States, in 2024. Also, even though U.S. employment still holds steady, job openings are declining. This could be an indication that business investment and production plans in some sectors are being adjusted downwards.

The reason why the U.S. economy is performing better than other economies, besides the contribution of its vibrant technology sector, is partly due to its heavily subsidized arms industry, which is one sector that is prosperous and in constant growth. It comprises more that 200,000 companies, the most prominent being Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, RTX (Raytheon), General Dynamics and Boeing.

Those companies are important contributors to the industrial growth and economic prosperity of states such as Alabama, Connecticut, Virginia, Texas and California.

The European and Canadian economies

It is even possible that future economic data, to be released next March, will confirm that several European countries and Canada are already into a recession, with two quarters in a row of decline in domestic production.

An energy crisis stemming from the Ukrainian-Russian conflict is adding to the rise in interest rates in slowing down European economies, notably those of the 20 countries of the Eurozone. Presently, the German and Italian economies would seem to be the best candidates for a recession.

In Canada, the unemployment rate is still respectable at 5.8 percent. But job growth is anemic, with only100 new jobs created last December.

Additionally, largely due to an open-door immigration policy, the Canadian population is growing at a record rate, by far the most of all industrialized countries, while employment growth stagnates. This is translating into a decline in living standards, as measured by real GDP per capita.

A period of stagflation can also be expected. Indeed, mass immigration, without major investments in infrastructure, increases effective demand but lowers productivity. The economy can find itself with both inflation and an economic slowdown.

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has even published a study, in March 2023, in which it highlighted that Canada is lagging behind developed economies in terms of the standard of living of its population, which continues to decline. The standard of living in Canada has been deteriorating since 2014, under the effect of unbridled immigration and poor general productivity growth.

Geopolitical risks

What could turn a mild economic recession into a more serious one would be an expansion of the ruinous and ongoing military conflicts in Ukraine and in the Middle East, or new and wider hegemonic wars to come.

In such a case, as most governments face high debt levels (i.e. total public debts greater than their yearly total domestic product), such developments would be likely to reignite inflation and cause a further surge in interest rates in years to come.

It is rare for economic conditions and geopolitical risks to be linked so closely, but unfortunately, this is the type of world we live in today.

Conclusions

The economic conundrum in 2024 is whether the expected economic slowdown will be mild and not very disruptive to labor and stock markets, or rather, whether unforeseen financial events, such as the failure of a large financial institution, could precipitate a more serious and severe global economic recession.

The geopolitical ball is murkier because the U.S. government of Joe Biden does not seem anxious to end military conflicts, even though the President had initially promised, at the start of his administration, to rely more heavily on diplomacy to resolve international disputes.

Nevertheless, the year 2024 could be an important turning point, both economically and geopolitically.

__________________________________________________________________

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals "The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles" of the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire", and the recent book, in French, "La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018". He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University.

Please visit Dr Tremblay's site or email to a friend here.

Posted Thursday, January 11, 2024; edited January 17, 2024.

*** To receive new postings of Dr. Tremblay's articles, 
please send Subscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
To unsubscribe, please send Unsubscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
_______________________________________________________

© 2024 Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay



Friday, October 20, 2023

 

Dangers and Lessons from the Perennial Israeli-Palestinian War: The Big Picture

By Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay, emeritus professor of economics at the Université de Montréal and a former minister in the Quebec government

[False flag operations:] "The powers-that-be understand that to create the appropriate atmosphere for war, it is necessary to create within the general populace a hatred, fear or mistrust of others regardless of whether those others belong to a certain group of people or to a religion or a nation."  James Morcan (1978- ), New Zealander-born actor, writer, producer and a resident of Australia, 2014.

"I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won't get in our way." Benjamin Netanyahu (1949- ), Israeli Prime Minister (1996-1999), (2009-2021) and (2022- ), addressing Israeli settlers in the West Bank, (as quoted in 'Netanyahu: 'America is a thing you can move very easily'", The Washington Post, July 16, 2010.)

"We must remember that in time of war what is said on the enemy's side of the front is always propaganda, and what is said on our side of the front is truth and righteousness, the cause of humanity and a crusade for peace." Walter Lippmann (1889-1974), American journalist, (in 'Public Opinion', 1922).

Those who want thwart the creation of a Palestinian state should support the strengthening of Hamas and the transfert of funds to Hamas.“ Benjamin Netanyahu (1949- ), Israeli Prime Minister, (during a meeting of the Likud party, in 2019).

Introduction

Nowadays, almost all wars, involving governments with access to enormous propaganda resources, are either deliberately provoked or simply the result of false flag operations, camouflaged under a veil of lies and fake news. — In time of war, all parties lie. —With the help of passive or complacent medias, not one distracted person in a hundred can see clearly what is really going on.

Rocket and missile clashes between Islamist Hamas and Israel, and atrocities and war crimes committed against civilians, are not new in that part of the world. The most recent outbreak of violence is, in reality, the continuation of a deep conflict, which is ongoing and which is entering into a new cycle of escalating violence.

Indeed, two years ago, in May 2021, serious riots took place inside the compound of al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem's Old City, which left hundreds of Palestinians and many police officers injured. What followed was an escalation of attacks between Israel and Hamas. The latter launched more than 1,000 rockets from the Gaza Strip towards Israel, while the Israeli army, in return, dropped a deluge of fire on the blockaded Gaza Strip, causing more than 150 Palestinian deaths and 10 deaths on the Israeli side.

Only six months ago, on April 5th and 6th, 2023, there were new violent clashes in Jerusalem when Israeli police raided again the al-Aqsa mosque, in the pursuit of  "agitators" who had barricaded themselves inside.

It is therefore somewhat puzzling why so many observers were taken by surprise when the Hamas launched its rain of rockets on Israel, on Saturday, October 7, 2023, in an operation specifically called al-Aqsa Deluge.

Likewise, we can only remain perplexed when the Israeli government itself says it was taken by surprise, since its relations with the Palestinian populations have been extremely tense, particularly since 2021.

Nevertheless, the British Guardian and other medias published the official version according to which there was a "catastrophic failure of intelligence by Israel", regarding the offensive launched from Gaza against Israeli towns. Such an attack, it said, must have been in preparation for many months and "it is a mystery why Israeli intelligence appears to have had no idea it was coming."

Significantly, other media also reported that Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant (1958- ) stated that, "We will change the reality on the ground in Gaza." "What existed before will no longer be."

The same minister also declared on Monday, October 9, that he was imposing "a complete siege" on the Gaza Strip: "There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel supplies, everything is closed." Adding, "We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly"—forgetting that the Nazis described German Jews as 'subhumans' (Untermenschen), to justify genocide.

The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu (1949- ), an ultra-Orthodox politician who favors "Eretz Israel", the "Greater Israel" of the Bible, proclaimed that Israel was at war and that the Palestinians would pay a heavy price. 

How to make sense of all this?

How to explain that the Netanyahu Israeli government had no clue that the Hamas was planing an attack?

The central question is why and how the Israeli army and navy, which have imposed a tight land and sea blockade on everything entering the Gaza Strip since 2007, as well as the Mossad secret services, could not have been aware of what was coming?

Is this likely? Did someone deliberately close his eyes? It would seem crucial for the future to elucidate such a mystery.

The alternative explanation would be that we are possibly in the presence of a more or less voluntary laissez-faire attitude on the part of certain authorities, starting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself, by not taking the necessary precautions to prevent an outbreak of military attacks by Hamas.

Why were warnings about an imminent attack ignored?

More fundamentally, perhaps, is how to interpret the report that Egypt's intelligence minister, General Abbas Kamel, called Netanyahu days before the Hamas attacks, advising him that islamist militants in Gaza were planning "something unusual, a terrible operation"?

The Egyptians were reportedly aghast at Netanyahu's passivity upon hearing the warning. "We repeatedly warned the Israelis that the situation had reached the point of explosion and would be very serious. But they took it lightly", said an Egyptian services official, as reported by the Times of Israel.

Such warnings were ignored and dismissed by Netanyahu's office as fake news! Even so, why did they not investigate them and prepare to deal with them, as a simple precaution?

What is more, the report that the Netanyahu government had been warned days before the Hamas attacks has been confirmed by the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, Representative Michael McCaul (R-Tex), who is privy to classified information.

The question thus arises: Has the Netanyahu government really been facing an unforeseen attack from Hamas, or are we rather in the presence of a war that has been somewhat facilitated, by omission or otherwise? In the latter case, it could be politically explosive for the Netanyahu government. It would, in fact, be much more than simple negligence.

Indeed, this would seem to be the case. According to a poll taken on Thursday, October 12, an overwhelming majority of 86% of Israelis believe their government and Netanyahu are to blame for the attacks and for the massacre that followed inside Israel. Besides, more than half of Israelis believe Netanyahu should resign.

This also seems to be the opinion of famous American investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, who believes that Mr. Netanyahu will have to answer for his governance before the Israeli population and that his days in power could be numbered. The Israeli government has a preexisting plan to eradicate Hamas, raze Gaza and expel its population.

As in any other conflict, it is important to ask the question Cui bono? or, who ultimately benefits?

This 'new' deadly Israeli-Palestinian war, presented as a 'surprise', could well come at the right time for two politicians, Benjamin Netanyahu and Joe Biden (1946- ).

On the one hand, the new hard-line coalition government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, elected at the end of 2022, is the most right-wing administration in Israeli history. Indeed, Netanyahu has allied himself with far-right and anti-Palestinian Zionist groups, which propose the annexation of part of the West Bank, occupied by Israel since 1967.

And, to make its intentions clear, the new coalition government's first guiding principle, published on Wednesday, December 28, 2022, declared that "the Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the land of Israel".

On the other hand, Netanyahu provoked huge anti-government demonstrations in his country when he pushed through a judicial overhaul to favor the religious extremists who are members of his coalition government.

For his part, President Joe Biden has often said, here and here, that he considers himself to be a 'Zionist'. He has declared that Netanyahu has been a "friend for decades", and he has pledged that U.S. support for Israel was "set in stone and unwavering".

However, Biden is currently low in the polls, both because of his poor record and for his advanced age.

Indeed, one year before the American presidential elections, the presumptive Democratic candidate has little chance of being re-elected, despite the legal troubles of his presumed Republican opponent, Donald Trump, or anyone else that the Republicans may choose as their candidate.

Only a large-scale war involving the United States could possibly change the situation and bail out Biden politically, allowing him to run as Commander-in-Chief.

Indeed, Joe Biden did not waste any time, at the start of the new Israeli-Palestinian conflict, to promise an additional military aid of $14.3 billion to Israel, beyond the $3.8 billion annually paid to the country.

Moreover, during his trip to Israel, on Wednesday, October 18, he is reported to have privately given Netanyahu the green light for an Israeli armed invasion of the Gaza Strip.

However, such a neocon-inspired and extremely biased one-sided foreign policy is not without creating increased frictions within the U.S. State Department.

The added complications of natural gas under the sea next to the Gaza Strip

To show how complex the situation is in that part of the world, there exists a large natural gas deposit off the coast of the Gaza Strip, which could greatly profit the Palestinians. The exploitation of this gas field, called Gaza marine, has been the subject of negotiations between the Israeli government, the Palestinian Authority and Egypt. All this necessarily also involves the Hamas group, a competitor to the Palestinian Authority, the latter being under the control of the Fatah party.

Future events should make things clearer concerning the behind the scenes objectives of both sides, in this umpteenth Israeli-Palestinian war, which seems to resurface each time the situation reaches an explosive level.

Conclusions

A first important geopolitical and moral lesson emerges here, and it is the enormous human disaster resulting from those repeated wars between Israelis and Palestinians. When misguided, visionless, incompetent or dishonest leaders allow a political problem to fester, many innocent people pay for their carelessness and irresponsibility.

A second major observation is that some leaders, in a position to do so, are currently doing next to nothing to strengthen international peace institutions, but seem rather to enjoy stirring up conflicts around the world.

Third, it must be said that it is not only where there are journalists and photographers that atrocities and war crimes are committed. Agressions, whether consisting in launching missiles or dropping bombs on populations, kill and massacre people (men, women and children), indifferently, on one side as much as the other. They are both immoral.

Fourth, barbarous and indiscriminate atrocities, which are carried out with modern weapons against civilian populations, are not only illegal under international law, they are unacceptable under basic humanitarian principles.

Fifth, the worst and everlasting human conflicts seem to be those that are fought within the context of a religious war.

Finally, states and terrorist organizations that do not respect international law create problems for themselves and represent an existential threat to civilization and to world peace.

__________________________________________________________________

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals "The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles" of the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire", and the recent book, in French, "La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018". He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University.

Please visit Dr Tremblay's site or email to a friend here.

Posted Friday, October 20, 2023.

*** To receive new postings of Dr. Tremblay's articles, 
please send Subscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
To unsubscribe, please send Unsubscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
_______________________________________________________

© 2023 Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay


Thursday, September 28, 2023


The 1982 "coup de force" of the federal government against Quebec has made Quebec a de facto domestic colony—and why correctives are now required to rectify that injustice

By Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay, emeritus professor of economics at the Université de Montréal and a former minister in the Quebec government

"There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada and (...) that makes us the first post-national state." Justin Trudeau (1971- ), in an interview with the New York Times Magazine, Oct. 2015.

"To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength -#Welcome to Canada." Justin Trudeau  (1971- ). message on Twitter, Jan 28, 2017.

"Under the doctrine of multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream... I believe it's time to turn the page on the failed policies of the past." David Cameron (1966- ), British Prime Minister, in a speech in Munich, Germany, Feb. 5, 2011.

"Official multiculturalism [in Canada]... was a bad idea in the beginning, and in time will probably be seen as one of the gigantic mistakes of recent public policy in Canada." Robert Fulford (1932- ), Canadian editor, in an article in The Globe and Mail, Feb. 19, 1997.

It is important to cast a new look at the referendum held in Quebec on May 20, 1980, and at the subsequent coup by the Canadian federal government to strip the people and the government of Quebec of historic rights and powers.

A plebiscite rather than a true referendum

The referendum held in Quebec in 1980 was more a plebiscite than a true referendum. Indeed, the Quebec government of Premier René Lévesque had put only its own constitutional option on the ballot, excluding all the others. In addition, a plebiscite approach is more risky, geopolitically speaking, than a genuine referendum, in the event of a defeat of the government's request for a mandate.

It was my feeling at the time, as a member of the Quebec National assembly, that in the event of a foreseeable defeat of the plebiscite launched by the government, such a rebuff of the government's option by the electorate could likely place Quebec at the mercy of the Canadian federal government of Prime Ministre Pierre Elliott Trudeau.

To be truly democratic, the 1980 referendum should have included more than a single constitutional option for Quebec

To be democratic, a real referendum held in Quebec in 1980 (like the one held in Newfoundland in 1948, which included a choice among three options), should also have included three options, namely:

A- the option of the Parti Québecois government (a mandate to negotiate the option of Sovereignty-Association as explained in a ''White Paper');

B- the option of a renewed federalism of Claude Ryan (explained in the 'Beige Book' of the Liberal Party of Quebec); and, 

C- an autonomous confederal-type state status for Quebec (with powers as explained in my book 'The Third Option').

If no option had obtained 50% of the votes in the first round, a second round would have been necessary (as was the case in Newfoundland in 1948). The exercise would have been consistent with the democratic principle, because the result would have reflected the majority choice of the people.

The referendum defeat on May 20, 1980 opened the door to a repatriation and modification of the Canadian constitution, without the participation of the Government of Quebec and its population

The referendum defeat of the Lévesque government was unequivocal, with a result of, Yes: 40%; No: 60%. It provided a useful pretext for the federal government of P. E. Trudeau to announce that it could proceed unilaterally with the repatriation of the British North America Act of 1867 (BNAA) from the British Parliament. Not only that, but it also intended to add new modifications of its own, which would reduce significantly the historic rights and powers of the Parliament of Quebec.

In such circumstances, both the Quebec government and the official opposition would be placed in a very disadvantageous position to prevent the federal government from moving forward with its unilateral plan.

On the one hand, the leader of the No camp, Claude Ryan, had morally 'won' the 1980 plebiscite, but he was not in power to defend his option in favor of renewed federalism with increased powers for Quebec. On the other hand, federal Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau was in charge in Ottawa, and he could take advantage of the situation to impose his own constitutional option, which had never been discussed and debated democratically during the Quebec referendum period of 1980.

Even though Premier Lévesque probably showed poor judgment in not resigning after his referendum defeat, this in no way justified the federal government to want to unilaterally modify the Canadian constitution, without the agreement of Quebec, and to forcibly reduce the historical rights and powers of the Quebec Parliament.

• The 'Group of Eight' and the role of the federal Supreme Court

The Lévesque Quebec government of the time, in addition to not resigning after its referendum defeat, chose to join seven other provincial governments to form the so-called 'Group of Eight', in a final attempt to prevent the federal government from going ahead with its unilateral constitutional plan.

Such a plan B to counter the visions of the federal government involved great risks for Quebec. Indeed, all it took for the federal government to isolate the Quebec government and rally the nine English-speaking provinces to its cause was to make minor concessions to the latter provinces. This took place on the fateful night of November 4, 1981, at the Château Laurier in Ottawa—an event known in Quebec as the 'Night of the Long Knives', in the absence of representatives of the Quebec government.

This is, in a few words, how Quebec and its population became the victimes of a historic constitutional 'coup de force", which paved the way for the adoption of the Constitution Act of 1982, officially ratified on April 17, 1982, by Queen Elizabeth II. This law was imposed upon Quebec, without ever having been signed by the government of Quebec, nor accepted by the Quebec people during a formal constitutional referendum.

This was particularly the case in matters of language, education, culture and secularism, by virtue of the general tradition of the Civil Code of Quebec, which dates back to the Quebec Act of 1774. These are areas which previously fell under its jurisdiction and which are deemed necessary to ensure its survival over time, as the only province with a French-speaking majority in the Canadian federation.

It must be pointed out that the Supreme Court of Canada, an exclusively federal body, played a crucial role in creating the injustice done to Quebec, in 1982. This is unlike what exists in the German federation, where a similar court is composed of judges, half of whom are appointed by the central government and half by the Länders, or provinces.

Indeed, the Supreme Court ruled on September 28, 1981, that the right of veto traditionally exercised by Quebec in constitutional matters, one of the four provinces signing the Confederative Pact of 1867, (and whose modifications were based on the rule of unanimity until then), did not have a legal basis but only a political one.

That interpretation allowed the Court to conclude that the repatriation of the Canadian constitution from London and its in-depth modification could be done, provided that a "sufficient number" of provincial government agreed, without taking into account the interests and prerogatives of the only province with a French-speaking majority in Canada, Quebec.

The Constitution Act of 1982 transferred important political powers to the Supreme Court—which had already benefited enormously from the repatriation of the powers of the Privy Council from London, in 1949to not only rule on the form of laws adopted democratically by parliaments, but also on their political merits.

Political and legal centralization at the Canadian federal level, unjustly imposed on Quebec since 1982, tends de facto to reduce Quebec, the only majority home of French speakers in the Canadian federation, to the status of a domestic colony, politically subject to the dictates of English Canada and its representatives. 

Such an increased and forcibly imposed political and legal centralization has set back the historical rights and powers of Quebec and its population by more than 100 years, i.e. since the adoption of the British North America Act of 1867.

The result has been a major breach of justice, democracy and the principle of the right of people to self-govern. Indeed, it is a reality that since 1982, Canadian democracy has been placed in a political-legal straitjacket.

• The failed policies of state multiculturalism

The political ideology of multiculturalism, which was inserted in the Constitutional Act of 1982—never signed by the government of Quebechas also served as a justification to adopt a federal policy of mass immigration. This has been a central policy of the liberal federal government of Justin Trudeau since 2015.

Canada is the only country in the world that has constitutionalized such a political ideology, intrinsically changing and optional, and this, without a referendum. Over time, such an ideology could pose a threat to the demographic stability of Quebec and, eventually, to the very survival of the French-Canadian nation as a whole, in Canada.

Conclusion

Consequently,

Considering that the Constitutional Act of 1982 forcibly imposed a reduction in Quebec's historic rights and powers, particularly in matters of language, education, culture and secularism, all areas that previously fell under its exclusive jurisdiction, and which are required to ensure its survival over time as the only province in Canada with a French-speaking majority;

Considering that Quebec is not a province like the others, because it is the only province with a French-speaking majority in Canada and because it is unacceptable that existential rights and powers were forcibly taken away from it, without its consent;

Considering that such a situation could ultimately lead to the 'louisianization' of Quebec and possibly its disappearance as the only French-speaking majority state within the Canadian federation;

Considering that neither the government of Quebec, nor the Quebec population, were directly and democratically consulted on the acceptance or refusal of the Constitutional Act of 1982;

It must be concluded that political corrections are necessary before irreparable damage results from the tutelage of the Quebec government and the subjugation of the Quebec population to the Anglo-Canadian majority.

Therefore, the Parliament of Quebec should solemnly declare that it has never ratified the Constitutional Act of 1982 and proclaim, as soon as possible, that it is an autonomous state within the Canadian federation, with all the historical rights and powers necessary for its survival and development.

Note that this is in no way an unjustified status in the circumstances, in history and in law, since there are such states or autonomous regions in some forty countries in the world, all established to allow important linguistic minorities to survive justly and prosper in peace.

___________________________________________________-


International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals "The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles" of the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire", and the recent book, in French, "La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018". He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University.

Please visit Dr Tremblay's site or email to a friend here.

Posted Thursday, September 28, 2023.

*** To receive new postings of Dr. Tremblay's articles, 
please send Subscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
To unsubscribe, please send Unsubscribe, to carole.jean1@yahoo.ca
______________________________________________________________

© 2023 Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay