The Front De Liberation Du Quebec

In further analysis, angry people are more likely to listen to militants and commit violent acts, building a tense environment for Quebec citizens to live in. According to CBC Digital Archives, in response to the FLQ and other revolutionary groups forming, “when innocent people became injured from terrorist attacks, the cry for police involvement became shrill.” (FLQ Backgrounder Web) It is evident in this statement that many separatists who resorted to acts of terrorism consequently stimulated anger and fear in Quebec. If the Quiet Revolution had not occurred and the feelings of separatism and rise of terrorist groups did not follow, fewer people would have been hurt by the violence, both directly and indirectly. All things considered, the encouragement of separatism also weakened English-French relations as Quebec left 30 large shared programs, though the other provinces did not have the right to do so. All things considered, “from the Quebec Act of 1774 to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canada has protected the place of its French minority. If Quebec were to separate, that protection would be gone and the Francophone society would be assimilated by the wider world within a generation or two.” (Kheiriddin) In relation to this comment, many English Canadians viewed Quebec’s special status during the revolution as

Although Canada can be defined as a nation state, its vast landscape means many people are faced with different views and mindsets. Source one simply shows the differences within the nation of Canada. Eastern and Western Canada, because of their geographical differences, can be faced with contending loyalties when it comes to some nations aspects of life. Different lifestyles under the same set of government creates a physiological barrier between a nation. The source also shows the differences in Quebec nationalism compared to the rest of Canada. Some groups like the FLQ or the Front for Liberation of Quebec are known for their extremist views of Quebec nationalism. The small group called the FLQ was active in the 1960’s and 1970’s and they

Pierre Trudeau is one of Canada’s most renowned Prime Ministers. He was in office April 20, 1968, to June 4, 1979, and later on March 3, 1980, to June 30, 1984,.¹ An event that Pierre Trudeau is well known for is the enactment of the War Measures Act during the October Crisis. This decision to invoke the War Measures Act during the October Crisis has led to a great deal of controversy on whether the act was justified. The October Crisis was a series of events in October 1970, these events began with the kidnappings of James Cross and later Pierre Laporte by the group known as the FLQ (Front de libération du Québec) the group’s main goals were to create an independent Quebec.2 The group resorted to terrorist acts in order to achieve those goals, this later led to Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau invoking the War Measures Act. The War Measures Act was a federal statute adopted by parliament during WWI and has been used 3 times; during WWI, WWII and during the October Crisis. The act gives major power to the Canadian government to uphold security during times of great distress.3 Pierre Trudeau was justified in enacting the War Measures Act during the October Crisis. One reason that Pierre Trudeau was justified in invoking the War Measures Act is that the FLQ was essentially a terrorist organization responsible for the deaths and injuries of countless people. Since the group was formed in the early 1960’s, the terrorist group’s acts had only worsened from mailbox bombings to

The Front de Libération du Québec, or the FLQ was the main group that was responsible for the October Crisis. This group of French Canadians were violent to reach their goals. FLQ members were trained by revolutionaries who supported Che Guevara, and some were trained by Palestinian commandos. They’ve committed 200 violent actions, have robbed banks, and participated in bombings. Not only did they commit those actions but they also kidnapped British Trade Commissioner James Cross and kidnapped Pierre Laporte. Laporte was found dead on October 17, 1970 which led to Prime Minister Trudeau broadcasting the FLQ manifesto and transporting five FLQ terrorists to Cuba to release James Cross. The government responded to this crisis by implementing the War Measures Act. This gave the government the power to take people’s civil rights away. They responded with the crisis using the War Measures Act as they believed that the people wanted to overthrow the Canadian government. French-English relations were greatly affected from the October

Criticisms of Trudeau were harsh during this time as many saw him as taking his response too far by allowing the army to have so much freedom in Quebec. When asked how far he was willing to go to maintain enforced peace in the province, he simply replied, “Well, just watch me.” The unmoving and uncompromising authority of the government removed the head of the FLQ by removing its leaders. Without the motivation and encouragement of their most vocal and cunning directors, the FLQ dissolved. Investigations concerning those involved in the crimes of the FLQ prior to and during the October crisis continued for fifteen subsequent

“Maîtres chez nous” or in English “Masters of our own house”. These words spoken by Premier Jean Lesage caused an uproar in Quebec by giving the citizens a sense of confidence they had never felt before. Jean Lesage played a crucial role in the modernization of Quebec in a short period of time after recuperating the province from the “Great Darkness”. While the rest of Canada was undergoing innovation, Quebec fell behind due to Maurice Duplessis. After the death of Duplessis, Lesage ran for Premier and was elected in 1960. He promised to improve Quebec through social, economic and cultural changes and proved so by creating programs and replacing others. One of Lesage’s accomplishments to modernize Quebec was being able to subside the Catholic Church’s role and replace it with a more commanding provincial government role. Another achievement of Lesage’s to rejuvenate Quebec was nationalizing private electricity companies which allowed workers to speak French entirely, guaranteed the Quebec economy benefits, and adjusted wages. Finally, the Quiet Revolution allowed the rest of Canada to hear the nationalist views of Quebecers after the FLQ terrorist group terrorized several mailboxes, kidnapped James Cross and killed Pierre Laporte.

Though the beginning of the separatist movement was marred by fighting and violence, the vast majority of the conflict has been a political one. The reason for the revolution in Quebec stems from the restrictions placed upon the populace by the English. These restrictions were on both the language and culture of the Quebecois, and caused them to feel trapped in under the English rule, for lack of a better term. This revolution is on a much less certain foot than the others however, with many of the younger citizens not remember the restrictions of days

For some time, many Quebecois had faith in the FLQ, believing the group would speed the process of separation from Canada; however the FLQ’s loyalty to these beliefs is questionable. Ultimately, it was perceived that the FLQ’s only goal was to give Quebec its justice; they wanted to see them united in a free society. On the other hand, during the October Crisis, they had not been able to prove that. When the FLQ kidnapped British diplomat James Cross, it publicized 7 demands, of which only one concerned French-Canadians, pertaining to fairer working conditions which was later dropped (Tetley, 2007). The rest concerned the FLQ themselves: publication of the Manifesto (a public declaration of policy and aims), the name of an informer, $500,000 in gold, the release of 23 jailed terrorists, and to transport them to either Algeria or Cuba (Knowlton, 1990). A goal of Quebec’s at the time, the protection of the French language, was a cause that preoccupied much of the nation, but was not a particular concern for the FLQ. In fact, the 1970 Manifesto was written in and proclaimed in informal French and “Fringlish” (Knowlton, 1990). The FLQ’s dedication to their cause is doubtful. FLQ believed that they weren’t going to get caught, hence their slogan “Independence or death” (Brown, 2011). However, when justice prevailed, the members chose exile rather than martyrdom. This made it clear that the FLQ’s dedication

In October 1970, Canada faced a pressing terrorist attack in Montreal, Quebec by a group known as the Front de Liberation du Quebec, or the FLQ for short. The group committed multiple attacks starting in 1963 that slowly escalated until the October Crisis, where they kidnapped two government officials and proceeded to murder one of them. The Canadian government responded harshly and rapidly. The prime minister of Canada, Pierre Trudeau, issued the War Measures Act which along with various things allowed the police and military full reign to arrest people and hold them with no explanation. The Canadian population was highly supportive of the government’s action believing that this extreme state repression would bring a finish to the October

“The past is to be respected and acknowledged but not to be worshipped. It is our future in which we find our greatness.” These words were written by Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, who paved the way for the great Canadian future present today. Pierre Elliott Trudeau was an indispensable leader who guided Canada to greatness, he brought biculturalism and bilingualism to Canada, believed in equality and protecting human rights. Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s accomplishments paved the way for a greater Canadian future because he became the leader Canada needed for protecting human rights, evolving Canada's language and by giving Canada the confidence it needed to succeed.

Pierre Elliot Trudeau was arguably one of the most vivacious and charismatic Prime Ministers Canada has ever seen. He wore capes, dated celebrities and always wore a red rose boutonniere. He looked like a superhero, and often acted like one too. Some of the landmark occurrences in Canadian history all happened during the Trudeau era, such as patriating the constitution, creating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the 1980 Quebec Referendum. However, it is Trudeau’s 1969 “white paper” and the Calder legal challenge which many consider to be one of his most influential contributions to Canadian history.

In the midst of the October Crisis Pierre Trudeau handled the time of terrorism well. In this essay one will see how Trudeau handled the crisis excellently by examining the first domestic use of the War Measures Act which led to improvements on the Act, ensuring that Quebec did not become its own independent country, and how Canada stood behind and supported Quebec and Pierre Trudeau through the acts of violence led by the FLQ.

During the twentieth century, Canada as a nation witnessed and endured several historical events that have had a deep and profound influence on Canadian politics. The most influential and constant force in twentieth century Canadian politics has been the increasing power and command of Quebec nationalism and the influence it has had on Canadian politics today. Quebec nationalism has shaped the structure and dynamics of Canadian federalism from a centralized to a decentralized form of federal government (Beland and Lecours 2010, 423). The decentralization of several sectors within the Canadian government has been a direct effect of Quebec nationalism. Decentralization has led to more autonomy among the provincial governments, especially in

Jacques Godbout is a Quebecois historian, author, and filmmaker as well as the great-nephew of Adelard Godbout. He sets out to create a documentary to explore the work of his great-uncle who was once the Premier of Quebec, who has somehow been lost in the history books. This documentary is titled “Patriot or Traitor”, because Jacques openly provides the information on his great-uncle that allows the viewer to ultimately make the decision on how we wish to view this great Canadian. With slight bias, Jacques realizes his fascination with Adelard’s politics may be caused because his childhood was influenced by him, since he and his family were framed as

When reading Marx and Tocqueville one may find that both seem to stand on opposite ends of a spectrum. While Tocqueville, as a social theorist, appears to value stability in political systems over all else (Ratcliff, 2014), Marx believes revolutions are the way for which the history of humankind can progress, and that the end of history will arise from the revolt of the people for a communist society (Ratcliff, 2014). Indeed, while both Marx and Tocqueville value liberty and equality, their notions of the two are fundamentally different, resulting in different ideas of the political manifestations of these two ideals. This essay will explore the motivations behind the two works, compare the two conceptions of liberty and equality, and show why Marx and Tocqueville arrive at very different conclusions.