Traduction abrégée

Le MLNQ et moi-même avons récemment été l’objet d’attaques vitrioliques dans La Gazette, journal anglophone de Montréal. En même temps, aucune attaque de ce genre n’apparaissait dans les journaux de langue française et monsieur Don Macpherson, auteur des dites attaques s’en étonne. Il s’agit en réalité d’une affaire de contexte, et le texte qui suit peut l’expliquer.

APPARENCES ET RÉALITÉ

J’espère que, conformément à la réputation de fair play dont se targuent tant les rédacteurs que les lecteurs de La Gazette, vous publierez le texte que je vous transmets ici. À moins que ce fair play ne soit qu’un démonstration de bonne conscience à rabais et un masque pour dissimuler des motifs ultérieurs moins nobles. Compte tenu de la période de transition que nous traversons tous, il vous sera utile de connaître le point de vue de l’adversaire afin de faire preuve de plus d’objectivité dans vos appréciations des contextes et des situations qui se présentent, ce qui devrait vous permettre de mieux définir vos objectifs et partant, choisir des solutions appropriées. C’est le premier principe de stratégie.

CHANGEMENTS ET CONTINUITÉ

Le MLNQ actuel, dont je suis le président, n’a rien en commun avec le FLQ des années 1960-71 dont je fus un des membres fondateurs alors que j’étais un étudiant près de la vingtaine. Le FLQ était un mouvement idéologique. Nous étions peu nombreux, sans expérience et dépourvus de moyens,. Comme tout notre peuple, nous subissions quotidiennement le mépris des Anglos de Montréal, du pouvoir à Ottawa et du Canadian Establishment, appuyé par les United Empire Loyalists. Cette situation humiliante nous mobilisait. À Montréal, les Anglos détenaient une position dominante et notre gouvernement à Québec ne pouvait rien faire sans leur approbation. Ailleurs au Canada, la population nourissait une haine antigallique, menaçante et potentiellement destructrice pour nous, descendants des colons de Nouvelle France. Après deux siècles de régime anglais, certains projetaient encore des mesures de déportation. À Ottawa, en 1948, le révérend Thomas Todhunter Shields avait déposé un plan pour nous extorquer nos possessions, de la même manière que Cromwell l’avait fait en Irlande au milieu du Dix-septième siècle.

Presque continuellement, des plans d’intervention armée se préparaient contre nous et la réaction d’Ottawa à la Crise d’Octobre 70 nous le prouve. Même si de tels préparatifs étaient des secrets militaires, nous en avons toujours été informés. Au Québec, ces plans provoquaient la peur et la colère. D’une manière ou d’une autre, nous devions nous décider et agir. Avant d’agir, cependant, nous devions prendre conscience de notre identité et de notre statut collectif. Ce besoin de savoir qui nous sommes et de connaître notre statut n’a rien à voir avec une idéologie de droite ou de gauche et c’est de la malhonnêteté intellectuelle que de l’affirmer ou même de le suggérer.

QUESTION D’IDENTITÉ

Nous connaissons notre histoire, nous, descendants des colons de Nouvelle France, survivants des guerres de Sept ans; de l’Indépendance américaine, des attaques de Montréal et de Québec; des massacres de 1837-38 à Montréal et dans les environs. Le fait de tomber sous la gouverne britannique et sous celle des United Empire Loyalists ne nous paraissait pas souhaitable, au contraire. Nous étions les victimes du colonialisme et de l’impérialisme anglais et nous faisions face aux dangers de génocide et de fossilisation que cette domination représentait pour nous. Ce sort a été celui des Acadiens, des Irlandais, des Écossais celtiques et des Gallois, sous le prétexte de l’Unité de l’Empire, maintenant remplacé par l’alibi fallacieux de “ l’unité canadienne”.

En dépit de cette menace suspendue au dessus de nos têtes comme une épée de Damoclès, nous avons non seulement survécu mais, ce qui est encore plus étonnant, nous avons progressé vers le statut de peuple, de nation et d’État, lequel État existe bel et bien de facto et partiellement de jure, grâce à une symbiose territoriale réussie, malgré l’hostilité britannique et celle des United Empire Loyalists.

Grâce à des historiens et à des géographes spécialisés en géopolitique, nous avons appris que la géographie du Québec a joué un rôle majeur dans notre survivance et dans le déroulement de notre histoire. Des événements territoriaux, tels que la construction des canaux et chemins de fer, dont la construction du canal Érié, ouvert en 1825 dans la vallée de la Mohawk, ont confirmé le rôle de la géographie, en incitant les New Yorkais à abandonner la voie Champlain en faveur de la vallée de la Mohawk jusqu’au lac Érié et d’autre part, en forçant les Anglais à déplacer leur centre principal d’activité de la vallée du Saint-Laurent vers les basses terres des Grands lacs, devenues le centre principal d’activité de l’Ontario actuel et de l’establishment canadian.

La langue française a joué un rôle identique, bien que nous ne l’ayons pas toujours appréciée à sa juste valeur. Cependant, nos ancêtres ne parlaient pas tous français. En Normandie, d’où viennent presque 60% des familles québécoises, on parlait nynorsk, un dialecte viking encore parlé en Norvège et en Islande. Les Bretons parlaient un dialecte celtique. Les autres habitants et marins des côtes de la France maritime parlaient l’allemand wisigothique et plusieurs autres dialectes germaniques. Les Basques d’Aquitaine parlaient euskara, une langue d’origine inconnue, encore parlée dans les Pyrénées.

Au cours de l’histoire, il y eût un temps au cours duquel plus de 45 langues ou dialectes étaient parlés sur le territoire français. Le Français, langue aristocratique connue des érudits, précise, très exigeante, s’instaura peu à peu, avec la scolarisation de la population. Pour le Québec comme pour la France, la langue française a été un facteur majeur de cohésion sociale et de développement intellectuel, économique et politique et, un instrument d’une exceptionnelle efficacité pour la construction d’un État. Elle a utilement servi à la construction de l’État français, aussi de l’État anglais, de la Conquête normande jusqu’à la montée au trône des Tudor, mais aussi de l’État belge et de l’État suisse et finalement, de l’État du Québec. De nombreux États en Afrique et au Moyen Orient se sont construits en langue française.

SAVOIR QUI NOUS SOMMES

En Nouvelle France, la majorité des colons vinrent des régions côtières riveraines de la Manche, de l’océan Atlantique et de la baie de Biscaye. En plus d’une compétence certaine dans la construction des navires et de la navigation en haute mer, (Le nouveau paquebot géant Queen Elizabeth The Second sera construit sur les côtes de France par la génération actuelle), les habitants de ces régions avaient une autre caractéristique en commun: la connaissance des Iles Britanniques, des Anglais, des Irlandais et des Écossais. Le commerce maritime avait fait l’objet de guerres impitoyables entre la France et l’Angleterre et nos ancêtres durent en faire les frais et subir les raids anglais contre leurs propriétés qui firent l’objet d’incendies, de vols, de viols, de rapines et de meurtres. En Amérique du Nord, de nouveau confrontés aux Anglais, nos ancêtres reconnurent le vieil ennemi qui ne leur était pas étranger.

Encore une fois, nous étions menaçés d’extermination, car le génocide ne dérange pas la conscience anglaise. En Nouvelle France, le rayonnement territorial de la langue française a été pour nous un facteur majeur de solidarité collective, de telle sorte que, lorsque les Anglais entreprirent l’occupation du territoire, les assises de l’État du Québec à venir étaient déjà en place et pouvaient durer malgré les difficultés.

STATUTS ET ACTION

La politique est une affaire d’intérêts, de rapports de forces et d’effectivité. Elle se fonde sur la géopolitique et s’articule autour de douze principes. Notre État naturel existe et nous ne pouvons rester inféodés au gouvernement unitaire, arbitraire, loyaliste et potentiellement totalitaire d’Ottawa, servilement soumis aux intérêts des united empire loyalists. Avec leur contrôle quasi absolu sur les communications, nous sommes continuellement exposés à une propagande à sens unique. Cela était déjà évident en 1960 et nous devions agir.

LA SITUATION EN 1960

Nous avons décidé d’agir et de frapper, mais nous n’avions pas les moyens de conduire un soulèvement de l’importance d’une insurrection, ni même un coup d’État. Nous devions nous limiter à des coups de théâtre, spectaculaires, économiques et potentiellement efficaces. Nous n’avions nulle intention de tuer qui que ce soit et nous regrettons les malheureux accidents qui se sont produits et que nous n’avions pas voulus. Cependant, notre “terrorisme” n’était rien comparé aux innombrables meurtres, incendies, destructions de propriétés, vols, viols, rapines, extorsions, mensonges, hypocrisies et autres crimes commis par les United Empire Loyalists depuis l’époque de Cromwell jusqu’à nos jours. La guerre soi-disant religieuse qui sévit en Irlande du Nord n’est pas, mais absolument pas une guerre de religion. C’est une guerre qui oppose les Loyalistes aux Irlandais celtiques, parce qu’il y a des intérêts à défendre, des intérêts matériels et non religieux. Partout où ils ont passé, les Loyalistes ont semé la terreur et mis les populations à feu et à sang, en Irlande, en Écosse, au Pays de Galles, en Acadie, en Nouvelle Angleterre contre les Yankees (voyez les sites Internet américains sur les United Empire Loyalists et vous en jugerez par vous-mêmes), en Afrique du Sud et en Australie. Comme dans la fable de La Fontaine: Les animaux malades de la peste, les Loyalistes passent pour de petits saints. Aucun Loyaliste n’a jamais été accusé de crime de guerre. Inversement, ils ne se gênent pas pour accuser et condamner qui ils veulent, sans se soucier des injustices qu’ils commettent.

Face à nos faibles moyens et à nos erreurs de tactique, le gouvernement centraliste et unitaire d’Ottawa a fait passer la Loi des langues officielles en 1969, pas tellement pour reconnaître le français, mais pour que l’anglais conserve son hégémonie au Québec. Deux ans plus tard, un militaire québécois en poste au Quartier Général de la Force Mobile à Saint-Hubert qui aurait osé écrire une seule lettre officielle en français, aurait fait l’objet d’une plainte et il y en a même eu un cas connu, dont la plainte est venue du Quartier Général de Montréal, 3530 rue Atwater, la fameuse Ferme sous les noyers.

LE MLNQ

Le MLNQ est une organisation nouvelle, composée de gens de tous âges et de toutes conditions sociales et économiques, dont beaucoup sont très instruits et n’ont pas besoin de moi pour s’instruire des choses de la guerre et de l’armement. L’Internet leur fournit tout ce qu’ils doivent savoir et bien davantage. Beaucoup plus nombreux que ceux du FLQ, les membres du MLNQ sont répartis partout au Québec. De plus, de nombreuses nouvelles organisations souverainistes tiennent, à peu de choses près, le même discours que le MLNQ et comptent former une coalition qui promet d’être plus mobilisatrice que le Parti Québécois. Systématiquement, nous devons maintenant prévoir et préparer notre défense collective. Ce n’est ni du séparatisme, ni du tribalisme mais la venue au monde d’un nouvel État dans le monde, le nôtre. Notre État, nous le voulons et nous l’aurons. Nous vaincrons.

Raymond Villeneuve
Président
MLNQ

CHEAP SHOTS

The Mouvement de Libération Nationale du Québec(MLNQ), and more specifically myself, have recently been the object of vitriolic attacks in The Gazette, a Montreal anglophone newspaper. At the same time, hardly anything concerning myself and my role as president of the MLNQ has appeared in the French language publications. This is a matter of context. The following text could provide the elements of a valid explanation. The MLNQ has not been consulted about this text, exceptionnally written in English, to avoid misinterpretations generally associated with a French language text, in spite of the fact that French is a very clear and precise language. I therefore assume full responsibility for its content and the historical, technical and grammatical mistakes it may contain.

APPEARANCES AND REALITY

Following numerous attacks directed against me recently in your newspaper, I have decided to prepare a reply, which I hope will be published and read, in keeping with the reputation of fair play which most readers of The Gazette like to be associated with. Unless fair play would only be a euphemism for cheap good conscience, also to conceal ulterior motives. Nonetheless, since we are all going through a period of transition, it will be useful for you to see things as they appear to the adversary, in order to better appreciate contexts and situations as they arise, determine practical objectives and make a choice of appropriate courses of action. This is the first principle of strategy, based on the principle of reality, not on models or appearances.

CHANGE AND CONTINUITY

The actual Mouvement de Libération Nationale du Québec, headed by myself, has little in common with the Front de Liberation du Quebec, which operated between 1960 and 1971, to which I belonged as a student in my early twenties. The F.L.Q. was an ideological movement. We were a very small group, lacking in experience and the means necessary for action on a large scale, unsure of ourselves. There was one mobilizing certitude, however: contempt by the Montreal Anglos, by Ottawa and the Canadian Establishment, all under United Empire Loyalist rule, insensitive, vindictive, ruthless. In Montreal, the Anglos held a dominant position. No Quebec government could make a move without their approval. Elsewhere in Canada, antigallic hatred was rampant, threatening and potentially destructive for us, the descendants of the settlers of New France. Some two centuries after English takeover, there were still suggestions of deportation and some planning to that effect in the Canadian Army Headquarters. Specifically, in 1948, reverend Thomas Todhunter Shields presented in Ottawa a plan to deal with us in the same manner Cromwell dealt with the Irish in the middle of the Seventeenth Century.

Plans for military interventions against Québec were prepared on an almost continuous basis in Ottawa and the October Crisis of 1970 proves it. Such secret preparations were never kept secret over a long period of time. Always, one of our people managed to grab a hold of “official secrets” and inform all of Québec accordingly. This is why plans for military interventions are common knowledge in Québec. It has caused a perpetual state of fear and anger among Québécois. It was obvious that someone must do something about changing this fear into protracted anger and effective action. But first of all, we must know who we are, what we are fighting for, under what conditions and which principles must we follow in order to achieve success.

This is a matter of identity, status and action, not ideology. To suggest that it has to do with some kind of left or right wing ideology, as do sensationalistic newspapers, is intellectual dishonesty.

A MATTER OF IDENTITY

For us, descendants of the settlers of New France, survivors of the Seven Year War, the War of American Independence, the American attacks against Montreal and Québec, the War of 1812 and the brutal British military interventions of 1837-38, in Montreal and vicinity, coming under British and United Empire Loyalist domination was no blessing. It meant colonialism, imperialism and potential genocide and fossilization of our people, a fate suffered by the Acadians, the Irish, the Celtic Scots and the Welsh, under the alibi of Empire Unity, substituted in Canada by Canadian Unity. Notwithstanding the threat, we survived and progressed from a population of abandoned settlers to becoming a people and from people to distinct nation reaching statehood, thanks to a successful territorial symbiosis, accomplished against British and United Empire Loyalist will and hostility.

As politics is foremost a matter of interest and balance of forces, we finally understood, from a few historians but mostly from geographers specialized in geopolitics, that the particular geography of Québec played a major role in our survival and paradoxical progressions and expansions. The singular role of geography in our extraordinary survival was confirmed by events such as the construction of canals and railroads and above all, by the Erie canal opened in 1825 in the United States, from which the main New York axis of gravity shifted from the Champlain axis to the Mohawk valley. In British North America, the main centre of gravity shifted westward from the St Lawrence Lowlands to the Great Lakes Lowlands. This had to do with geopolitics, not British or United Empire Loyalist humanism and this explains why we were not treated like the Irish, the Celtic Scots, the Welsh, the Acadians or even the Yankees before the War of American Independence.

An equal role was played by the French language, not always appreciated by most of us. Some of our ancestors did not speak French. In Normandy, where nearly 60% Québécois families originated, their language was nynorsk, still spoken in the Norwegian countryside. The Bretons spoke a Celtic dialect and the other coastal dwellers and seafarers of France spoke wisigothic German and other germanic dialects as well, not to forget the Basques of Aquitaine, who spoke Euskara, a language of unknown origin, still spoken in the Pyrénées. At one time during history, there existed some 45 different languages on the French soil. French, the language of scholars and aristocrats, precise, very demanding, was introduced very gradually. For Québec as well as for France, the French language was and remains a major factor of social cohesion, intellectual, cultural and economic development, and, an exceptionally competent instrument for the growth of statehood. Very usefully, French served the construction of the French State; paradoxically, also the English State, from the Norman conquest until the Tudors, the Belgian and Swiss States, numerous other States in Africa and the Middle East, and finally, the State of Quebec.

KNOWING WHO WE ARE

In New France, therefore, most settlers originated from the coastal regions boarding the English channel, the Atlantic ocean and the bay of Biscay. In addition to competence in ship construction and seafaring (The new giant cruise ship Queen Elizabeth The Second will be built in coastal France by the present generation), these populations have one distinct characteristic from the other French: a practical knowledge of the British Isles and their history. The rest of France has much less experience in direct relations with the English than the coastal dwellers. For centuries, the British have been buying Bordeaux wines and selling tweeds in exchange, not to mention many other items. For better or for worse, these relations between the coastal French and the British extended throughout an historical period exceeding fifteen hundred years. When confronted in North America, coastal dwellers of France then settlers of New France, became enemies of the British, over fur trade. This happened many times before in France for other trades and the coastal dwellers suffered heavily from British attacks against their farms and properties. The enemy, referred to as “les maudits Anglais”, was no stranger at all.

In France, the particular context in which the coastal dwellers lived created a distinct society in relation to the rest of the country. Nonetheless, one of the conditions to be sent to New France as a settler was to speak French. There was reticence but the St Lawrence valley offered an exceptional opportunity to start an equalitarian new society. Finally, the importance of the French language as a major factor of collective cohesion and action was recognized, especially when English occupation began.

When the “maudits Anglais” took over in 1760, the geopolitical base for the future State of Quebec was solidly established, fragile but well protected by the harsh geography and climate of Québec, thus rendering the abandoned settlers capable of resisting repeated attempts at Anglicization, assimilation and fossilization. In addition, the new context created with the birth of the United States and the necessity for the British to concentrate their forces in the Great Lakes lowlands. These shifts combined with our geographic setting and historical developments enabled us not only to survive in spite of English and Loyalist hostility, but also to progress towards statehood. Four centuries of development, under favorable geopolitical conditions, are generally necessary to allow a people to create statehood and reach recognition at least de facto. Québec has reached its fifth century of development. Switzerland, France and Portugal lived through a formative period exceeding 1200 years, Germany 1800 years, but in North American, States were formed in a much shorter period.

STATUS AND ACTION

Politics is a matter of interests, balance of forces and effectivity. It is founded on geopolitics and as such, articulated around twelve fundamental principles: correct and rigourous appreciation of context and situation; determination and maintenance of practical and practicable objectives; maintenance of moral; concentration of effort in time and space; economy of effort; simplicity; flexibility; security, surprise, applicable when confronted with adversity; co-operation; co-ordination, administration and logistics.

Status is the state of an investment leading towards statehood. We, Québécois, have reached that status, de facto and partially de jure, after nearly five centuries of repeated efforts. We must now put into practise the basic principles of geopolitics, so our State will reach full status and effectiveness. Thus, we cannot remain infeodated to United Empire Loyalist interests, concentrated in Ottawa, simply because we will not be able to act with any degree of magnitude. This is not separatism, but a matter of status and action. We cannot be subjects of two different and opposed States: our natural State and the unitary, centralist, arbitrary, Loyalist and potentially totalitarian State of Ottawa, which has and will treat us with contempt and hypocrisy, as before in the British Empire, in order to better serve the interests of the “chosen few” to the detriment of everyone else. Having an absolute upper hand on communications, Ottawa delivers a unidimensionnal, simplistic and manichean one-way message, which we can only oppose by direct relations with our people. But the Internet is now offering us unexpected possibilities to transmit our own message and this is now a subject for concern in Ottawa.

THE SITUATION IN 1960

Many events, not necessarily sensational, exerted major impacts on our society in 1960. With the Aggiornamento, the Church began veering on a new course. In Quebec, the clergy abandoned its privileges and its influence, allowing secularizations, which coincided with the growth of our middle classes, a novelty in la société Québécoise. Education for the modern age was a major issue in Quebec and redundant subjects such as excessive religious studies, were replaced by mathematics and science. Now, Québec holds a very enviable widespread reputation in mathematics. Communications were and are still changing. It was the end of the railroad age and the beginnings of the St Lawrence Seaway. This meant a new shift of entreprizes, mostly Anglos, from Montreal to the Great Lakes lowlands, now Southern Ontario, and the West. The strategic purposes of such shifts were the same as during the previous century, when canals and railroads were constructed, only this time, with larger magnitude. When the construction of highways began, the Government of Quebec decided that this will immediately become our business, not Ottawa’s business. All Québécois supported this decision. The highways will be our enterprise, creating centripetal dynamics within Quebec territory. This new era was referred to as the Quiet Revolution. At the same time, decolonizations were taking place in all colonial Empires.

But Quebec was not recognized as the home of a people. It was only an infeodated province deprived of the fundamental powers necessary for self-rule. We were humiliated by the arrogance of the United Empire Loyalists, infuriated by the servile submissiveness of our own natural leaders, dealing too many times in lies. We were mad at our upper clergy, still holding a position of influence, pro-British and pro-Loyalist, no doubt out of class interest, despite the fact that it enjoyed very little consideration in the United Empire Loyalist (alias Canadian) world. There were too many collaborators among us, aplaventristes, as we keep calling them, who played into the hands of Ottawa and Toronto power brokers, a situation not abnormal with dominated peoples but abject for the conscious Québécois. We suffered from repeated verbal abuses, directed against Quebec, its people, and French Canada generally, in English language publications all across Canada, under the most futile pretexts. But we also understood that the Irish, the Celtic Scots, the Welshs, the Acadians, the Yankees, the Boers of South Africa and the Australians suffered similar abuses, often with much more serious consequences. With the United Empire Loyalists, insults and foul language are common practice, to be translated into action.

THEATRICAL TERRORISM vs REAL TERRORISM

We decided that time has come to do something about it and bring our colonial status to an end. However, lacking in political education, our people although sympathetic towards our ambitions, could not effectively support us. The ruthless repressions of 1838-39 were still in everybody’s mind. Our grand-parents had been directly informed about it by their own parents, who had been exposed to the wrath of the British Army. Realizing therefore that we did not have the means necessary to conduct at least a protracted war on a grand scale against our Loyalist enemies, with a satisfactory degree of magnitude and good chances of success, we resolved to limit ourselves to coups de théâtre.

Our intention was to attain political objectives with a maximum economy of means. We did not plan to kill anybody nor to cause much damage to property and we regret the accidents which caused losses of lives. However, such damage is infinitesimal compared to countless murders, destructions, extorsions, injustices, lies, cruelties and miseries, legal or otherwise, inflicted by United Empire Loyalists to anyone who had something to lose, from cromwellian times until today. The war in Ulster is NOT, repeat, NOT a religious war. It opposes the United Empire Loyalists to the Celtic Irish, over economic and political possessions. Politics is a matter of interest, balance of forces and effectivity and so are wars, all of which extend politics by other means, in a totally machiavellian spirit. However, no Loyalist has ever been accused of war crimes. It was the reverse. Loyalists accused, condemned and destroyed countless innocent people. The purpose of so many cheap shots was always the same : greed, depossessions and good conscience at the same time, all in one package. Before placating us as « terrorists », The Gazette should honestly expose loyalist arch-hypocritical terrorism and crimes. The Internet is full of good websites on the subject, almost non existent in Canada, but very widespread in the United States, where the Yankees have been directly confronted to the British and the Loyalists. Without the help of a French army and a French fleet, which we thought were destined to liberate us from the rotten grip of the British in Quebec, the Yankees would have been slaughtered. Take notice of the fact that after Waterloo, a British Expeditionnary Force was removed from France to cross the Atlantic and try to reconquer the United States.

LOYALIST ANTIGALLICISM

The Gazette of Saturday january the 19th, 2002, published a typical unsigned loyalist editorial concerning me. This was an addition to the comments signed by M Don Macpherson published in the same newspaper on Sunday the 20th. This is sheer loyalist paranoïa in a strong antigallic setting. If M Macpherson vituperates such much against me, it is because he knows that the danger of being hit by a goon squad from the MLNQ is very remote. Since M Macpherson now appears to me as the perfect case of an accident looking for a place to happen, then his name need not be written on any hit list. Being his own worst enemy, M. Macpherson needs no other enemy. Since the Loyalist (alias Canadian) cause he represents carries within itself the principle of its own destruction, then it will be more economical for us simply to abandon it to the forces of its own turpitude. I have made a mistake by paying attention to such individuals, including M. Brent (la bottine) Tyler and I shall not repeat this mistake in the future.

THE NECESSITY FOR QUEBEC TO ORGANIZE DEFENSE AND DISSUASION

The unfortunate experience of all the other peoples who fell under British and Loyalist domination has convinced us that repression and war is a perpetual option hanging over our heads like the sword of Damocles. In Ottawa, laws and preparations have been taken over a long time, under the pretext of maintaining « Canadian Unity », a policy which has succeeded « Empire Unity », and as another pretext, « fighting separatism and terrorism », especially where none exist. This is paranoïa. The real purpose remains the same : maintain the hegemony of Canada’s olygarchy and reinforce central and centralist power in Ottawa, to the detriment of the spirit of an authentic Confederation, a Union of Sovereign States. However, since no Québec Government will confront Ottawa with its intentions and options, then it becomes the task of individual groups such as MLNQ, to prepare the elements of a defense policy for Québec. With the adoption of recent bills created to corner Québec in case of a new referendum, the necessity for defense is now being realized by an increasing number of people and organizations.

History must not and will not repeat itself and the continuities affecting our collective status will not be destroyed to cause us to regress to statu quo ante. Studies and measures to assure our protection and collective defense are now taking place in an increasing scale and we intent to put as much competence into them as we have in many other fields. Our « we » is a NOUS, and that NOUS will not be destroyed, especially to please the United Empire Loyalists, alias Canadians.

The actual MLNQ is a defensive movement aiming at dissuading the use of violence against Quebec, in the process of reaching statehood status, de jure as well as de facto. The F.L.Q. was headed by a handful of very young idealists, inexperienced, mostly younger than thirty years old and less than forty in numbers. Far more numerous, and widespread throughout Quebec, the MLNQ is composed of people of all ages and all walks of life, most of whom highly qualified in technologies, including space technology, social sciences and geopolitics. Their arrival in the movement has surprised me considerably. Such a novelty in an old conjecture was most unexpected and I must admit I was not prepared for it.

Educated as it is, this new generation acquires through Internet all necessary knowledge concerning wars, warfare and weapons. So my services are not required any more and the MLNQ is now only a discussion forum on fundamental questions affecting the future of Quebec. Everybody is well informed through the American Internet about United Empire Loyalists before and during the War of American Independence and the War of 1812. In fact, millions of websites provide this new generation with information never seen before by any previous generation, to include Ph D graduates and post-graduates.

Numerous other similar movements are now rising in Quebec, outnumbering the MLNQ and seeking a coalition of all sovereignist forces outside the Parti Quebecois. Now, Bernard Landry openly recognizes the growing strength of the new movement, its competence, determination, sophistication and independence from his own party. Without exception, however, what is wanted by all, Parti Quebecois members, MLNQ members and the increasing number of new sovereignists, can be resumed in one word: power to act with magnitude, in keeping with our de facto conquest of statehood status. This is not a revolution, nor rebellion or insurrection. This is not separatism either, especially in the pejorative and dangerously simplistic sense most Quebecois have perceived through their readings of the Canadian anglophone press. This is not tribalism either, as we are a people, not a tribe. It is the coming to existence of Quebec, indeed one of the last Nation-State on earth to be born. For Quebec and an increasing number of Quebecois, their interests will be best served when all power and taxes are concentrated in Quebec, where they belong, in accordance with the spirit of an authentic Confederation, which is a Union of Sovereign States, not in Ottawa. Statehood we want and statehood we will get. Nous vaincrons.