Most historians and social science scholars agree that Maurice Duplessis, who was one of Quebec's dictators and rivaled Batista in Cuba in terms of authoritarianism (minus the executions) in about the same period, by giving privileges to the rural world, helped slow considerably the economic development of Quebec. That is the interpretation i have of his reign, and i underline the word 'reign' since, as a despot, he embodied all the worst in French-Canadian values.
Nowadays, the spirit of Duplessis seems to haunt the political agenda at every level of government, be it municipal, regional, provincial and even federal. At the municipal and regional level, politicians seem to tend to feel utter contempt for their constituents, as is witnessed in the "i know what i'm doing and i'm doing it whether you like it or not" on the part of suburban mayors like Vaillancourt in Laval and Andrée Boucher in Quebec City. Is it because Charest proudly sports the same impunity tag -- with respect to such issues as Mt. Orford or the forced signing of anti-union laws -- that local politicos feel comfortable espousing the same views or is it because of a backlash fueled by the influence of the United States?
Maybe both.
One thing is for sure, if agriculture regains the centre of attention it got under Duplessis, the economy of Quebec is sure to go down the drain. At least the situation is not as clear cut as in the forest business (pun unintented) but they also get more money from us than they give back to us. As for agriculture, pay attention to what the cheuf had to say all but two generations ago:
"L'agriculture est la banque nationale, où notre race garde ce qu'elle a de plus cher, nos traditions." [Agriculture is our national bank, where our race keeps what is the dearest to us, our traditions.] (Le Devoir, June 23, 1952)
"L'agriculture est notre principal facteur de stabilité de notre économie. Elle est un point de ralliement, une forteresse implacable. Elle est garantie de paix et de sécurité." [ "Agriculture is the main factor in our economic stability. It is a rallying point, an indestructible forteress. It ensures peace and security".] (Le Devoir, September 5, 1946)
"L'agriculture, c'est l'industrie basique, c'est la pierre angulaire du progrès, de la stabilité et de la sécurité. Les peuples forts sont ceux chez lesquels l'agriculture occupe une place de choix." [Agriculture is the basic industry, the cornerstone of progress, stability and security. Strong nations are that confer a agriculture ] (Le Devoir, June 29, 1950)
Unfortunately for Duplessis, when agriculture is at the centre of a national economy, that means the country is either quite backward or does not have much else to run it, and it is anything but stable and "indestructible". When agriculture is the basis of your economy, you are dependent on all the other countries for whatever you do not produce. The Netherlands is a coalition of developed cities with very little agricultural land but the few acres it has is way more productive than, say, Poland (who has more than double the Netherlands' population and, what, eight times the land area) -- not because of the EU subsidies (Poland receives a bigger share of them since 2004 anyway) but because Netherlands have a city-based economy and Poland does not.
Posted by phonono at août 02, 2006 12:05 PM