Search results

Même si la plupart des manuels de science politique parlent du déclin des chambres hautes à notre époque, elles n'en continuent pas moins à poser un problème « classique » et «crucial». Ce sont les deux épithètes qu'emploie Georges Burdeau dans son volumineux et inégal Traité de science politique en précisant qu' « il n'est guère de problèmes d'organisation constitutionnelle qui n'aient donné lieu, dans les milieux politiques, à des discussions plus âpres, et dans la doctrine, à une littérature plus abondante que celui de savoir si l'organe législatif doit être constitué par une assemblée unique ou par deux chambres». Dès l'antiquité, sous forme de ce qu'on appelait alors le régime mixte-la combinaison de la royauté, l'aristocratie, et la démocratie-le problème a passionné les esprits et Platon en a esquissé la théorie dans Les Lois. Aristote a précisé les idées de son maître dans sa Politique et a inspiré au Moyen Age Thomas d'Aquin qui, dans son régime politique idéal, veut combiner royauté, aristocratie, et démocratie. On ne possédait tout de même pas une idée très précise de la chambre haute qui ne s'incarna vraiment qu'avec la naissance et le développement de la Chambre des Lords en Angleterre. Mais ce n'est évidemment qu'avec l'avènement des idées démocratiques au dix-huitième siècle et surtout leur mise en pratique au dix-neuvième que se posa vraiment la question de la dualité des chambres. Après un débat fameux, en septembre, 1789, la Révolution française fut d'abord favorable à une assemblée unique mais dans la constitution de l'an III, le bicaméralisme triompha comme il devait triompher dans la plupart des constitutions pour servir de frein aux assemblées populaires. Il fut cependant, en 1830, l'objet d'une brillante attaque de la part de Jeremy Bentham dans sa lettre «to his fellow citizens of France on Houses of Peers and Senates».

Historically, French Canadians have not really believed in democracy for themselves; and English Canadians have not really wanted it for others. Such are the foundations upon which our two ethnic groups have absurdly pretended to be building democratic forms of government. No wonder the ensuing structure has turned out to be rather flimsy.The purpose of the present essay is to re-examine some of the unstated premises from which much of our political thinking and behaviour is derived, and to suggest that there exists an urgent need for a critical appraisal of democracy in Canada. No amount of inter-group back-slapping or political bonne-ententisme will change the fact that democracy will continue to be thwarted in Canada so long as one-third of the people hardly believe in it—and that because to no small extent the remaining two-thirds provide them with ample grounds for distrusting it.

This paper will describe the functional relationship of the growth of industry to the traditional system of rural life prevailing in Quebec. The general course of this growth is familiar enough. Quebec has always had industries which exploited the native resources of forest, sea, and lately, of the mines. In the present phase new major industries, which make little use of native materials except water and man-power, have invaded the province. Industries of this type are generally not on the frontiers of settlement, but in the very heart of the province. In the course of the last two decades, Quebec has become more urban than rural. It is now only slightly less industrial than Ontario.Modern capitalistic industry grew up in a few centres, coincident with an enormous expansion of sources of raw materials and markets. Its spread has taken two forms: the first, still proceeding at a slackening rate, is the extension of its far-flung frontiers; the second is an inner expansion in which industry moves from its most intensely developed older centres to nearby less industrialized regions, where it finds a population accustomed to the main features of Western capitalistic civilization but not sophisticated with respect to its more extreme manifestations. Quebec and the southern United States are among the outstanding regions in which this inner expansion or "mopping up" is taking place.

The Preliminary Report of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism begins with a sombre statement concerning the condition of Canada. The commissioners note that "Canada … is passing through the greatest crisis in its history" and that "the source of the crisis lies in the Province of Quebec." The purpose of this note is to report the results of a limited investigation of that crisis.

Any attempt to assess the direction of social change in a particular society is a risky business at best. Yet, inasmuch as sociology, in its official texts on method, rests its claim to scientific status on its predictive capacities, it must somehow, sometimes, take this risk and say something about what are the significant changes occurring in the social organization of a society. In order to achieve any such general assessment the social analyst needs, it seems to me, to consider the society as a whole, and through time.Sociologists are generally reluctant to view the whole of a society as a proper subject of study and reluctant also to study social phenomena through time. Indeed, what is at present felt to be adequate methodology, or should we say prestigeful methodology, requires living respondents whose answers can be given statistical treatment, and therefore becomes largely irrelevant for studies with historical dimensions; and while it may be quite useful in measuring change it is quite helpless of itself to account for it. Furthermore its preference for piecemeal and detailed verifications makes it a rather awkward instrument to use when dealing with general analyses. Anthropologists, by tradition, have commonly achieved such analyses in the case of less complex cultures. Even they, however, when confronted with large societies, have tended either to adopt the sociological habit of narrow investigation or to postulate that an image of the larger whole can be gleaned through the minute study of a particular instance, a particular cell such as a village, or a town. In choosing the first alternative, they abdicate what seems to have been a traditional objective of anthropology. In the second case, they stand in danger of missing the target through oversimplification.