Anyone acquainted with the political philosophy of Cultural Action Party of Canada will know that our belief system includes the concept that the Liberal Party of Canada and establishment media are “joined at the hip.”
Within this context, one of the least understood—and most impactful—example can be found within the world of high finance and banking.
Such as it is, few Canadians are aware of the history of our nation’s economic transition away from the Bank of Canada, and toward international banking, or what is referred to as Charter Banking.
As it happens, as recently as the year 2011, a lawsuit was filed in the Federal Court by the Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform against the Government of Canada, and the Bank of Canada. The lawsuit attempted to:
“Restore the use of the Bank of Canada to its original purpose, by exercising its public statutory duty and responsibility. That purpose included making interest-free loans to the municipal/provincial/federal governments for ‘human capital’ expenditures (education, health, other social services) and/or infrastructure expenditures.”
After nearly five and a half years of contentious litigation, on May 4, 2017 the Supreme Court of Canada made a decision not to hear the case.
The Bank of Canada was first created in 1934, under private ownership. In 1938, our government nationalized the bank. Since this time, it has been publicly owned. It was mandated to lend not only to the federal government, but to the provinces as well. was injected into various infrastructure projects.
With the outbreak of the Second World War, it was the Bank of Canada that financed the war effort. For the following 30 years, the Bank of Canada helped to transform Canada’s economy, while elevating the standard of living for Canadians.
The critical point here is that between 1939 and 1974, the federal government borrowed extensively from its own Central Bank. The result was what was best of Canadian society— interest-free debt.
It was as it this point the situation was fundamentally altered. An entity called the Besel Committee was created to ostensibly establish global monetary and financial stability. As it happened, Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau became involved in the process. An ominous sign, indeed.
The Basel Committee’s recommendation was to encourage the Liberal government to borrow from interest-charging private banks, and END the practice of borrowing interest-free from their own publicly owned banks.
“The difference is simply that a publicly-owned bank returns the interest to the government and the community, while a privately-owned bank siphons the interest into its capital account, to be reinvested at further interest, progressively drawing money out of the productive economy.”
Why did Pierre Trudeau endorse this transition? Was the endorsement to the benefit of the Canadian economy, citizens, families, workers or any other element of society?
It appears not. In typical Liberal fashion, all the benefit appears to go to non-Canadian, international sources—what in 2020 may be labelled “the globalists.”
% OF DEFICIT INCREASE UNDER PRIME MINISTER:
Lester Pearson 1963-68 Debt: $18.75 billion 19.6% increase
Joe Clark 1979-80 Debt: $77.4 billion 18.3% increase
Brian Mulroney 1984-94 Debt: $487.5 billion 67.7% increase
Jean Chretien 1994-2004 Debt: $496.2 billion 1.8% increase
PIERRE TRUDEAU 1968-79, 1980-84 Debt: $157.2 billion 738.7% INCREASE
Now, let’s travel deeper into globalist ethos of Pierre Trudeau, and the Liberal Party of Canada:
According to a Canadian Dimension report, this decision was never debated by Parliament. Nor was it questioned by Opposition Parties.
Notice a lack of democratic process? See how neatly this fits in with the anti-democratic nature of Pierre Trudeau, communist enthusiast?
To what extent did establishment media dissect this axiomatic transformation? You got it—the answer is ZERO Percent.
As a result, Canadians have been saddled with government debt at all levels—debt that has risen exponentially since the mid-1970’s:
“Over a 108-year period (1867-1974) the accumulated debt shows as nearly a flat line growing to only $18 billion. But around 1974, the debt began to grow exponentially and, over a mere 43 years, it reached to $728 billion in 2017.” Canadian prime minister in 2017— Justin Trudeau.
“The debt curve that began its exponential rise in 1974 tilted toward the vertical in 1981, when interest rates were raised by the US Federal Reserve to 20 percent.”
Who was prime minister from 1980-1984?? Why, it was Pierre Trudeau. Canada has now forked out over a trillion dollars in deficit interest payments.
Fast forward to 2015—the year son Justin Trudeau became prime minister of Canada. The fact that Trudeau Jr. put national deficit—as well as personal and family debt— into the stratosphere is irrefutable.
Does media hide the disservice of Justin Trudeau in 2020 as they did Pierre Trudeau in 1974? Yes, they do.
Something fishy going on within the former “Great White North?” Of course there is— and of course there has been ever since the day Pierre Trudeau seized control of Canada in the year 1968.
Anyone heard of combined, long-term government and media obfuscation? A planned and pre-meditated seduction of society for the benefit of non-Canadians, international banks and globalist power-players?
You have now. Too bad 98% percent of society will never experience a similar feeling due to the pseudo-communist Trudeau Family and their mainstream media backers.
— Brad Salzberg, Founder, Cultural Action Party of Canada(est. 2016)
This is nicely put! .
Best Essay writing
narrative essay https://trickyessays.org/narrative-essay/
Merci–Brad
Hmmmm. I wonder how the author connects communism (‘community minded’?) with this performance that is obvious the opposite of community minded behaviour – as outlined explicitly by the author. Is this a lip of the pen or a major misunderstanding of communism. I think it should be called fascism, dictatorship or some other non-democratic meaning term. Have we completely forgotten that the ideal of communism was defiled by the cold war to scare people away from ever wanting anything like public or community control over the government that was supposed to be looking after them?
Most of this never happened. You are just repeating the false claims of COMER and Rocco Galati.
The purpose of the Bank of Canada was never “making interest-free loans to the municipal/provincial/federal governments for ‘human capital’ expenditures (education, health, other social services) and/or infrastructure expenditures.” Those words originate in Rocco Galati’s claim and appear nowhere in the Bank of Canada Act or any other Bank of Canada document. The Bank of Canada Act allows but has never required the Bank of Canada to lend to the federal or provincial governments. The Bank of Canada Act has never said anything about the interest rate on the loans, lending to municipal governments, or the purpose of any loans.
There is no evidence the Basel Committee ever recommended the “government to borrow from interest-charging private banks, and END the practice of borrowing interest-free from their own publicly owned banks. “
That is not even related to the purpose of the Basel Committee which is to be the “ global standard setter for the prudential regulation of banks and provide a forum for regular cooperation on banking supervisory matters. “ https://www.bis.org/bcbs/ The three Basel accords deal with the regulation of private banks, not who governments borrow from.
We have paid over a trillion in interest because of deficits and debt, not some nonexistent decision in 1974 to stop borrowing from the Bank of Canada. Canada still borrows from both the Bank of Canada and private banks the same way it did before 1974.