Trinity College School - Record Yearbook (Port Hope, Ontario Canada)

Page 21 text:

POURQUOI CANADA? The most startling fact concerning the recent wave of terrorism and kidnapping in Montreal, is, I feel, that it happened in Canada. Most Canadians, 1 wonld guess, are walking around shaking their heads, not so much at the fact that this tragedy is happening, for such things have become almost commonplace today, but rather at the fact that it hap- pened in a country which most of them would think of as much less prone to violence than the United States. And at first glance it does indeed seem an anomaly that the United States with all its violence, with all its campus, race and protest riots, would not have had this type of happening while Canada, sometimes called a restrained version of the U. S., would. To try to understand this, one must, I feel, look for other examples of this kind of activity in other countries. The example that leaps to the eye when this is done is not another country but another continent: South America. It seems to be a political fact of life in the countries of that continent that foreign diplomats or local politicians are liable to be kidnapped and or murdered at any time. In fact it was in South America that the tough, no giving in to the kidnappers’ policy was developed, a policy which is even now being practised here in Canada. The question that arises almost inevitably at this point is why is it Canada that is following in South America s foot- steps rather than the U. S. ? What have South America and Canada got that the States doesn’t have ?

Page 20 text:

UNKNOWN FREEDOM Freedom has always appealed to man. It has been one of our basic desires evident throughout history. We have been in a constant struggle to attain our so-called entitled rights and liberties from either political, economic or religous re- strictions. Still today there are those who advo- cate freedom from some restriction. In this “struggle’ we believe we have become more free relative to previous societies in that we all have more liberties and rights as individuals. However, is this really freedom? Are we really free and happy? Although we might believe we have more freedom I don’t think any of us can honestly admit in the last analysis that we are any happier, which we should be if we were actually free or freer. Consequently I cannot believe we have real freedom. We may be freer to act but because of the fact that we’ve been conditioned by educa- tion and customs, etc. our will is limited. Even though we are more liberated we act the same. We have the same values and goals. We have been conditioned to work for the betterment of the system. We are trapped by the system in that our lives are devoted to it. Our goals are to be a success, to be famous, and not for our own personal fulfillment. As a result we have accepted and lead our lives on false val- ues. We are far more concerned with money and our materialistic wealth than the true wealth of experience and knowledge. We have forgotten the virtues of life. Our life and energy is consumed by the system, consequently we miss life s true meaning and what it offers. We have created an impersonal and insensitive society of selfish and aggressive individuals of no personal identities. It is a socie- ty almost void of communication and honest relationships. Such a society has developed and survived because of the fact that many of us are not ready for such true and personal freedom. We are not mature enough-to be aware of it and handle it. In fact many of us fear it because it threatens our security and requires a change in us. We are caught in our own man made game where we are restricted or limited for experienc- ing life fully. To break through this “cell re- quires an awareness of knowledge of one’s self, his society and life itself. With this personal free- dom we may be free to experience true relation- ships with others and nature and be confidently ourselves . i. a. skaggard 10

Page 22 text:

When viewed in this light a few things become clear. In the first place both the United States and the South American countries have many more university protests than Canada. They also have or seem to have more violence within their societies. The United States’ crime rate is one of the highest in the world as is that of most South American countries. South America has her violent guerilla bands, America has the Bl ack Panthers and the Weathermen, a para-militant group within the militant S.D.S. structure to say nothing of the conservative’ mili- tants such as the members of the Ku Klux Klan or the John Birch Socie- ty. Canada has only the F.L.Q. And thus it would seem that the U.S. is much more prone to violence than Canada and it is only, perhaps, when these assorted questions and facts are viewed in the light of location and type of violence that the answer becomes clearer. For the South American terrorists are fighting, literally fighting in every sense of the word, for revolutionary goals. They want to destroy their present gov- ernment or be granted certain demands that they consider of prime importance. They are a unified cohesive force within their individual frameworks and they are driven by any means possible to obtain their goals. , , , This is a unique system, not matched anywhere else in the New World, not in the U.S. nor Canada. However, I feel that the disparity is greater between these guerillas and the various militant American groups than between the guerillas and the F.L.Q. For many of the American groups, while professing a desire to see America destroyed they themselves benefit from it. They are, perhaps, from middle class families and rely upon their society for sustenance and their luxury while bitterly criticizing it. Theirs is a type of wish ful- fillment in which they wish to have things all their own way but do not want to jeopordize their lives or living standard by preaching their phi- losophy. The other militant groups I feel who do believe in what they say to the extent of carrying out such violence as kidnapping and mur- der are too diffuse. They are spread out among two hundred million people and as a result, their ideas and actions all become watered down, absorbed by the mass. However, in Canada the F.L.Q. is not diffused. They are concentrat- ed in one province, and in this province they are surrounded with peo- ple of the same cultural background as their own; people who are in a sense alien and antagonistic to those people whom the F.L.Q. are trying to destroy. For the F.L.Q., I feel, fall into the second category of militant groups. They are not, like the Weatherman, trying to have their cake and eat it too, to benefit from society but also destroy it, they are rather like the Black Panthers, fiercely believing in their cause and all it stands for. However they re not so diluted. They are not spread over three thousand miles; they live among three and a half million people, most of whom have sympathetic tendencies toward them. 12