Before completing my article on Refus global(1948), a document that indicted the institutions of old Quebec, the Church in particular, I am sending you the news. Refus global (1948) was written during a period in Quebec’s history when the province was often referred to as the “priest-ridden” province.
My students read that document because I considered it a statement that ushered in Quebec’s Révolution tranquille. It is now viewed as such in an official manner.
“So the nature of war, consisteth not in actuall fighting; but in the known disposition thereto, during all the time there is no assurance to the contrary.” (The Leviathan,Chapter XIII)
Hobbes identified “three principall causes of quarrell. First, competition; Secondly, Diffidence; Thirdly, Glory. The first maketh man invade for gain; the second, for Safety; and the third, for Reputation. The first use Violence, to make themselves Masters of other mens persons, wives, children, and cattell; the second, to defend them; the third, for trifles, as a word, a smile, a different opinion, and any other signe of undervalue, either direct in their Persons, or by reflexion in their Kindred, their Friends, their Nation, their Profession, or their Name.”
What we heard and saw in this week debate, held on 16 October 2012, is one man, President Obama, defending himself against false accusations and false accusations may eventually lead a man to say: “You’re lying.” The debate turned into a quarrel and President Obama defended himself, for his own safety. Human beings are born equipped with an instinct for self-preservation. John Locke opposed inneism, but to my knowledge, he did not negate the innateness of man’s instinct for self-preservation. It is the instinct that motivates individuals to protect themselves and, at times, to enter into a Social Contract to ensure their safety.
In Chapter XIV of the Leviathan, Hobbes writes that “no man can transferre, or lay down his Right to save himselfe from Death, Wounds, and Imprisonment.”
In the case of the October 16th debate, no one had to fear death and imprisonment, but wounds were being inflicted. Mr Romney indulged in machiavelianism: the end justifies the means. I therefore believe that the winner in the October 16th, 2012 debate is President Obama. Defending oneself seems legitimate.
The Near and Middle East
Moreover, if war is a constant feature in human behaviour, the US and the world may be at risk again (please see the New York Times, 20 October 2012, for an analysis), “Mr. Romney has repeatedly criticized the president as showing weakness on Iran and failing to stand firmly with Israel against the Iranian nuclear threat.”
Mr Romney should know better. It isn’t in the best interest of the United States to wage war in the Near and Middle East. Citizens of the Near and Middle East loathe the United States. I would rephrase the above quotation. It would read: “The world must stand firmly in opposing nuclear threat.”
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian President, is no choirboy. If the US takes sides, it may provoke him into greater adversity.
Besides, we all know that Mr Romney is seeking the Presidency of the United States in order to spare the rich their fair share of taxes, which is the freedom we surrender, the social contract, in order to live safely.
Let this gentleman guide you into a better future. And in return be his guide. He has paid his dues, i.e. taxes. As for Mr Romney, having studied the social contract, I am rather surprised he is even allowed to drive his car(s) on the highways of America. Citizens pay their income tax. Is there any way his indebtedness to the United States could be assessed?
Yesterday, my reader was not accessible. It was filled with blogs from I person I follow, I tried to get beyond these posts, but gave up after two hours. Does WordPress have a way of controlling this problem. I would like to read the blogs I was sent, but one blog would give me access to all the blogs the person I follow has written. Then I would read all of the blogs I follow. Doing so is very important.
Nicholas Roerich, (October 9, 1874 – December 13, 1947)
I am sending the news without commenting on Nicholas Roerich whose life and times are fascinating. It is best I discuss Roerich separately as I wish to send the News as quickly as possible.
Please note that last night’s debate between President Obama and Mr Romney can be watched on the New York Times and elsewhere.
I have been extremely busy during the last few days. As a result, it has not been possible for me to post blogs.
Photo credit: WikipediaJohn James Audubon (26 April 1785 – 27 January 1851)
Rameau’s Boréades is his fifth and last tragédies en musique and opéra-ballet. Rameau’s librettist for the Boréades was Louis de Cahusac. As you know, Rameau was maligned during the Querelle des Bouffons (1752-54). However, allow me to quote German scholar H. W. von Walthershausen:
“Rameau was the greatest ballet composer of all times. The genius of his creation rests on one hand on his perfect artistic permeation by folk-dance types, on the other hand on the constant preservation of living contact with the practical requirements of the ballet stage, which prevented an estrangement between the expression of the body from the spirit of absolute music.”
His ballets were suites (called “ordre” by François Couperin): gavottes, minuets, loures, rigaudons, passepieds, tambourins, and musettes. These pieces are usually gleaned from various folk dances, such as the Spanish and possibly Portuguese passacaglia.
Absolute music is self-referential. It excludes all pieces that have so much as a title, such as Vivaldi’s “Four Seasons.” Music that is not self-referential is called programmatic or program music.
A century is a very long time, but Marian Anderson’s performance of “Plaisird’amour” brought me greater pleasure than the more authentic Baroque version. I liked the slower pace, but particularly charming was Marian Anderson’s ability to sing the highest notes with minimum obvious recourse to the various techniques used by most mezzo-sopranos or sopranos.
This comment is in praise of Marian Anderson. I am in no way criticizing Poème Harmonique artists who are thorough professionals and perform to perfection. But how can one demand of the very best of sopranos to match a voice “heard once in a hundred years.”
Today, I wish to express a degree of indignation. As you know, a video ridiculing Prophet Muhammad was seen on YouTube and, therefore, globally. Making and showing such a video was juvenile behaviour. To the individuals who think this was great fun, “boys will be boys,” I want to say that the persons who made the video acted irresponsibly and recklessly.
Inflammatory videos can lead to the death of innocent people and they invite a repetition of the attacks of 9/11. Moreover, people who show hatred harm the effort of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama. They also harm the reputation of Americans who are respectful of other cultures.
It would seem appropriate to ask the persons who produced the video ridiculing Prophet Muhammad to go and apologize to the grieving families of the four persons who died in Lybia: Christopher Stevens, US Ambassador to Libya, Sean Smith, a Foreign Service information management officer, former Navy SEALs Tyrone S. Woods and Glen A. Doherty.
My apologies. I thought two persons had died in Lybia, but there were four victims. (See CBS News, 14 September 2012.)
I am still very disappointed. The Parti québécois is an indépendantisteparty and I am an advocate of unity among Canadian provinces. However, one does not try to kill another human being. Madame Marois is a human being and this form of hatred, assassination, is unacceptable, as is bearing a firearm.
As for the man who attempted to stop the gunman and died, he was a 48 year-old father. He will be sorely missed by his family and friends. However, people are not blaming English-speaking Quebecers for the shooting. The gunman, Mr Bain, acted on his own.
It was a narrow victory, so those of us who wish for Canada to remain a unified country will regroup and rectify matters, but in a civilized manner.
Madame Marois has already but a referendum on independence on a back burner. I believe she will try not to raise tuition fees, but may have to face reality. She does not have very deep pockets.
I did ask one more person why she voted for Madame Marois. She said: “I am a Quebecer.” Je suis québécoise. Undergirding that statement, I heard: “I am a Catholic.” Je suis catholique. Quebec used to be called the “priest-ridden” province, which it was. However, the words that came to my mind may be a misperception, but not altogether.
I am sending you the News. Madame Marois, the leader of the Parti québécois is Quebec’s new premier. Under such circumstances, a victory for the Parti québécois, I believe it is best to remain as optimistic as possible. Madame Marois‘s victory will probably lead to a referendum. But whether or not madame Marois will hold a referendum, as was done in the past, we truly do not know. However, if I had an opinion to give, it would be not to provoke madame Marois and members of her cabinet. It may also be useful to remember that what politicians promise to do during an electoral campaign, they may not be able to do once they are in office. For instance, there are financial constraints.
The last time the Parti québécois was elected into office, 600,000 persons left Quebec. These persons were tax payers. Can madame Marois raise taxes once again? If she does, Quebec citizens will protest.
Micheline Walker©
November 2nd, 2012
WordPress
Micheline's Blog 