thePhilosophyBook.com

How the world survives the 21st century and beyond!

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

*THE PHILOSOPHY Trilogy Book Series!
*The Future of Belief!
*https://t.co/gPpEjN5T8W
*The Future of God!
*https://t.co/0m9YYNj52s
*The Future of Man!
*https://t.co/UP9PxoP4fy

*talkTolerance!
*https://t.co/YrtNqtGLTg
*FROM CANADA: True. Global. Strong. Free. Brave!

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

*FEATURE VIDEO:
*How Canada remedies secessionist movements!
*ALSO, from CBC, why it is next to impossible!
*https://t.co/iIPzXTxf49
*MAIN VIDEO Table of Contents below.
*FIRST A KEY CLARIFICATION, From the 1998 Supreme Court re. the Secession of Quebec vis-a-vis the political first to the standard of established Canadian principle (via Oakes) trumps the initial legal merits of any one initial 'yes' by any one regional secessionist vote!

*PART 152: The negotiation process would require the reconciliation of various rights and obligations by negotiation between two legitimate majorities, namely, the majority of the population of Quebec, and that of Canada as a whole.  A political majority at either level that does not act in accordance with the underlying constitutional principles we have mentioned puts at risk the legitimacy of its exercise of its rights, and the ultimate acceptance of the result by the international community.

*PART 153: The task of the Court has been to clarify the legal framework within which political decisions are to be taken "under the Constitution", not to usurp the prerogatives of the political forces that operate within that framework.  The obligations we have identified are binding obligations under the Constitution of Canada. However, it will be for the political actors to determine what constitutes "a clear majority on a clear question" in the circumstances under which a future referendum vote may be taken.

Equally, in the event of demonstrated majority support for Quebec [or Alberta] secession, the content and process of the negotiations will be for the political actors to settle.  The reconciliation of the various legitimate constitutional interests is necessarily committed to the political rather than the judicial realm precisely because that reconciliation can only be achieved through the give and take of political negotiations [first to establised Canadian political principle].  To the extent issues addressed in the course of negotiation are political, the courts, appreciating their proper role in the constitutional scheme [already in effect], would have no supervisory role.

*VIDEO TABLE OF CONTENTS:
*Introduction 00:00 - 1:24.
*1998 Quebec Secession Case 1:25 - 3:49.
*1986 Supreme Court Oakes Test Case 3:50 - 10:29.

*SUMMARIES 10:30 - 16:24.
*Intro 10:30.
*Key 13:30.
*Main 14:30.
*EPILOGUE: *A call to action 16:25.
*The Making of New Canada 17:46.
___
*LONG LIVE CANADA PROPER, CANADA WHOLE!
*CANADA: True. Global. Strong. Free. Brave!
___
*CHEERS,
*David Jim Proctor (AA, BA, PB, Social Policy Issues),
*B.C., CANADA!
___

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

*CANADA AND THE REST OF THE WORLD CAN BYPASS A DICTATING TRUMP TARIFF REGIME!
*A commentary below.
___
*PLUS CLARIFICATIONS RE. SUBSIDIES:
*QUESTION.
*What if Canada (and all other nation-states) were to create a Trump-tariff work-around? What? By example, in August 10, 2026, Canada launches its new COMMODITIES SECTORIAL SUPPORT PROGRAM. In short, with Fed help, it supports lower transportation costs on essential trade goods shipped within Canada (facilitating new internal trade). IN ADDITION, why not a new reciprocating International Purchase and Export Grant (I-PEG), this time between any and all new partner nation-states between Canada and the rest (facilitating new world trade between all new-partner nation-states minus a dictating USA)?

*AGAIN. Minus the question of subsidies on competing nation-to-nation commodities, if the problem of new facilitated trade between Canada and the rest (minus a USA) is first and foremost an exceptional price cost in distance shipping between Canada and each partner nation-state, then make it much easier (minus competing subsidy questions) to facilitate new trade (on non-competing product items) between any two states.

*FOR EXAMPLE, on a trade item like steel, where country-A (like Canada) has lots of steel, then sell (with the help of an international purchase and export grant) to country-B, that for itself has little to no real internal steel-making capacity vis-a-vis the question of subsidies does not really apply. BUT... BUT DOES THE QUESTION OF SUBSIDIES APPLY TO THE DIFFERENT STEEL SUPPLYING NATIONS EACH WANTING TO SELL TO THE SAME COUNTRY-B? Yes! But what to do?

*ANSWER.
*The current MFN ("equal rights trade standard") is in the way. What to do? Introduce a new partnership standard akin to a reciprocating MTN ("Most Trusted Nation) trade standard vis-a-vis in liberalism-proper, grant a qualifying first sovereign right to each partner nation-state the right (in some responsible trust) to preference trade particulars with any and all new partner nation-states. On point, let country-B make a free liberal decision who they want to better-to-best trade with in the first instance ala is the most trusted nation-state standard! BUT HOW DO NEW MEMBER COUNTRIES NOW PAY FOR THE NEW INTERNATIONAL PURCHASE AND EXPORT GRANT?

*ANSWER.
*Each new partner nation-state agrees to tax a small portion of their current bilaterial county-to-country trade values. Call this, for example, a new International Development and Trade Tax (the IDST). Thus, terms and conditions pending, this new trade and development fund is made available to any new-member nation-state government and qualified domestic business respectively. In other words, it's a GRANT-BASED fund applied to any and all long-distance shipping costs respectively, thus facilitating new international trade world-over respectively.

*FOR EXAMPLE, least developed and/or developing countries world-wide especially, whether buying from Canada or any other partner nation-state, can buy new facilitated goods as required, e.g., steel, aluminum, lumber; or otherwise, can now apply the same Internatonal Purchase and Export Grant (I-PEG) to the purchase of services particularly, e.g., new-industry consulting services, etc.

*COULD A TRUMP-USA STILL INTERVENE and threaten third-party nation-state partners who wish to trade in a new way whether with Canada, or better still with any and all other world nation-states partners? I believe so. If that's the case, then, let Canada (or some responsible, courageous other) call for the creation of some new and better world economic order (a new Democratic Trade Organization). This is what now passes the unreasonable economic dictates of any one economic super-state (in the tradition of a mercantilism of old)!

*P.S. It's arguably the case the greatest market in aggregate economic demand isn't the USA nor China nor the EU or even all three of the aforementioned. Rather, it's a new manner of facilitated aggregate demand that comes from any and all of the world's nation-states, each now helped by a new manner of better partner nation-state trade FIRST ONE-BY-ONE!

*YOUR THOUGHTS?

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

*WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, A new path forward!
*YouTube,
*https://t.co/FIEIGIW47B
*Plus, One Silver Bullet, a new political economy.
*https://t.co/rdBf4NjpqV
*Homepage,
*https://t.co/9tbx0fGk26
*Strengthen the nations - each local community - each person!

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

*THE MAKING OF NEW CANADA!
*One Canada whole!
*Homepage
*https://t.co/G7l7BWhQto
*On YouTube
*https://t.co/LSYxDNPNPB

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

*A WAR TO END ALL WARS!
*A people's global proposal for a new and better United Nations!
*Making the UN fit for service in the 21st century and beyond!
*Homepage - https://t.co/q81m6lVLf6

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

*IT'S NOT THAT Piers Morgan is not trusting the science.
Rather, MISSES a great opportunity to lead the discussion on the question of God, by simply not asking the right follow-up question to Sean re. his own atheistic belief in an infinite eternal pre pocket-universe! Piers - there is a better way!

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@elonmusk DEAR ELON MUSK. Yes! Also see the following @ globalproposal1 on X, or at theInternationalCommonwealthCommunity (dot) org

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@JustinBonomo *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@Israellycool @intifada *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@TheEconomist *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@SilentlySirs *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@IsraelWarInfo *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@SputnikInt *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@Jerusalem_Post *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@bdnews24 @AJEnglish @ajplus @PreetKGillMP @BBCWorld @BBCNewsnight @bpolitics @nytimes @HuffPost @Forbes @WSJ *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@l_ysr66365 *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@dwnews *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@SilentlySirs *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.

[thePhilosophyBook.com @GlobalProposal1]

@Palestinians786 *Respectfully, if nothing else is really working after all of these years, then try thinking outside of the interpretive box:
1. https://t.co/CGO8z59RLf
2. https://t.co/gL7dXyELNZ.