place the Republican Party.rnWhen an openly Christian politicalrnparty consistently elects mayors and congressmen,rnwe can then begin to talkrnabout a national third party. The Biblerntells us to become successful at littlernthings before taking on bigger things. Jesus’rnparable of the talents is the properrnstandard: “His lord said unto him, Wellrndone, good and faithful servant; thournhast been faithful over a few things, I willrnmake thee ruler over many things: enterrnthou into the joy of thy lord” (Matthewrn25:23). This principle applies to politics.rnWe should not dream great dreams ofrnnational political triumph through arnthird party when we have yet to win a singlerncounty government out of 3,300.rn—Gary NorthrnTyler, TXrnOn QuebecrnWhile working up to his conclusion thatrn”the first task of a moral human being isrnnot to play the stranger to our friendsrnand judge the world as if we were gods,”rnThomas Fleming (“Other People,”rnMarch) finds it necessary to issue thisrnstirring proclamation: “It is time for Anglo-rnAmericans, in Canada and the UnitedrnStates, to make up their minds oncernand for all that the French are in Quebecrnto stay.”rnI’d be very much surprised if Dr.rnFleming could find anyone up here whornneeds such advice. In fact, a great manyrnCanadians have come to see a trulyrnsovereign, self-supporting Quebec as arnnecessary step to English Canada’s regeneration.rnIt’s been a long time since FrenchrnCanada’s otherness was considered arnproblem to be solved through assimilation.rnBut while Quebec’s national institutionsrnand traditions have beenrnstrengthened over the last 30 years or so,rnthe opposite holds true for those of EnglishrnCanada. It’s no coincidence. Bilingualismrnand biculturalism, Ottawa’srncause celebre during the mid-1960’s,rnwere forced on English Canada with farrngreater fervor than on Quebec. As predecessorsrnof multiculturalism, “bi andrnhi” can now be seen as the first attack inrnthe war that engulfs us.rnEconomically, too, Quebec is a liability.rnThe province benefits disproportionatelyrnfrom government jobs, federal patronagerncontracts, interprovincial tradernpreferences, and a form of interprovincialrnsocialism called transfer payments,rnwhich channel billions of federal tax dollarsrnannually to Quebec, mostly from therntwo most westerly, least Frenchrnprovinces. The cost of maintainingrnFrench-language government servicesrnand state-owned French-language televisionrnand radio stations in all parts ofrnCanada, despite the overall tiny Frenchspeakingrnpopulation (less than five percentrnoutside of Quebec), helps explainrnCanada’s monstrous levels of debt andrntaxation. Those “millions of Frenchspeakersrnin Ontario, New Brunswick, andrnNova Scotia” to whom Dr. Flemingrnrefers do not exist, unless there has beenrna dramatic increase in Haitian immigration.rnThe 1991 census figures (the mostrnrecent available) show that Ontario, withrna total population of 10,085,000, hasrn464,000 people whose first language isrnFrench; in New Brunswick the figures arern724,000 and 237,000. In Nova Scotiarnand elsewhere in Canada, most Frenchspeakersrnare transplanted Quebecoisrnwho work for the government or stateownedrncorporations. There they providernFrench-language services to other transplantedrnQuebecois who work for the governmentrnor state-owned corporations.rnDespite the much-vaunted minorityrnstatus of the Quebecois, bloc voting andrnpolitical truculence have given Canadarnprime ministers from their province, forrn26 of the last 28 years, a disproportionatelyrnFrench federal cabinet and bureaucracyrnand a political elite that relies onrnQuebec for much of its support. It mattersrnnot at all whether members of thisrnelite are federalists or separatists. Fromrnan Anglo perspective, both are dedicatedrnto ethnic preferences, social engineering,rnand government expansion.rnThe most frightening scenario is notrnthat Quebec will secede, but that it willrnperpetuate its current ambiguity. Thernwatered-down proposal for separationrnnow being sold to the Quebecois resemblesrnnot so much a self-supporting countryrnas a comfortably well-off but financiallyrndependent Indian reservation.rn—Greg KleinrnWhitehorse, YukonrnOn the American EmpirernIn just a few years, Samuel Francis hasrngraduated from columnist to philosopherrnof history who observes past andrnpresent and draws the correct conclusionsrnfrom both. His article in the Junernissue (“The Price of Empire”) offers arnbalanced panorama, a nice surprise inrnthe avalanche of talk about “democracyrnin Zaire” and “Western values.” But inrnone regard, he still displays the conservativernprejudice.rnThe Roman farmer and his Americanrncounterpart, the small businessman, arernrobbed, Francis writes, by the large plantationsrnand the modern transnationalrncompanies. That was indeed the casernwith the Roman peasant whose choicernwas between decades of service in thernarmy or a miserable life on the dole inrnRome. But Americans today enjoy thernbenefits of empire when, for example,rnthey pay far less for gas and many otherrngoods and services than one does anywherernin Europe.rnOur “isolationists” enjoy the best ofrntwo worlds: patriotic slogans and a highrn(imperial) standard of living. The troublernis, at some point the logic of empirernwill interrupt this heaven on earth.rnSamuel Francis is mature enough torncrush the main taboo: “It cannot happenrnhere!” It is already happening. Historyrndoes have its laws and its will.rn—Thomas MolnarrnRidgewood, N/rnOn Reverse DiscriminationrnI would like to thank Nicholas Stix for hisrnMarch Correspondence (“Letter FromrnNew York City: The War on WhiternTeachers”). I taught foreign language inrna public high school until about fivernyears ago. We had an incident in whichrna custodian, who was also part of the administrationrnfriendship circle, physicallyrnthreatened one of my fellow teachers forrnbringing up an issue involving the distributionrnof stipend positions for activitiesrnand sports in our school. The inquiryrnshowed that the principal was illegallyrngiving out the extra positions to peoplernnot covered by our contract. As a result,rnthe custodian lost a few stipends. Therncustodian then turned on this Germanrnteacher. He chased her down the hall,rnfollowed her into the women’s lounge,rnshaking his fist, and told her what he’drndo to her.rnThe custodian was black, the foreignrnlanguage teacher was white. And yournhave already probably guessed what hap-rnAUGUST 1997/5rnrnrn