More on the Monarchist League and Bidding Adieu to the Royal Family

I wrote recently of a Liberal Party initiative to limit the role of the monarchy in Canada.  It is undemocratic and almost tyrannical, given the strict rules to the rights of ascendancy.  Recently, restrictions on women have been removed, but Catholics are still out and of course anyone without "Royal" blood.
 
However, Canada's Monarchist League is out to give the British Royal family more face time and are attempting to bring back all of the old traditions that promote our WASP heritage.  Anathema to French Canadians and First Nations.
 
The League admits to being behind our 1950s style citizenship guide, the expensive and archaic renaming of our navy and airforce, and the push to have the Queen's picture put back in public places.

In recent years, the Conservative government of Stephen Harper has shown an appreciation for the value of the monarchy and a willingness to restore royal symbols, Rowe said. Under its watch, a new citizenship guide has come out that emphasizes the role of the monarchy and the image of the Crown has been restored to the patch worn by customs officers on their uniforms.

The league attributes this new attitude toward the monarchy in no small part to the arm-twisting, subtle negotiating, public campaigning and persistent pestering of government officials its members have engaged in over the years.

However, many other groups have twisted Harper's arm, so why is he giving this small organization so much say over our culture and how taxpayer money is spent?

It's politics and another opportunity to divide Canadians.  He's counting on the silent majority being agreeable to the quaint customs, without looking at the broader implications.

"Monarchist League Getting Younger, More Dynamic, Say Members"

CBC did an in depth piece on the League in July, pointing out the fact that many young people are now joining the tea and crumpet crowd.  So I thought I'd take a closer look at this new phenomenon. 

These kids are not in this for the sake of tradition, but are just another vehicle for the conservative movement.  I've spent a great deal of time studying their American counterparts, like Young Americans for Freedom and Youth for Western Civilization, and their websites are almost identical in theme.

Liberal, "leftie" bashing and the promotion of far-right causes. Look at the photo of William and Kate that goes with the CBC piece.  No tea and crumpets there.

On their website, the links to their imperial guides, include the majestic:

- Tory Bloggers

- Kathy Shaidle who promotes on her blog the actions of James O'Keefe, not someone our youth should be trying to emulate.

- Daniel Larison, a paleoconservative voice for "Anglo-American conservatives"

- Lew Rockwell, right-wing activist and chairman of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, that promotes the Confederacy and is deemed to be racist by the Southern Poverty Law Center.  "Rockwell and the prominent libertarian theorist Murray Rothbard championed an open strategy of exploiting racial and class resentment to build a coalition with populist paleoconservatives."

- Peter Brimelow - the man who taught Stephen Harper everything he knows about the supremacy of the Anglo-Saxon race.  His Quebec bashing book The Patriot Game so affected Harper that he went out and bought ten copies to give to friends.  (Shut up.  I'm pretty sure he does have ten friends).  Our young aristocrats even include a quote from the owner of the anti-immigration site V-Dare and self described Paleoconservative:  "The attitude of successive governments towards the monarchy is that of the urchin, secretly urinating on some shrub in the hope that it will die."  How profound.  Picture me swooning.  Brimelow is also involved in the white race promotion group Youth For Western Civilization.

Spend a few minutes on their site and tell me if you get a warm and fuzzy feeling.  Anything regal jump out at you?

The Monarchist League claims to be non-partisan, but clearly, at least its youth wing, is anything but.  It is an indoctrination into far right-wing causes, promoting the Paleoconservative notion of the supremacy of the white race.

I wonder how many of these kids graduated from the Manning Centre for the Destruction of Democracy?

I want Canada to be independent.  Canada's neocons are now embracing this movement because it paints them as traditional conservatives, loyal to the Crown.  However, Sir John A. fought against too much influence from both Britain and the U.S.  His challenges prompted popular cartoons, of a Johnny Canuck kicking the butts of John Bull and Uncle Sam.  I tweaked one of them a little.

I expect that these young monarchists will protest the upcoming Liberal convention and the Harperites will create a whole new swath of bumper stickers, suggesting that the Liberals are unpatriotic, hate our navy and air force and want to overthrow the monarchy in a some kind of coup.

And only they can save the Queen.  Just not her silver tea service.

The Canadian Manifesto 6: To Every Action There is a Reaction. Cough, Cough!

Isaac Newton may not have had neoconservatism in mind when he wrote his laws of motion, but it seems fitting when discussing the multitude of think tanks and AstroTurf groups that back up the movement.

Most were created in reaction to an action that went against their ideology, or to bolster a policy being implemented by a neocon government. They are also important to industry lobbyists, since all are financed by large corporations hoping to dictate public policy.

If you want to follow the money I suggest you read Donald Gutstein's Not a Conspiracy Theory: How Business Propaganda Hijacks Democracy. Well researched and informative.

Beginning in the 1980s and throughout the 1990s, many books and papers were published detailing Canada's neoconservative movement, courtesy of the Chicago School and Uncle Sam.

This was back in the day when we were allowed to call Stephen Harper and his entourage neocons, without having to face a verbal firing squad.

I've began rereading several of my books from that time, now that we've had a federal neocon government for five years, and in Ontario Tim Hudak's neoconservatives have a good chance of retaking Ontario. (Mike Harris was the first to advance the interests of the American Neoconservatives)

The authors, journalists and pundits who were sounding the alarm back then, may take little comfort in knowing how right they were, but their words can still be used to educate Canadians today, especially the media.

The late Dalton Camp, former president of the now defunct federal Progressive Conservative Party (folded in 2003), wrote many columns on Preston Manning's* cozy relationship with the American neocons, including Mr Manning Goes to Washington ((did his then lieutenant, Stephen Harper, carry the luggage?), that was reprinted in his book, Whose Country is This Anyway?

However, another column he wrote, helps to reveal how these think tanks/AstroTurf groups work: Luntz of Luch With Newt (first appeared on March 17, 1995).

In it he discusses Manning's appearance with Newt Gingrich on National Empowerment Television in the U.S.. The Newt was rewarding Manning for helping him to storm Washington in 1994.

As a bit of background (I have a lot more on this which will appear in another element of the Canadian Manifesto), NET was the brainchild of Paul Weyrich, the man who helped Stephen Harper in 2006, by demanding that his flock stay silent on Harper's involvement with the American Neoconservative/Religious Right.

The late Weyrich was also a key strategist for the paleoconservative movement (white nationalism), that includes early Reform Party inspiration and Harper's favourite author, Peter Brimelow; and founder of The Christian Coalition**,  Pat Robertson.

That's Why he Makes the Big Bucks

According to Camp:

Most of the questions addressed to the Reform leader came from Newt's co-host on the show, Heather Higgins ***, a woman with a ful­some, incandescent smile sufficient to melt the polar ice cap. Also present as interlocutor, and lending a little verisimilitude, was Frank Luntz, president of Luntz Research, who, according to Higgins, was "very much involved" in helping the Reform Party in its recent Canadian electoral success in 1993. Luntz is something of an over­achiever in the polling and consulting business; his clients have included not only Gingrich and Manning, but also Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan.

A little cross border back scratching.

It was Frank Luntz who advised Stephen Harper to talk about hockey every chance he got, tapping into a national symbol.

"If there is some way to link hockey to what you all do, I would try to do it."

Luntz also inspired several of Harper's counterparts, like William Kristol, son of the late Irving Kristol. Back to Camp's column:

As made clear in a recent magazine piece, Luntz is a neo-conserv­ative of Gingrichian proportions. He favours the immediate elimina­tion of public funding for the arts, the humanities, and the Public Broadcasting Service. Before eliminating farm subsidies, Luntz would prefer them to be included in a wider range of cuts. "If every­one is giving up something at the same time, it's okay," he is quoted saying. "But if we make the farmers go first, we're going to get killed in the farm community. We've all got to go together."

This sort of pragmatic counselling excites Luntz's colleagues, such as William Kristol, who explains, "That's why Frank gets the big bucks."

If you can make a fortune with that drivel, perhaps we could all be rich.

Instead of stealing one woman's purse, steal the purses of all women. Instead of kicking one man in the shin, kick the shins of all those around him. How can anyone demand sympathy, when so many are squealing with the same pain or loss?

Yet that is why "he gets the big bucks"? Frightening.

Now to My Point.  Cough, Cough!

The above may seem irrelevant, but in fact it is enlightening, for other reasons than a simple blast from the past, since it helps to explain how organizations like Canada's Fraser Institute function.  When Stephen Harper was  helping to create the Reform Party, he visited the Fraser, to see what they could do to help.  When named prime minister,  he rewarded them with new beneficial tax polices.

To give some idea of how the Fraser works, we can compare them to the group who sponsored the Manning/Luntz comedy hour on Weyrich's National Empowerment Television.  Back to Dalton Camp:

I had been witness to a television production involving the second most powerful politician in America and the leader of the third most populous party in the Canadian Parliament and ... ? Well, it was a little hard to say—until the last words appeared on the tube, inviting viewers with questions or comments to write "The Progress and Freedom Foundation."

Every totalitarian or authoritarian movement in history co-opts the language of democracy in order to conceal its purpose. The Soviet commissars could scarcely draw a breath without invoking peace or liberty or freedom**** or progress. Even as the gulags were filling up with their victims, the regime celebrated its legitimacy by claiming itself to be the one true instrument of all the people.

The true instrument of the people wielded by big business.  From the New York Times, February 11, 1995:

"One source of financing of Mr. Gingrich's college video courses is the Progress and Freedom Foundation, a conservative advocacy group in Washington. Among the foundation's donors are half a dozen companies that do business with the agency, including two for which Mr. Gingrich has personally written letters urging approval of their products, [FDA] documents show."

The list of supporters in 1998, included tobacco giants Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds.  In a letter to PFF from then VP of Public Affairs for  Philip Morris:  "…Philip Morris is pleased with the exciting work you have done, especially in the area of deregulation, and are glad to continue working with you."

The Fraser Institute, which was established in reaction to the election of  NDP  Dave Barrett  as premier of B.C., also receives a great deal of funding from the American tobacco industry.

In fact, when they were establishing their Social Affairs Centre, according to Fraser Institute sources, money could not initially be found to start it, "so the staff went to New York and secured funding from Philip Morris."

As reward, the institute then released papers, suggesting that second hand smoke was not harmful, using crack medical teams from local bars opposing anti-smoking legislation.

I don't know if they copied their work from the American think tanks, but if you peruse them, you'll find many that challenge anti-smoking laws by again suggesting that second hand smoke is not harmful, including Paul Weyrich's Heritage Foundation.  (he was a busy man)

With NET now defunct, they used Fox News to sell it.  However, all of this was in reaction to the action of anti-smoking laws, that ban lighting up in public places.  (You should hear them huff and puff over the new ads on cigarette packages).

A Perfect Example

All of these right-wing think tanks and AstroTurf groups have several things in common, not limited to their funding.  One of them, is the easy movement of staff from their offices to the government offices, and vise versa.

The directors of The Progress and Freedom Foundation, included not only heavyweights like Kenneth Starr, the man who worked to impeach Bill Clinton, but also people like Jeffrey Eisenach, who worked as a senior policy advisor for the Federal Trade Commission under Reagan and Bush, senior and junior.  Kenneth Ferree, who spent time with the Federal Communications Commission under G.W. and several others who worked directly for Dick Cheney.

One of the best tests for Newton's Theory in Canada, relates to Ridley Terminals in B.C.

The first action was to clean up the books of the federally owned terminals, and determine whether or not they could be made profitable.  The first reaction was the hiring of Dan Veniez, to do a bit of house cleaning.

The next action was Veniez' s recommendation that they sell the terminals, since they would always be a cash cow.  The reaction was John Baird's, who immediately flapped his way to Vancouver, to fire the highly competent Veniez.  This was in response to the American Coal industry, who needed those terminals to remain subsidized.

When Veniez went public with the reasons why taxpayers were being bilked, the AstroTurf groups started kicking up divots.  Said Terrance Corcoran in the Financial Post:

In the great scheme of Canada’s economy, Ridley Terminals Inc. is no big deal. With annual revenue of just under $25-million, the Crown corporation operates a bulk-commodity handling facility off Ridley Island in Prince Rupert, B.C., 1,000 kilometres north of Vancouver. FP Comment’s editorial team has never been to Ridley Terminals, and wouldn’t know a bulk handling facility from the Coney Island Cyclone Ride. What we do know, when we see it, is big time corporate subsidy seeking, backroom politics, scheming lobbyists and cabinet ministers throwing their weight around to satisfy the big time corporate interests.

He nailed it. 

One of the AstroTurf groups working for corporate interests, was the Ridley Terminals Users Group, funded by Houston based  Global Public Affairs, lobbying reactionaries, who have worked with  George W. Bush.

With slight of hand, Stephen Harper removed Erin Wall as administrative assistant to his MP Brian Jean, then Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities (aka John Baird) and sent her to work for Global Public Affairs as a registered lobbyist for their affiliate, International Commodity Export Corporation, the largest beneficiary of government subsidies to the Ridley terminals.

On the same day, June 19, 2009, just before the firing of Dan Veniez, ICEC underwent a name change  to give it the appearance of a Canadian company.  You'll notice that they altered the date of this name change in June of 2011, but I believe I still have a screen shot of the original in my files.

Regardless, you get an idea of how this works, resulting in the Canadian taxpayers subsidizing the American coal industry.

And that is not the only example.  There are many, including Josh McJannet who was the contact person for the AstroTurf group The Canadians For Afghanistan.  McJannet was a former staffer of both Conservative Jay Hill and Rahim Jaffer, who registered as a lobbyist for Summa Strategies, an Ottawa government-relations firm that counts some defence contractors, including U.S. aircraft manufacturer Boeing, among its clients.

For every action there is a reaction, with the motion being the flow of our tax dollars to corporate interests, on both sides of the border.

And you wonder why Paul Weyrich wanted to protect Stephen Harper.  He is pure gold to the American neoconservatives.

Footnotes:

* Manning was the first leader of the Reform Party which became the Alliance Party, which became the Conservative party of Canada

**The same year that Manning went to Washington, Jason Kenney and others from Canada's Cristian Right attended a conference there, importing Robertson's 'Coaltiion', thus creating the Canadian Christian Coalition.

*** Higgins would also write for the godfather of the Neoconservatism, Irving Kristol's The Public Interest, and become involved in the Independent Women's Forum, and anti-feminist organization that dispute the notion of a gender gap. Similar to our REAL Women of Canada.

**** The National Citizens Coalition, that Harper once headed up, hand out a Medal of Freedom every year.  Both Stephen Harper and Preston Manning are past recipients of this prestigious (?) honour.

Back to the Future as Canada Now Fights for King and Country

When Louis St. Laurent was acting as secretary of state for external affairs, he held a dinner party in honour of Ernest Bevin, then Great Britain's foreign secretary. At the end of the meal, Bevin got up and made a speech, praising Canada for standing beside Britain in her hour of need.

'His compatriots, he said, would never forget the way their cousins across the Atlantic had come to their assistance during the darkest days of World War 11.'

St Laurent was not impressed by the implication that Canada had entered the war out of loyalty to the mother country, rather than for reasons of principle. In his reply to Bevin he went out of his way to emphasize that Canada's declaration of war had been an independent decision made by the country's elected representatives, that it was prompted by the nation's determination to fight Nazism and had nothing whatever to do with helping Britain. (The Making of a Peacemonger: The Memoirs of George Ignatieff, By Sonja Sinclairp. 108)

That was an important stand, because Canada's foreign policy was based on what we felt was right at the time. And that same independence kept us out of Vietnam and Iraq, despite the fact that they were wars waged by our powerful neighbours to the South.

St Laurent believed that most Canadians wanted their country to contribute to world peace and better understanding among nations. (Sinclair)

The big news yesterday was that Canada will now be going back decades to "correct an historic mistake", fighting under the Royal Standard. Back to the time before we thought that we were no longer a British colony.

Silly us.

Stephen Harper said "king me" and so it was done.

A year ago, Liberal Sen. William Rompkey, wanted to change the name of our navy from Maritime Command to the Canadian Navy. I've always called them the Canadian Navy.

The "monarchists" sprang into action, insisting instead that we go back to the Royal Canadian Navy, which sparked an immediate response.

While everyone agrees the name Maritime Command is terrible, senators and witnesses are squaring off over whether to call it Royal or not.

Numerous retired members of the navy have suggested the rank-and-file don't want Royal in the name, and some senators believe it conjures up a colonial past that doesn't reflect the modern Canadian navy as independent.

James Knox of the Times Colonist, writes that the name change will upset the United States, as Canada reclaims its independence.

Poor Jack. He doesn't get out much.

Since coming to power, Stephen Harper has slowly signed away our military sovereignty.

Operation "Shiprider" allows U.S. agents to patrol Canadian waters, and make arrests.

An agreement with their military, allows the U.S. to send troops across our border in the case of an emergency. One of those emergencies would be an indigenous protest over a joint venture like a pipeline or highway.

And the Border Security deal, locks us inside fortress North America. We can no longer refuse to go where the U.S. tells us to go.

If they want to invade Switzerland for their chocolate, we'll strap on the AK-47s and fondue pots, and keep Jenny Craig on standby.

We are no longer a sovereign nation, and invoking memories of our military past, only hides what is in store for our military future.

Former prime minister, Louis St. Laurent may have felt that "most Canadians wanted their country to contribute to world peace and better understanding among nations", but that is the polar opposite to what Stephen Harper believes.

The Reformers back in the day, hated the new Canadian flag, believing that we should bring back the Red Ensign. So is that the next step?

Or maybe a blue flag, with the image of King Steve?

Anything is possible.

What's in a Preposition?

"Look. I've got to suck up to Quebec, so just shut up and let me get on with it." Stephen Harper (Harperland, Lawrence Martin, 2010 P. 82)

James Laxer recently wrote a piece Stephen Harper: Now He’s The Champion of National Unity, in which he questions Harper's new found love of a united Canada. He invoked memories of Harper's Reform Party under Preston Manning, who had an Abraham Lincoln complex, hoping to invoke "A House Divided" in his handling of Quebec.

With a recent surge of NDP popularity in Quebec, Laxer believes that anything is possible. I still feel that Gilles Duceppe is pretty popular in this province and doubt that the NDP will capture many more seats, but stranger things have happened. It would be wonderful if a federalist party made inroads into the province. And I believe that this election will not be decided by the polls but at the polls.

However, let's look at Stephen Harper himself. His campaign is being run under the banner 'Here for Canada' (while hiding from Canadians). A stark contrast to his former plans for decentralization.

"Whether Canada ends up with one national government or two governments or 10 governments, the Canadian people will require less government no matter what the constitutional status or arrangement of any future country may be." - Stephen Harper in a 1994 National Citizens Coalition speech.

However, there was a more direct attempt by Stephen Harper in 2004, to divide Canada, based on the 'Belgian Model'.

The Conservative leader first floated the idea during a speech in Quebec last Friday. He said there are some areas where Ottawa could hand over some of its powers to linguistic groups, such as francophones or anglophones. "By devolving authority, not solely to a province, but to have an arrangement based on linguistic groups that cross the country," he said

Then Prime Minister Paul Martin said: "I think the role of the prime minister of Canada is not to build a better Belgium, it's to build a stronger Canada.

His party immediately went into damage control, because he didn't explain how this would work for Anglophones in Quebec or Francophones in other parts of the country.

Of course anyone following Stephen Harper's career, knows that few of his ideas are his own. As chief policy wonk for the Reform Party, he "cribbed" about 2/3 of their platform from the National Citizens Coalition handbook. (1)

And he also stole the idea of the Belgian model to handle Quebec, from Peter Brimelow's 'The Patriot Game'. In his book Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada, William Johnson said that after reading the book, Stephen Harper was so excited that he went out and bought ten copies to give to friends. (1)

Brimelow lays out the Belgian model on Page 83 of his book. (2)

And after suggesting this model for Canada, André Lecours, from the Department of Political Science at Concordia University, wrote a paper on why Harper's (Brimelow's) idea wouldn't work. In fact it's not even working in Belgium.

So is Stephen Harper really here FOR Canada, or for what he plans to do TO Canada. Sometimes it's all in the preposition.

Sources:

1. Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada, by William Johnson, McClelland & Stewart, 2005, ISBN 0-7710 4350-3

2. The Patriot Game: National Dreams and Political Realities, By Peter Brimelow, Key Porter Books, 1986, ISBN: 1-55013-001-3

The Patriot Game: The Charter of Rights

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"And we have a Supreme Court, like yours, which, since we put a charter of rights in our constitution in 1982, is becoming increasingly arbitrary and
important ... The establishment came down with a constitutional package which they put to a national referendum. The package included distinct society status for Quebec and some other changes, including some that would just horrify you, putting universal Medicare in our constitution, and feminist rights, and a whole bunch of other things." Stephen Harper (1)

In April of 2007, Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms celebrated it's 25th anniversary. Stephen Harper refused an invitation to be the keynote speaker at an event marking the occasion.

The Harper government is passing on a major Ottawa conference marking the 25th anniversary of the Charter of Rights, with the Prime Minister and three Cabinet ministers turning down invitations to speak. In fact, the milestone anniversary will be a muted affair within the government ranks ... Mr. Jedwab said Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, Heritage Minister Bev Oda and former justice minister Vic Toews were also invited to address the April 16-17 event, but they declined. (2)

The fact is that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has always been a thorn in the side of the Reform movement. Preston Manning preferred that it would have been more like the American model.

On the Charter of Rights, Manning takes the position that Canada should have, like the U.S., a concept of rights which makes no mention of race, gender, or language. His support for triple-E Senate is modelled after the U.S. Senate and is proposed for Canada in spite of the fact that a similar model "often makes government impossible" in Australia, according to Desmond Morton.

Last, Preston Manning wishes to emulate the U.S. by including a provision for property rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights. This concept is rooted in American individualism and free-enterprise culture. However, it may be less appealing in Canada, which has had a more co-operative and collective approach to life and to government. (3)

Stephen Harper's views were similar to Manning's but based a lot on the book The Patriot Game by Peter Brimelow, who saw both the patriation of the Constitution, and the Charter as not only an attack on Anglo Canadians, but the endowment of too much power on the judiciary.

Certain aspects of public policy were entrenched, however, notably bilingualism, and a "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" was added .. the new constitution clearly does pose a legal threat to much of its nationalist legislation restricting the use of English. More subtly, the constitution represents a break with the British tradition of common law, custom and precedent, and greatly enhances the power of the judicial branch. (4)

What Brimelow opposed the most, and what was reflected in the views of the Reform party members, was that in his mind the English had conquered the French in Canada, so they should accept the Anglo hierarchy. What he failed to understand was that Quebec and French Canadians, were to be equal partners in Confederation as one of our country's founding peoples.

So the Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms set out to right a wrong.

The difficulty Francophones faced in the civil service ... the one addressed by the resulting bilingualism policy, was not discrimination against Francophones as such, but the fact that at the higher levels they had to work in English. Francophones who were prepared to speak English could always in effect resign from their race in working hours, unlike the American blacks. (5)

"Resign from their race in working hours"?

And this was the logic that Stephen Harper found so compelling that he went out and bought ten copies of Brimelow's book to give to friends. And when Harper addressed the Reform Party Assembly in Saskatoon in 1991, and stated emphatically that there would be no special privileges for Quebec, his mind was made up.

And we have to remember that his political views are not organic, but set in stone. He only gave Quebec special status, because he said that he needed to "suck up to them."

Another bone of contention for the movement was the entrenching of rights, including those for women, ethnic groups and Aboriginals, but especially for homosexuals.

One of the Reform Party founders, Ted Byfield, stated that the only thing that should be legislated in Canada was morality, but this charter actually, in his view, attacked morality, by protecting "sin". And protecting that sin was the judiciary.

This would start a war. One that is ongoing.

On June 12, 2000, Harper railed against biased judicial activism. "Serious flaws exist in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and there is no meaningful review or accountability mechanisms for Supreme Court justices" (6)

And on September 2, 2009, at a closed-door speech to Conservative supporters in Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., he spoke against judicial independence and made it clear that if he ever obtains a majority, he will stack the bench with judges who are not "left-wing ideologues." (6) "I ask you for a moment to imagine how different things would be if the Liberals were still in power. . . . Imagine how many left-wing ideologues they would be putting in the courts. . . ."

Maurice Vellacott had accused Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin of calling herself God, and though it was a lie and he made a meager attempt at an apology in the House of Commons, the sentiment remains.

One of the worst attacks however, has been on Louise Arbour (shown above right). Arbour is the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, a former justice of the Supreme Court of Canada and the Court of Appeal for Ontario and a former Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. She has since July 2009 served as President and CEO of the International Crisis Group.

Someone all Canadians should be proud of. And yet Harper’s ministers refused to recognize her work, while Vic Toews launched a personal attack, as part of his party's policy.

The Conservative grenade hurlers couldn't help themselves. Next up to the plate was Treasury Board Secretary Vic Toews, whose target was Louise Arbour, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and a former Supreme Court justice. Arbour had a far more distinguished reputation than Toews did, but that didn't stop him from labelling her a national "disgrace" when she praised a new Arab human rights charter and chastised both sides in the conflict between Israel and Lebanon. Toews hollered "Shame on her!" when the matter was raised in the Commons. (7)

Yes shame on her. How dare she stand up for human rights abuses, earning enough of an international reputation that she would be given such high positions.

We need to start recognizing and supporting our public intellectuals, who have been taking a beating since Stephen Harper came to power. Canadians have always taken pride in the accomplishments of it's citizens and this government would prefer that we forget them, so they can be free to pursue their agenda of Americanization.

U.S. style prisons. U.S style courts. U.S. style justice.

Canadians should be proud of their Charter of Rights and Freedoms and proud of the fact that we have for decades been seen as a Just Society. Harper's law and order agenda is a wrong fit for us. It's not who we are, just who he would like us to be.

One of my favourite quotes about the Reform movement came from the Vancouver Sun, and I share it often:

"Reform is somewhat un-Canadian. It's about tidy numbers, self-righteous sanctimoniousness and western grievances. It cannot talk about the sea or about our reluctant fondness for Quebec, about our sorrow at the way our aboriginal people live, about the geographically diverse, bilingual, multicultural mess of a great country we are." (8)

Sources:

1. Full text of Stephen Harper's 1997 speech, Canadian Press, December 14, 2005

2. PM passes on marking Charter anniversary; Rejects invitation, By Janice Tibbetts, National Post, April 11, 2007

3. Preston Manning and the Reform Party, By Murray Dobbin, Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing, 1992, ISBN: 0-88780-161-7 4, Pg. 190

4. The Patriot Game: National Dreams and Political Realities, By Peter Brimelow, Key Porter Books, 1986, ISBN: 1-55013-001-3, Pg. 34

5. Brimelow, 1986, Pg. 191

6. The Hill: Harper challenged as silence of the jurists ends, By: Richard Cleroux, Law Times

7. Harperland:The Politics of Control, By Lawrence Martin, Viking Press, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-670-06517-2, Pg. 130

8. Vancouver Sun, April 8, 1994

A Voice From the Grave: McCarthy and His Men

In 1953, Joseph McCarthy, the infamous 'Communist hunter', sent two of his aides, David Schine and Roy Cohn, on a tour of European libraries of the United States Information Agency for books written by authors they deemed to be Communists or fellow travelers.

The American Press thought they were idiots and the Europeans were not impressed. Nor were the Americans working for the United States Information Agency abroad.

It was a witch hunt and greatly damaged America's reputation.

McCarthyism would spread throughout the entertainment industry, the media, the public service and even the government, as Senator Joe McCarthy ran his anti-Communist campaign.

But when he also targeted the military, Joe was censored.

The anti-Communist rhetoric was mostly dormant for a few decades, until Ronald Reagan was elected. On the advice of his military advisers, Reagan revitalized the Cold War, to justify his enormous increase in military spending. They were also concerned that Mikhail Gorbachev was becoming too popular in the West.

The BBC ran a great documentary series called The Power of Nightmares, available on YouTube, which shows that most of the revived scare was fabricated. It's three hours roughly, in total, but worth watching, even if just a bit at a time.

It also goes into detail on Leo Strauss, the father of the Neoconservative movement.

So after the Berlin Wall came down (which Reagan falsely tried to take credit for), we again had a return to sanity.

But now we have the Tea Party gang and their anti-communist freak show, once again dominating the media. And our government is lapping it up.

In December of 2009, University of California professor, Michael Allen, wrote a mocking piece on our government: The D-word out of favor? Don’t tell the Canadians

Apparently they are now launching a campaign to 'spread democracy' and fight Communism.

But Allen needn't worry. Nobody did tell Canadians. Our media was busy that day (Week? Month? Five years?).

Seeing as how we're taking over the American 'democracy' business, and our government has been ramping up their anti-communist "the sky is falling' nonsense, the next logical step would be to introduce American immigration policies to keep out those darn 'Commies' and 'Ruskies'.

Or heaven forbid, Jason Kenney's worst nightmare: A Russian communist lesbian with a gay brother, a good job, a university education, who previously marched in an anti-Iraq war rally carrying a copy of Das Kapital.

Before entering the United States as an immigrant, you must complete The American Immigration and Naturalization Service form I-485. On the third page, applicants must indicate if they have committed any crimes or participated in any terrorist organizations. The sixth question is, “Have you ever been a member of, or in anyway affiliated with, the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party?” Through enforcement by immigration police, the U.S. is strict about not admitting Communist Party members and terrorists, who they appear to view as one and the same.

At least in terms of form I-485.

Now Jason Kenney and Stephen Harper have redrafted our immigration applications, also targeting communists. According to John Ibbitson.

The new forms require any visa applicant who has served in the military, police or civil defence services to disclose when they served, what unit they served in, where that unit was located and what were their responsibilities.In Russia, which enforces mandatory military service, providing such information to a foreign government is punishable by up to four years in prison.

The new forms require any visa applicant who has served in the military, police or civil defence services to disclose when they served, what unit they served in, where that unit was located and what were their responsibilities.In Russia, which enforces mandatory military service, providing such information to a foreign government is punishable by up to four years in prison. ... Russian and Canadian officials are to discuss the new visa requirements next month. But Mr. Petrov warned that if there is no progress, Russia may retaliate by imposing equally restrictive requirements on Canadians applying for a Russian visa.

When Joe McCarthy began routing out communists from within, it very much angered the Jewish communities, because in Europe they were always lumped in with Marxists. The Nazis were able to convince the populace that the Jews had to be dealt with because they were in cahoots with socialists, who were intent on destroying their country.

One theme that is apparent in Lawrence Martin's new book, Harperland, is Harper's attitude toward foreign policy and the Cold War, nurtured during his days with the anti-Communist crowd like Peter Worthington and Lubor Zink ("Pierre Trudeau is a communist" ... every bloody day. The teabaggers would be proud), and the Religious Right.

The Conservatives are building a monument for the victims of Communism, but they had better be careful. This could stir up a lot of unnecessary ill will, with dueling history lessons.

And besides. Michael Ignatieff's family was the victim of Communism, as they were forced to flee Russia or face certain death. Will he be cutting the ribbon? Not bloody likely.

We have got to start paying attention. These are not isolated incidents. Harper has a foreign policy agenda, and with the UN out of the picture, there is no one to stop him.

Wake up people, before these morons do something really stupid.

The Politics of Hate: Where Will it Lead?

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"Canada appears content to become a second-tier socialistic country, boasting ever more loudly about its economy and social services to mask its second-rate status, led by a second-world strongman appropriately suited for the task." Stephen Harper (1)

A friend just loaned me Harperland, and in the first chapter there was something that hit me.

It wasn't the revelation that Stephen Harper is a "different Conservative", with no ties to the party of Sir John A. or John Diefenbaker. I already knew that, though I think it was an important statement to make for those who vote for Harper's party believing that they are Tories. This was more of a hostile takeover of the Progressive Conservatives by the Reform-Alliance movement.

As Martin says:

The merger was a ruse of sorts. This was no equal partnership. The merged party had five times as many Alliance MPs as old Tory ones. In the election before this merger, the Alliance Party had won sixty-six seats, the Tories only twelve. Before long, Harper won the leadership of the new party, making the domination of the Reform-Alliance wing even more pronounced. This wasn't so much a merger as the Alliance Party's annexing of an auxiliary group. (2)

But what struck me was his reference to Stephen Harper hating Liberals. Not competing with, but a deep-rooted visceral hatred. Where I believe Martin is a bit misguided though, is in his belief that Harper simply hates the Liberal Party. It's much more fundamental than that.

Stephen Harper hates liberalism in all of it's manifestations, including the former Progressive Conservatives. What the right-wing Brits, especially Margaret Thatcher, would refer to as "wets", he called "pink liberals".

The opening quote referring to Canada as a "second-tier socialistic country" is seen often, but usually ends at "status". However, I think the rest of that quote is more important, as he refers to Jean Chretien as a "second-world strongman".

The term "second-world" was usually applied to the Soviet Union or Communist Block, though it's not a term used much since the Cold War. But it does reveal the Harper mindset.

I once thought that he played the 'socialist' card like a silent dog whistle to his base, but I now believe that he himself, is personally driven by a fear or loathing, perhaps both, of Communism. And it may go back to the time before the Reform Party was established, but accelerated after his involvement with men like Peter Worthington, Lubor Zinc, Peter Brimelow and David Somerville.

Worthington was obsessed with the belief that Pierre Trudeau was a Communist. Guy Giorno fell under his spell after hearing him do a radio interview, and it helped to impact his political thought. Stephen Harper joined the Northern Foundation (3) which was not only anti-communist but also anti-gay, anti-abortion and pro-Anglo; when Worthington was a member and Peter Brimelow a regular speaker at their conventions. (4)

Lubor Zinc was also a member of the 'Trudeau is a Communist' crowd, a Reform Party member and the man who coined the term 'Trudeaumania', though he meant for it to have a negative connotation.

Peter Brimelow calls himself a Paleoconservative and his book The Patriot Game so inspired Stephen Harper that he went out and bought 10 copies to give to friends. (5)

Brimelow also detested liberalism and says of Trudeau that while he espoused the notion that the individual must be protected from the State, he was alarmed when he also noted that the "State has to intervene to protect the weak members of society, minorities, those who need protection from the State against stronger forces than themselves." (6) And of course this was reflected in the Charter of Rights.

All anathema to the far right.

And then there's David Sommerville, the man that Stephen Harper replaced as president of the National Citizens Coalition. When Ernest Manning and Colin Brown first decided to create this right-wing advocacy group, they chose him to head it up, inspired by Somerville's anti-communist columns, and his book Trudeau Revealed was a Bible to the 'Cold War' crowd.

At the time, these men were considered to be crackpots by most Canadians, viewed under the shadow of McCarthyism, but to an impressionable young man just entering active politics, they were his mentors and they would have used terms like "second-world strongman".

So while Martin agrees that Harper is a different conservative and a different political figure, driven by hate, and a desire to destroy the Liberal Party (aka liberalism), he also reminds us:

Given that party's domination of the power structure through time, the Liberal order and the Canadian order were almost one and the same. To take down one was to take down the other. (7)

He had already destroyed the Tories as "pink liberals" or "wets", by swallowing them whole, and is determined to anhilate the Liberals.

The only thing standing in his way then would be us.

Sources:

1. "It is time to seek a new relationship with Canada", By Stephen Harper, December 12th, 2000

2. Harperland:The Politics of Control, By Lawrence Martin, Viking Press, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-670-06517-2, Pg. 2

3. Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper demonstrates continued ultra right wing affiliations by blocking pro social justice Toronto candidate, by Dr. Debra Chin, The Canadian

4. Of Passionate Intensity: Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada, By Trevor Harrison, University of Toronto Press, 1995, ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6 3, Pg. 122

5. Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada, by William Johnson, McClelland & Stewart, 2005, ISBN 0-7710 4350-3, Pg. 52

6. The Patriot Game: National Dreams and Political Realities, By Peter Brimelow, Key Porter Books, 1986, ISBN: 1-55013-001-3, Pg. 49

7. Martin, 2010, Pg. 6

The Patriot Game: Western Separation

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

In 1965, a student at Winnipeg College climbed to the roof of the school to hoist a nine-foot Red Ensign when the Canadian flag was first being raised. His name was Doug Christie and he would become a life long separatist, advocating for the Western provinces and territories to split with Canada and strike out on their own.

His movement would gain some support in 1980 when Quebec was holding a referendum and the government of Pierre Trudeau had announced the National Energy Policy. However, it wasn't the NEP that created the uproar but changes to the tax laws in Alan MacEachern's budget.

MacEachen's senior advisers soon focused his attention on how billions of dollars were being lost yearly to scores of dubious corporate tax breaks. Finance officials put together a tax reform package designed, among other things, to eliminate 165 of the most costly and counter-productive tax expenditure measures and in the process increase revenue by close to $3 billion.

When he introduced the legislation it caused a firestorm of protest from the corporate elite. Neil Brooks, now professor of tax law at Osgoode Hall Law School, was working for the finance department on the tax reform package and has recalled the tactics of the large corporations. "It's almost a classic example of what's called a capital strike. I mean, business simply said to the government that if you go ahead with these measures we will stop investing in Canada." The development industry reacted instantly. "Literally the next day they were closing jobs down and . . . pulling cranes off construction jobs."

Life insurance companies had their own strategy. The industry, which for years had paid income tax rates of close to zero, wrote to every one of its policyholders, telling them the new measures to tax investment revenue would greatly increase their premiums. "The government," says Brooks, "at one point was receiving thousands of letters a day from people across the country."(1)

But in the west, they couldn't sell it as the wealthy fighting against tax increases, so instead made it about Ottawa pandering to Quebec and Ontario, at the expense of the western provinces, especially Alberta. The National Energy Policy then became the enemy, despite the fact that many wealthy westerners liked the new policy, because it promoted 50% Canadian ownership and allowed further development of government lands.

Soon after the announcement of the NEP, [Alberta Premier Peter] Lougheed fired three effective salvos: a constitutional challenge to the natural gas tax; a staged reduction in shipments of oil to other provinces; and a freeze on the oil sands, whose development the NEP encouraged. Although the Petroleum Club and the radio talk-shows in Alberta cheered the premier, and bumper stickers declared "Let the Eastern Bastards Freeze," [energy minister Marc] Lalonde had included provisions in the NEP that attracted key Albertan players.

These entrepreneurs and their lawyers rightly saw the provision that there must be 5o percent Canadian ownership on the Canada Lands —those potentially rich areas under government control—as highly beneficial. Dome Petroleum, Nova, and Petro-Canada therefore complained about the new taxes on gas and oil but did not join Lougheed's general denunciation of the NEP. The influential Bob Blair of Nova, a major figure in the oil patch, openly declared his Liberal allegiance and remained in close touch with both Trudeau and Lalonde. "Smiling Jack" Gallagher of Dome most enthusiastically embarked on the acquisition of foreign oil companies, which were eager to abandon Canada in the wake of the NEP. (2)

Unfortunately, after the 1980 election that ended Joe Clark's brief governance, those fuelling the separatist campaign, went into action.

Highlighted against the rise and fall of the abbreviated Tory reign, the 1980 election aroused immediate anger and concern in the West. In Alberta, a sixty-year-old Edmonton millionaire and car dealer, Elmer Knutson, sent an angry letter to the Edmonton Journal the day after the election."' The letter, which has acquired an almost mythic stature in western separatist folklore, adumbrated a series of themes which were to be the staples of western separatists and other right-wing elements in subsequent years."' It especially complained of a French-dominated Ottawa, as exemplified in such policies as bilingualism, and the fear that Trudeau's majority Liberal government would now proceed with constitutional reforms which would reinforce French domination of the rest of Canada. Knutson's solution to this perceived threat was simple: Quebec must be made to leave Canada.

Knutson was not a stranger to political matters. In the late 1970s he had been co-chair of the One Canada Association, an organization 'committed to increasing police powers, ending bilingualism, and tightening immigration policies. Then, in December 1979, Knutson lost the Edmonton South Tory nomination to incumbent Douglas Roche, whom Knutson once described as 'a socialist masquerading as a conservative But the response to his Journal letter — 'One lousy little letter,' in Knutson's words — astonished even him. In one month, Knutson received 3800 replies, most of them positive.' As a result of this public response, Knutson formed the Western Canada Federation (West-Fed) in March 1980. At almost the same time, the results of the federal election breathed new life into the faltering political career of a thirty-four-year-old Victoria lawyer, Doug Christie. (3)

Peter Brimelow, author of The Patriot Game, the book that was a Bible for Stephen Harper's early political leanings, saw things a little differently. This was an attack on English Canada:

In the fall of 1980, after the federal Liberals' return to power and their imposition of the National Energy Program, reports began to filter back to Central Canada that the natives on the western frontier beyond the Ontario boundary were unusually restless. Several organizations had sprung up advocating that the West - the Prairie provinces, British Columbia and the federally administered Yukon and Northwest Territories - separate from Canada. The two most important were the Western Canada Concept Party, begun in British Columbia and headed by Doug Christie, a Victoria lawyer; and the Western Canada Federation Party, based in Alberta and led by Elmer Knutson, an Edmonton farm equipment millionaire.

Both these parties argued that, to adapt Joe Clark's Shawinigan comment during the Quebec referendum campaign, the Canada to which they had wished to belong no longer existed. The conditions of Confederation had been changed, and they wanted out. Less active but worth a footnote was the Unionist Party, which directly advocated joining the U.S.: it was founded by Dick Collver*, until 1979 leader of the Saskatchewan Progressive Conservatives, who shortly afterwards acted on his beliefs and moved to Arizona.

Suddenly, Christie and Knutson were attracting crowds of thousands to their meetings. Prominent Western figures were expressing sympathy, notably Carl
Nickle, a well-known oilman and former Tory federal MP, who had even been considered a candidate for Lieutenant Governor of Alberta the previous year but who told a luncheon gathering of 700 Calgary businessmen in October that after the NEP he had "sorrowfully" become a separatist. At the same time, the Edmonton Journal ran a poll showing that a startling 2 3% of Albertans supported an "independent West." There were angry exchanges in the House of Commons in Ottawa when Tory leader Joe Clark drew attention to the phenomenon. He was immediately accused of thereby "aiding and abetting" it. Pierre Trudeau offered the helpful opinion that Western separatism was "nil and non-existent," being at, root "a fight about money" in no way comparable with Quebec's grievances. This naturally inspired redoubled efforts to prove him wrong. (4)

He was right of course. The uproar was over the closing up of the tax loopholes, but instead was channeled against the NEP. And Quebec's grievances were completely different. Many of the French-Canadians had been living like plantation slaves in their province.

The NEP wasn't perfect but it wasn't the disaster it was made out to be. But that didn't stop the Reform Party from reviving it for political gain.

Doug Christie's Western Canada Concept Party had one seat in the House of Commons, but only for a few months. He was joined by another disgruntled Anglophone, who had left Quebec during the Quiet Revolution. He would run as a WCC candidate against Tommy Douglas, but of course lost. His name was Stockwell Day Sr. and his son is now in the Harper government.

Footnotes:

Dick Collver moved to Arizona, coming back to testify during the trial of Colin Thatcher. According to Collver, Thatcher had visited him on his Arizona Ranch, asking him where he could hire a hitman.

Sources:

1. The Myth of the Good Corporate Citizen: Canada and Democracy in the Age of Globalization, By Murray Dobbin, James Lorimer & Company, 2003, ISBN: 1-55028-785-0, Pg. 168

2. Just Watch me: The Life of Pierre Elliot Trudeau, By John English, Alfred A. Knopf, 2009, ISBN: 978-0-676-97523-9, Pg. 488

3. Of Passionate Intensity: Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada, By Trevor Harrison, University of Toronto Press, 1995. ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6, Pg. 57-58

4. The Patriot Game: National Dreams and Political Realities, By Peter Brimelow, Key Porter Books, 1986, ISBN: 1-55013-001-3, Pg. 240-241

Patriot Games and the Committee for an Independent Canada

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Something strange, nameless, and profound moves in Canada today. It cannot be seen or labeled, but it can be heard and felt - a kind of whisper from
far away, a rustle as of wind in prairie poplars, a distant river's voice, or the shuffle of footsteps in a midnight street. It is less a sound than a sense
of motion.

Something moves as it has never moved before in this land, moves dumbly in the deepest runnels of a collective mind, yet by sure direction toward
a known goal. Sometimes by thought, more often by intuition, the Canadian people are making the final discovery. They are discovering themselves. - Bruce Hutchinson

When Pierre Trudeau called an election in 1972, the country was undergoing a lot of changes. The Baby Boomers were growing up and the voting age had been reduced to 18.

Unemployment was at 6.2%, considered high for the time, and despite generous changes to Unemployment Insurance, the youth were worried.

Also worried were many Canadians seeing a growing American influence, not only in our popular culture, but in the very real U.S. takeover of our natural resources.

One of these was Liberal MP Eric Kierans, who had left Trudeau's' Cabinet in April of 1971, and was an outspoken critic of finance minister John Turner's 1972 budget, believing that the party was moving to the right and was blind "to the sale of Canadian resources to foreigners" (English 2009).

Kierans prefaced a book financed by the NDP called Louder Voices: Corporate Welfare Bums. The phrase "corporate welfare bums" was in response to those who felt that the increase in UI premiums was creating a sub-culture of "welfare bums".

The phrase caught on and NDP leader David Lewis thundered it from the podium, regaling against corporate privilege. And many former Trudeau supporters, joined Lewis, including high profile figures like Walter Gordon with the Toronto Star, Peter C. Newman, Claude Ryan, prominent Alberta Liberal, Jack McClelland and publisher Mel Hurtig.

This group created The Committee for an Independent Canada, and over 170,000 concerned Canadians would join their ranks. As a result Trudeau's Liberal Party was reduced to a minority, with Lewis's NDP holding the balance of power.

But CIC did not only help to influence the election, but they would also steer the Liberal Party to the left, and though Trudeau had at one time been opposed to the nationalization of industry, he allowed the creation of Petro-Canada. His government also began to take on a more nationalistic tone. (1)

The right was enraged, while corporate and business donations for the Liberals decreased substantially.

Harper's Bible Sees it Differently

Peter Brimelow's The Patriot Game lays the blame squarely on the shoulders of Pierre Trudeau, for the country's dramatic shift to the left, though he is not without disdain for the Committee for an Independent Canada.

A case can also be made for 1970. In that year, at a lunch "which is now mythologized in some branches of the movement as The Beginning," according to an account written by Christina McCall-Newman in 1972, three men decided to found a pressure group for their version of Canadian Nationalism: the Committee for an Independent Canada. They were Walter Gordon, the former leader of the Liberal Party's left wing, who as Finance Minister under Lester Pearson had introduced a controversial nationalist budget in 1965; Peter C. Newman, then Editor-in-Chief of the nationalist Toronto Star; and Abraham Rotstein, an academic economist from the University of Toronto. Their creation was something of a nine-day-wonder in the small world of the English-Canadian intelligentsia.

It attracted much joining, signing of petitions, attending of meetings and declarations of support. The Committee itself quickly became moribund, but it symbolized emotions that were coming to dominate Anglophone public debate, and it conveniently marks the moment when the Canadian Liberal elite finally acknowledged that it had reversed fronts and trained its guns on free market economics and on the U.S.A.

The weaknesses of Canadian Nationalism were already present at The Beginning. All three lunchers were Anglophones, all Torontonians, all prosperous members of the bourgeoisie. All, perhaps not coincidentally, represented professions that stood to benefit disproportionately from protectionism: Gordon as a scion of the preeminent Clarkson, Gordon and Company accounting firm, whose relationships with Canadian corporate clients were vulnerable to disruption from takeovers by U.S. firms equipped with their own auditors; Newman and Rotstein as examples of those "producers of Canadian culture" who, in the deadpan summary of a recent academic survey, "are more determined than consumers" to "keep Canadian cultural life Canadian." (2)

And this Canadian Nationalism was viewed as "anti-Americanism" in Alberta, where the U.S. oil industry prospered, and was added to the list of western grievances. This became even more profound when it became about "Toronto" and "elites" and "intervention".

Early Nationalist campaigns were to aim at reserving Canadian university appointments for Canadians and promoting Canadian periodicals through punitive taxation of their American competitors. Two were members of Canada's small Jewish minority, a group normally cautious about nationalism, and one was not even a Canadian by birth but a central European refugee, anomalies which, although not without parallel in other nationalist movements, may help account for the peculiar artificiality of this Canadian variation. They were also all good political progressives and, at least in the case of Gordon and Rotstein, conscious advocates of government intervention in the economy. (2)

Canada was moving toward a just society and the corporate sector saw this as injustice to the almighty dollar.

And like Ted Byfield, Brimelow also held contempt for Pierre Berton. Byfield, because he threatened religious fundamentalism, and Brimelow because he threatened Anglo-Saxon hegemony.

A significant description of the brave new Canada that Canadian Nationalists hope and claim to have discerned has been conveniently provided by Pierre Berton in his book Why We Act Like Canadians: A Personal Account of Our National Character. This deeply revealing essay on the Canadian national character and its fundamental differences from the American norm was one of the best-sellers of the 1982-83 season and has influenced several subsequent journalistic commentaries ... the inevitable landscape rhapsodies in Why We Act Like Canadians were quite bearable.

And yet Pierre Berton is still a household name, while most Canadians outside of the Reform/Conservative movement, have never heard of Peter Brimelow.

Sources:

1. Just Watch me: The Life of Pierre Elliot Trudeau, By John English, Alfred A. Knopf, 2009, ISBN: 978-0-676-97523-9, Pg. 130

2. The Patriot Game: National Dreams and Political Realities, By Peter Brimelow, Key Porter Books, 1986, ISBN: 1-55013-001-3, Pg. 131 -133

Stephen Harper's Radical Roots With Paul Fromm

The above video is rather long but early into it you can hear Mr. Fromm speaking of a so-called Mexican invasion. To be honest I hadn't heard of such a thing until Jason Kenney and Stephen Harper 'put a stop to it'. I just thought that before discussing the relationship between Stephen Harper and Paul Fromm you might like to see and hear from the man who has been described by the media as "one of Canada's most notorious white supremacists".

Since the Harper Reform Conservatives have given us permission to delve into the lives of politicians, going as far back as possible, I've started posting little nuggets from the PM's past that should shake free a few skeletons.

It has been said that Harper is very secretive about his past, giving strict instructions that no one in his party discuss it. Well, I'm not in his party, just an ordinary Canadian with legitimate concerns about the roots of his ideology.

It's difficult to pinpoint exactly when Stephen Harper and Paul Fromm met, but by 1987 they were, if not friends, at least acquaintances with mutual friends. During the founding of the Reform Party, he played a fairly significant role by arranging to have author and journalist, Peter Brimelow, speak at their convention. As reward, Fromm was allowed to set up a table in the hall, where he distributed literature and sold memberships to his anti-immigration organization C-FAR.

I'm going into Peter Brimelow's story in a separate post, but his book Patriot Game: Canada and the Canadian Question Revisited, is said to have been one of the motivations behind the formation of the new party. After reading it, Harper and his buddy John Weissenberger, another Harper patronage appointment, were so enthralled with the book that they bought ten copies and gave them to friends. (Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada by William Johnson ISBN 0-7710 4350-3, 2005, Pg. 52)

So when Paul Fromm said that he could get Brimelow to attend the convention, Harper must have been beside himself. Both Fromm and Brimelow were anti-immigration activists who supported each others organizations: C-Far for Fromm, V-Dare for Brimelow.

The person who may have been instrumental in introducing Fromm to our current PM, was Leigh Smith, an early Reform Party member.

"The Reform Party under the watchful eye of Preston Manning and Stephen Harper housed former Western Guard (an infamous Toronto-area hate group launched in the 1960's) members like Leigh Smith, and Wolfgang Droege."

In the book 'Web of Hate', we learn, while discussing Don Andrews: "In February 1967, he (Andrews) and two other men, school teacher Paul Fromm and University of Toronto student Leigh Smith formed the Edmund Burke Society ... Along with Communism, which it loathed with a vengeance, the Edmund Burke Society opposed immigration, sex education, welfare, homosexuality, abortion, big government and Pierre Trudeau." (Web of Hate: Inside Canada's Far Right Network - Author: Warren Kinsella Toronto : Harper Collins, 1994 ISBN 0-00-255074-1 Pg. 207)

Mr. Kinsella goes on to say that when the Society was reformatted into the Western Guard, both Smith and Fromm left feeling that it was becoming too extreme. "... Smith, who moved to Ottawa and later became involved in Preston Manning's Reform Party" (Pg. 208)

Therefore, it could very well have been Smith who introduced Fromm to Harper and subsequently Peter Brimelow.

However, there was another connection with Harper and the Northern Foundation he helped to create with Brimelow, Gairdner and other extreme right-wing conservatives.

"The Northern Foundation was established in 1989, originally as a pro-South Africa group . . . lists among the founding members of the Foundation both William Gairdner and Stephen Harper ... " Their goal was in part to discredit the anti-apartheid movement. (Preston Manning and the Reform Party. Author: Murray Dobbin Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing 1992 ISBN: 0-88780-161-7)

and

From Wikipedia: "In the late 1970s, Fromm also founded Canadian Friends of Rhodesia to support the white minority rule regime of Ian Smith and his Rhodesian Front. In the mid to late 1980s, Fromm's organizations were involved in advocacy on behalf of South Africa's apartheid regime, and opposing the movement to impose economic sanctions on the country .... In the late 1980s, Fromm was an active member of the Reform Party of Canada."

Paul Fromm would move in and out of the Reform/Alliance Party. (He joined the Alliance in 2000 to help get Stockwell Day elected as party leader) Expelled for his racist views, after they had passed a motion to allow fringe groups, was a smart move. However, it begs the question, why Fromm and not Brimelow, or William Gairdner?

After an "... anti-Semitic column by former Texas KKK Grand Dragon Louis Beam Jr. (in one of the neo-nazi publications) the August 1992 issue carried a lengthy account of Wolfgang Droege's involvement with the Reform party. In late February 1991, Bill Dunphy exposed in the Sun the fact that Droege and four other Heritage Front activists maintained memberships in Toronto area Reform Party riding associations. Immediately thereafter, Reform Party leader Preston Manning ordered the group expelled." (Web of Hate: Inside Canada's Far Right Network - Author: Warren Kinsella Toronto : Harper Collins, 1994 ISBN 0-00-255074-1 Pg. 243)

"The expulsion enraged the Heritage Front, which saw the Reform Party's policies as very similar to, if not indistinguishable from, its own. How could a party that went on record opposing immigration policies that "radically alter" Canada's ethnic make-up turn around and shun a group like the Heritage Front, Droege asked, when the Heritage Front supports the very same approach? Privately, spokesmen for B'nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress admitted that Droege had a good point." (Pg. 243-44)

Later Fromm and others would suggest that Stephen Harper knew of the neo-Nazi elements in the Party yet allowed them to stay. In fact Paul Fromm continued to speak at Northern Foundation conferences.

Naturally Harper denied this, but really, how could he not have known?

Youth For Western Civilization

The Canadian Manifesto: How the American Neoconservatives Stole My Country

The group, Youth for Western Civilization, is a spin-off of the Intercollegiate Society of Individualists; both spin-offs of Young Americans for Freedom, and all connected to Morton Blackwell's Leadership Institute.  In fact, YFC is financed by the Institute through their Campus Leadership Program. The financing must be substantial, since when they made their debut at the 2009 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), they were actually one of the major donors of that year’s event.

YWC was created to perform stunts that the seemingly more respectable Republican youth groups might shy away from.  Or as they say at the institute:  "You can get away with stuff that you would take a lot of flak for doing in the College Republicans ..."  (1)

For instance, they  held a muffin sale at several campuses, where the price of the muffin was determined by your race.  Whites paid $2.00, Asians: $1.50, Latinos: $1.00, Black/ African American: $0.75, Native American: $0.25 and Illegal Immigrants FREE.  Obviously this an attempt to incite, as whites are penalized just for being white and illegal immigrants get a free ride, while everyone else is subsidized. 

However, many of the actions of WYC are more dangerous, as they go after what they call "liberal" professors.  One who had been targeted by the group, was being harassed to the point where he emailed a friend stating that he had a gun and knew how to use it.  YFC hacked into his email account, took the message to the public and the professor was fired.  He shouldn't have said what he did and the university was right to let him go, but these are the kinds of activities that the group engages in.

Retired university professor Michael Yates says he's glad to no longer be in academia.  "At least I did not have to face the nasty right-wing students who spy on their professors and do the bidding of the professional witch hunters who spew hatred on radio talk shows, and television programs."  Others are not so lucky.

Everybody Draw Muhammad Day

When the South Park cartoon depicted the prophet Muhammad as a bear, or at least as someone dressed up in a bear costume, the show's producers began to receive death threats.  This prompted Seattle artist Molly Norris, to establish an Everybody Draw Muhammad Day, in protest of censorship.

The Muslim religion does not allow depictions of the prophet, anymore than Christians would tolerate Jesus drawn in a disparaging fashion, or Jews, Abraham.  It's blasphemy.

To Youth for Western Civilization, this was a perfect opportunity to stir up a bit trouble, so they promoted the artistic endeavour on several U.S. campuses.  It was petty and mean, but that's what defines them.

The Marcus Epstein Affair

Thomas Tancredo is a former Republican congressman and now the honorary chairman of Youth for Western Civilization.  In his younger days, he was a member of Young Americans for Freedom, and was rewarded with a job in the Reagan administration.  Tancredo ran for President in 2008, under the new Constitution Party banner, on an anti-immigration platform.  An outspoken critic of immigration and multiculturalism, he has earned a reputation as a bigot. 

Marcus Epstein is the executive director of Tom Tancredo's Team America PAC, an immigration panel at CPAC, financed by YWC, discussing the imminent demise of the white race.  “No more of this multiculturalism garbage,” Tancredo said, adding that “the cult of multiculturalism has captured the world” and is “the dagger in the heart” of civilization. (2)  Stephen Harper, in a 2003 speech to the Institute for Research on Public Policy, claimed that "multiculturalism" was "a weak nation strategy", and to ensure that Canada is "never again" perceived as a potential source of threats, he called for a "long-overdue" reform of our refugee programs. (3)

Epstein also runs Pat and Bay Buchanan's The American Cause, another group established to end non-white immigration.  Says Buchanan:  "The central objection to the present flood of illegals is they are not English-speaking white people from Western Europe; they are Spanish-speaking brown and black people from Mexico, Latin America and the Caribbean." (4)

Founder of the National Citizens Coalition, where Harper has been a member for more than three decades and once acted as its President, Colin Brown, when asked why letting in Hungarians fleeing communism after the Soviet crackdown was justified, but letting in Vietnamese boat people fleeing communism was not. “I think the Hungarians have made marvelous citizens, but the bloodlines run the same way. We all come from Europe so they fit in. You wouldn’t know if the people next door to you are Hungarian or not. They don’t all go and gather in a ghetto.”

All those involved in the conservative movement, on both sides of the border, sing from the same hymnal.

Back to Epstein. 

Not exactly white himself, but Korean-American, he writes for Human Events, The American Conservative, The Washington Examiner, the anti-Semitic Taki's Mag, and racist/anti-immigrant site VDARE.  He also claims that he is not a racist, and yet according to the Washington Independant:

On July 7, 2007, Marcus Epstein had too much to drink and stumbled onto Georgetown’s scenic, shop-lined M Street, walking in no particular direction. At 7:15 p.m., he bumped into a black woman, called her a “nigger,” and struck her in the head with an open hand. An off-duty Secret Service agent was watching. Epstein “jogged away,” according to the agent’s affidavit, and when Epstein was finally chased down, he “continued to flail his arms while being taken into custody.” ... He faces a maximum punishment of 180 days in jail and a $1000 fine. He’s under a restraining order to stay away from the couple involved, has agreed to seek mental health treatment, complete an alcohol treatment program, write a letter of apology to the victim and donate $1000 to the United Negro College Fund. (5)

A Circle of Hate

According to the Anti-Defamation league, YWC has many ties with White Supremacists. 

Youth for Western Civilization (YWC) may have standing in the mainstream conservative world but from its inception, white supremacists have enthusiastically embraced the group.  In April 2011, YWC received direct help from white supremacist Jared Taylor,who runs the racist magazine American Renaissance. Taylor and YWC joined forces that month to create a fund-raising packet that Taylor mailed to his supporters on YWC's behalf. Taylor is a strong supporter of YWC because of his own racist convictions. He introduced race as a crucial issue in his fund-raising letter for YWC by writing, "Race is an important aspect of individual and group identity. Of all the fault lines that divide society—language, religion, class, ideology—it is the most prominent and divisive. Race and racial conflict are at the heart of the most serious challenges the western world faces in the 21^st century." (6)

ADL is also concerned with YWC's founder, Kevin DeAnna, who Taylor says  "knows how important our cultural identity is" and "has agreed to continue our struggle on college campuses throughout the nation and dedicated himself to reaching our children and grandchildren."

DeAnna is also linked to Richard Spencer, who runs a site called Alternative Right.  Spencer writes articles for Taylor's American Renaissance and The Occidental Observer, an anti-Semitic and racist publication, and is the executive director of the National Policy Institute (NPI), a white supremacist think tank. Spencer once remarked, "I'm very lucky to be friends with Kevin DeAnna of Youth for Western Civilization. I think this group is extremely important for our side." (6)

The H.L. Mencken Club for Mice

H. L. Menken (1880-1956) was an American author best known for his satirical essays on the famous Scopes Trials (evolution), which he referred to as the "monkey trials".  Though not really a racist, he was an elitists, who scorned a democratic system that allowed lesser men to rule their superiors.  He was also critical of Roosevelt's New Deal.

The H. L. Mencken Club came into existence in 2008, and according to their website is "an organization for independent-minded intellectuals and academics of the Right."  The Club hosts an annual conference that attracts speakers and guests from around the world, including paleoconservative Peter Brimelow, Pat Buchanan of The American Cause, YWC's Kevin DeAnna and his friend Richard Spencer.

If these people represent intellectuals and academics of the Right, then the Right is in serious trouble.

Peter Brimelow has a Canadian connection through the Reform Party, now called the Conservative Party of Canada.  He is an author and former right-wing journalist for Conrad Black's Financial Post and William Buckley's National Review.  In his book The Patriot Game, he attacks Quebec, bilingualism, the Canadian flag and the Canadian national anthem, which he sees as pandering to Quebec.

According to a college friend, after Stephen Harper read the Patriot Game, he became so enthused that he went out and bought ten copies to give to friends. (7)  I've read the book and in many ways, it formed the basis for much of Harper's and the Reform Party's philosophy.

Brimelow was an acquaintance of Canada's Paul Fromm, who founded the Citizens for Foreign Aid Reform (C-FAR), which opposes foreign aid to Third World countries.  Fromm was allowed to sell memberships to C-Far at a Reform Party assembly, in exchanging for getting Peter Brimelow to speak.

Brimelow, along with other speakers at the H.L. Menken conference, Paul E. Gottfried and Steve Sailer, operate V-Dare, an anti-immigration, pro-white hate group. The Southern Poverty Law Centre covered the inaugural event in 2008, where much of the talk was about "how the GOP could regain power by more fervently courting the white vote."

[Said Brimelow]  “The way to win is to get white votes. If [Republicans] did that, even without actually cutting off immigration, they could continue to win national elections for quite a long time.”  Look at Alabama ... with whites only comprising 65 percent of the electorate, they’re in worse shape than American whites generally. Yet McCain easily won that state, in large part because of support from 88 percent of white voters  ...  It seems like an implicit thing that everybody in the South understands how things are and they all vote Republican."

Brimelow even suggested that McCain should have said that Obama was the affirmative action candidate. “It would have been so easy. All he had to do is get up and say it.”

Fortunately, I think McCain had a bit more class.

Most of these groups who use terms like "Western", really mean "White".  When you trace their funding, they all dip from the same pool, promote each others think tanks, and organizations, and deliver the same message.

This was the message that the Reform Party presented and it did not disappear when they bought out the rights to the Tories.  It's still there under the surface.  The media just no longer covers it.

Sources:

1. My Right-Wing Degree, By Jeff Horwitz, May 24, 2005

2. CPAC Immigration Panel: Readying the Fight to Save the GOP and White America, By Brian Tashman, Right-Wing Watch, February 11, 2011

3. Too Close for Comfort: Canada's Future Within Fortress North America, By Maude Barlow, McClelland & Stewart Ltd., 2005, ISBN: 0-7710-1088-5, p. 19-24

4. Into the Mainstream, By Chip Berlet, Southern Poverty Law Centre

5. Tancredo, Buchanan Bruised by Racist ‘Karate Chop’, By David Weigel, The Washington Independant, June 2, 2009

6. Youth for Western Civilization:  Ties with White Supremacists, Anti-Defamation League, May 23, 2011 

7. Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada, by William Johnson, McClelland & Stewart, 2005, ISBN 0-7710 4350-3