Art by Yousef Amairi

Art by Yousef Amairi
the struggle continues

March 20, 2015

Stanley Brehaut Ryerson: Marxist Historian, by Gregory S. Kealey in Studies in Political Economy

Studies in Political Economy 9 (Fall 1982): 105
 by Gregory S. Kealey
Online ISSN 1918-7033
Print ISSN 0707-8552

In "Stanley Brehaut Ryerson: Canadian Revolutionary Intellectual," I
present a biographical sketch of Ryerson which situates him in his
intellectual and political context. In the process the ambiguity of
Ryerson's role as both major party intellectual and key member of the
Central Committee emerged as a peculiarly Canadian phenomenon.

Other communist parties recruited many more intellectuals and thus
they seldom combined political and scholarly roles. Ryerson, of course,
did not have the academic luxury of distance from the corridors of party
power. Instead he was a major actor both in the often tortured debates
of the Canadian party and in the increasingly antedeluvian debates of
Comintern and post-Comintern international communism. Yet Ryerson
also initiated the attempt to write Marxist history in Canada. In this
article, I will survey his career as a Marxist historian and attempt to
assess his contribution to Canadian historical writing.

In the same year that Warsaw Pact troops entered Prague, beginning
the process that would lead to Ryerson's departure from the Communist
Party of Canada (CPC), Unequal Union: Confederation and the Roots
of Conflict in the Canadas, 1815-1873, the second volume of the
"People's History," appeared. Receiving far more attention from the
Canadian academy than his earlier work, this volume represented the
high point of Ryerson's historical writing. Although, as we shall see, his
work as an historian and political activist through the 1970s to the
present remains vibrant and productive, this simultaneous break with
the party and the publication of Unequal Union may be taken as a
convenient point to turn to a more detailed consideration of Stanley
Ryerson's contribution to the writing of Canadian history.

Although trained academically in literature and concerned actively
with philosophy, the bulk of Ryerson's published work has been
historical. Obviously taken with the ambiguities and ironies of his own
personal history, Ryerson from the start of his career as a communist
intellectual wrote history. His first contributions to the party press and
to left-wing journals concerned Papineau and the rebellion of 1837. 1 As
part of the party's discovery of Canadian history, a series of essays
appeared in The Worker in the fall of 1935 and the winter of 1935-36. 2
History at its eulogistic best (or worst), these articles ran under titles
such as "Heroes from Canada's Past" and "Communists, Bearers of
Great Traditions."? In addition, the new cultural/theoretical journal
New Frontier carried historical work in its eighteen-month existence. In
addition to Ryerson on 1837, articles by Leo Warshaw and Betty Ratz,
then University of Toronto graduate students, were particularly not-
able." Despite their sometimes too-overt didacticism and their tendency
towards hagiography, these initial attempts at historical writing quickly
established the method and themes which would remain important and
within which the party's, and especially Ryerson's, major contributions
to Canadian historical writing developed.

The first and most obvious point about the project is that it was to be
Marxist. What that would mean precisely, of course, was not at all
obvious. The nature and methods of historical materialism were not well
known, almost no Marxist historical writing was available in English,
and European material was relatively inaccessible.i This, of necessity,
meant a return to Marx, Engels, and Lenin, but even there much
remained untranslated and even unpublished in the 1930s. In the
Canadian context, there was very little to draw on. Earlier SOcialist
movements had produced relatively little analysis of the Canadian
context." Agrarian radicalism, on the other hand, had produced a
number of muckraking accounts in its wake, including the works of
Gustavus Myers and Edward Porritt." The former's History of
Canadian Wealth undoubtedly influenced Canadian progressives more
than any other work. Ryerson, both in his introduction to the reprint
(1972)8 and in earlier commentaries, has acknowledged his debt of
gratitude to what he termed "the first major step towards a Marxist
interpretation of Canadian development." Moreover, he continued, "It
constitutes a landmark; I owe much to it, both in getting my initial
bearings in this field over a quarter-century ago, and in projecting some
of the lines of search pursued in the present study [Founding of
Canada]."9 Ryerson's early work shows Myers's strong influence.

Also developing in the 1930s was the "Toronto school" of economic
history, vigorously led by Harold Innis. The writings of Innis on the
great staple trades would contribute strongly to Ryerson's work but also
created a curious dialectic in which the unfolding Marxist work con-
stantly had to resist the temptations of what it viewed as Innis's degener-
ation into economic and geographic determinism. Ironically, if Maurice
Dobb set the economic context for the unfolding work of the British
Communist Party's Historians Group, then one could argue that Innis
did the same in Canada. 10 Clearly, their relationship to Innis's work was
always tense and highly charged, but it was nevertheless quite
compelling. II

But, in addition to being Marxist, the historical, work of the com-
munists had another primary aim. It was to be popular, "people's his-
tory," written not for an academic audience but rather for the Canadian
people - an entity relatively undefined in the days of the Popular
Front, but certainly wider than the historical profession.F These two
problems then frame Ryerson's project as an historian. It should be
quite evident at the outset that the task he faced was not identical to that
encountered by his colleagues in the academy - not even to speak of the
unpropitious circumstances in which his work would be carried on.
A third point also should be made. Ryerson's interest was in Cana-
dian history. Other Canadian scholars (E.H. Norman, C.B. Macpher-
son) would make major contributions to Marxism in other realms, but
Ryerson, surrendering his early pursuit of European literature, turned
resolutely to the study of the Canadian past. As he put it in the foreword
to his first book, he hoped to provide "a starting point for an enterprise
long overdue: the analysis, from the standpoint of Marxism, of our
country's history."

Few Canadian communists reflected on writing history other than
Ryerson. John Weir did so in "Our History" in 1944 with rather
disastrous effects. Proundly influenced by Earl Browder, then leader of
the Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA), Weir
called on the party "to deepen our study of Canadian history to uncover
not only the 'stormy' but also the 'peaceful' pages." Mimicking
Browder's views, Weir explained that "confederation, a class compro-
mise, did open up the road to the 'peaceful' achievement of the main
tasks which the unsuccessful revolution of 1837 had set for itself.,,13
This article then is a blatant example of Penner's criticism of the party
for "confounding" theory and tactics and for too often subordinating
theory to "the needs of the day.,,14 In that same article, however, Weir
called on the party to place a premium on historical work, "a political
task of major importance," and suggested the creation of a history
committee of the Labour Progressive Party's education department.
Ryerson, on occasion, considered historical materialism in a more
theoretical vein. His address to the 1946 National Affairs Conference on
Marxist Studies of Canadian Development drew its inspiration from
Marx's 1846 letter to Annenkov. This letter uses Proudhon as a foil to
draw out the general lines of historical materialism in a fashion similar
to that of the more-famous preface to Contribution to the Critique of
Political Economy of 1859. Ryerson in this speech also drew on the
Annenkov letter to criticize Innis, after easily dismissing Creighton,
Brebner, Lower, et al. as idealists. Innis's problem, like Proudhon's,
argued Ryerson, lay in his inability to perceive the social relations which
accompanied the productive forces he described. Thus class disappeared
from his writing. 15

The emphasis on social relations necessitated by the encounter with
Innis's materialism is evident in later reflections as well. Ryerson always
went out of his way to deny the charge that equated Marxism and
economic determinism: "Marxism holds that it is the people who make
history - their labor and their struggles and their dreams; and that
these are understandable and have meaning when seen in their real
setting .... " Moreover, he added: "Labor, production, the real
relationships of living society: this is the point of departure for historical
materialism .... Thought and feelings, ideas and passion and
imagination have their being in a material world, are conditioned by it,
work upon it.,,16 This approach to writing history is evident in his major
work where "the struggles and ideas of people are what makes history.
They operate, not in a vacuum but in and upon a specific setting, a given
social system." This overt recognition of the interplay of freedom and
necessity is present in Ryerson's history as it is in the best Marxist
historical writing."

The 1946 National Affairs Conference led to the establishment of a
series of committees under the general direction of Ryerson and
Margaret Fairley." The major initial success of this work lay in a vib-
rant group of Toronto researchers who began to lay a systematic
research framework which would eventually support the edifice of "A
People's History." Early results of this work were published in a special
issue of National Affairs Monthly in 1949 and continued to appear
throughout that year and, farless frequently, in the early 1950s. Ryer-
son in "Re-conquest," his introduction to the special NationalAffairs
Monthly issue, explained the rationale of the project: "A people have to
win back into their own possession their land and the fruits of their
labor and also their culture, ideology, and history." Pursuing the mili-
tary metaphor, he concluded: "To restore to the working people the his-
tory of the past struggle - the real history of their land - is a worthy
engagement in the battle of ideas." 19 On this occasion, he also reminded
readers of the difficulty of the project while unrealistically promising
the People's History within a year. First, "We pay for past neglect," he
explained, since "the poverty of previous output requires that we begin
almost from scratch." Second, skills were in short supply, and third,
"the pull of immediate practical work" was always great. Problems two
and three, of course, would increase over the next few years as party
strength declined markedly. Nevertheless, the work published from this
project was of a noticeably higher quality than that which preceded it in
party publications. Jacqueline Cahan's work on labour in politics, for
example, was much stronger than the party's usual reflections on
labour's past and 1. Wilson's overview of the development of Toronto
provided an interesting periodization of the stages of Canadian capi-
talist development. 20

People's History, as developed by the Canadian party, was at its best
in Ryerson's two volumes, The Founding of Canada and Unequal
Union, published in 1960 and 1968 respectively. Both have already sold
around 12,000 copies in four printings and continue to sell well. Two of
the projected three volumes of People's History, they owe much to the
collective work of the late 1940s, and especially to Margaret Fairley,
J.F. White, and Clare Pentland, but they also provide ample evidence
of Ryerson's gifts as a Marxist synthesizer. Like his earlier works, they
are based primarily on published material which the author reshaped
into a Marxist overview. Like all surveys, they have certain problems
owing to the inadequacy or non-existence of work in important fields,
but as stimulating Marxist syntheses of Canada to 1873they still have no
equals. Moreover, they demand to be evaluated on their own terms as
"a preliminary breaking of ground, suggesting a line of approach to a
reinterpretation of this country's history. "21

Founding of Canada, especially, fits.that description. Written very
much as a popular Marxist introduction to Canadian history, it offers
little new material, instead providing significant shifts of emphasis
which make the whole enterprise quite different than the familiar
narrative would suggest. Partially stemming from Ryerson's eclectic
interest in prehistory and Soviet anthropology, we receive, for example,
six chapters on pre-European-contact Canada. Discovery, exploration,
and first settlement are then surveyed not in the customary terms of
great men and the spirit of adventure but instead in the context of the
decline of feudalism and the rise of capitalism. Throughout Ryerson
attempts to include the lower classes of society, providing interesting
material on slaves, fishermen, voyageurs, habitants, artisans, and the
initial surfacings of class discontent and organization. Written before
blossoming of the renaissance in Quebec historical writing, parts of the
New France material are now, however, dated.

Unequal Union is the more adventuresome of the two works.
Partially because of its focus on 60 as opposed to over 300 years, it
delves more deeply into the events between the end of the War of 1812
and the entry of Manitoba, British Columbia, and Prince Edward Island
into Confederation. Organized in three parts, it is less of a narrative
history than its predecessor, instead focusing on three major themes:
colonial revolt, the rise of industrial capitalism, and the creation of the
new nation state. "A series of studies," then, it fully lives up to its
avowed aims to "incite further exploration" and tomake "some
contribution to the eventual production of a full-scale, 'three-
dimensional' history. ,,22

By way of evaluating the overall contribution of Ryerson's corpus to
Canadian history, a closer analysis of his writing on 1837, Quebec, the
industrial revolution, and class - the major themes of his work-
would seem in order.

1837: Failed Bourgeois Revolution?

Ryerson's first major work was 1837: The Birth of Canadian Demo-
cracy. As we have already noted, it was written quickly and in an un-
stable, not to say dangerous, setting. Somewhat self-consciously,
Ryerson noted in his "Foreword" that it was not a work of original
research. "Such a task," he wrote, "would be extremely tempting, all
the more since the documentary material has been scarcely touched, and
next to nothing written on the Rebellion period - a gap which can
hardly be unintentional.i'P (For this confession of inadequate original
research, he received an irritated dismissal from Donald Creighton.j'"
Yet despite Ryerson's apologia the work retains considerable interest
and provides the basic outline for the story he tells with additional
evidence in Unequal Union.

Surprisingly, the book begins not with economic structure, but with
ideas. The first chapter, "The Spirit of Democracy," situates the Cana-
dian events in the grand sweep of the development of bourgeois democ-
racy and sees 1837 as a peculiar hybrid of the British, French and Amer-
ican revolutions. Analyzing briefly the ideas, language, and even the
symbolism of the rebels and the patriotes, he demonstrates the overt
linkages to the earlier revolutions. Although arguing as he would in later
works that "the 1837 Rebellion was in aim and content an anti-feudal,
anti-colonial bourgeois democratic revolution," he warned his readers
that such a revolution was "at no time, a simple, schematic process" -
especially, he added, in the New World, "for there the relations with the
metropolis and the 'transplanting' of Old World institutions into a new
setting create new and peculiar problems."

Then, in attempting to trace the specificity of 1837, he turned to an
analysis of land and land-holding. From a correct recognition of the im-
portance of land to the colonial ruling class, he overextended his argu-
ment to claim that land-monopoly represented "a sort of commer-
cialized feudalism" which "loomed as the dominating problem before
the Canadas." Drawing on a classical Marxist formulation, he argued
further that "potential production forces were stifled by dominant
property relations; and as long as the latter couldn't be broken down
progress remained illusory." Thus the rebellion was an effort to break
the "rule of a landlord-merchant oligarchy," which owing to its
reactionary stance, was blocking industrial capitalist development. 25
In subsequent chapters, he recognized that in Lower Canada the de-
mand for political independence was part of the national struggle of
French Canadians and led naturally to a demand for national indepen-
dence. This theme, however, received less attention than it deserved and
suggests the difficulty that Quebec nationalism in the 1930s presented to
Marxist analysis.

In a chapter entitled, "Class Forces in Conflict," probably the first
such writing in Canadian historiography, Ryerson describes in more
detail the ruling class: "a kind of commercial-landlord aristocracy,"
"doubly parasitic" since it toadied to the British, while simultaneously
exploiting the Canadian people. On the other side of the class divide, he
found "the democratic masses: a commercial and industrial middle
class, professionals, farmers, and city workers." While not pretending
that a proletariat could yet be identified, he did draw attention to the
emergence of trade unions in York and Montreal and to the active sup-
port of British Chartist workers. Less successful was his attempt to dif-
ferentiate the moderate reformers from the rebels in class terms, that is a
moderate bourgeoisie versus a rebellious popular mass."
The volume then turned to a narrative of the events of the rebellion of
1837. In concluding, Ryerson argued that, while a military defeat, the
rebellion was a historic victory since it paved the way for responsible
government and industrial capitalist development. The military defeat
he blamed on the moderate reformers, the defensive strategy in Lower
Canada, and organizational weaknesses."

In Donald Creighton's view of 1938, "the book, in short, is a kind of
garbled translation in the Canadian vernacular of what Marx thought
about the class struggle in Europe. There is little evidence in it that Mr.
Ryerson has discovered anything of much value concerning the class
struggle in the Canadas. "28 In another review, B.K. Sandwell, the editor
of Saturday Night, scoffed:

The determination of the communists to make 1837 their own private
property and to masquerade as the descendants of the "patriots" ... a
determination for which Mr. Ryerson is probably responsible ... is one
of the most illogical features of a monumentally illogical campaign. Its
sole motive is to justify rebellion by establishing an honourable precedent
and by representing it as a defence of constitutional rights against uncon-
ditional tyranny.i"

In honour of the first attempt at Marxist historical writing, then, came
the first classic statements of anti-Marxism. Creighton's dismissal of it
as an importation of foreign theory imposed on Canadian reality and
Sandwell's imputation of political motives, both remain all-to-familiar
responses to Marxist historical writing in this country. On the other
hand, Frank Underhill responded much more favourably to 1837. 30
How does 1837 look from a perspective other than Creighton's?
(Creighton, by the way, chose to celebrate the anniversary of the
rebellions by addressing "the Canadian Bankers' Association on the
economic crisis of 1837 and its consequences.i'j"

The book fits easily
into the emerging Marxist historiography of its time. As communist
intellectuals came to write history, their attention turned predictably to
revolution. Thus in Britain, for example, Raphael Samuel has noted
"that the heaviest concentration of Marxist historical work was in the
field of 16th and 17th century England ... [especially] left-wing
democracy in the English civil war.'>32 In the United States the same
held true for the American Revolution. One suspects that Christopher
Hill's retrospective notion that "the celebration of 1640 - and
especially of 1649 - did something for the party in giving it confidence
in a non-gradualist tradition'! has its echo in Canada with Ryerson's
treatment of 1837. Equally there can be little doubt that Ryerson found
it natural to embrace elements of the old radical-democratic view of the
rebellions. In the nineteenth-century liberal tradition, Mackenzie
enjoyed a place of considerable importance as can be seen by the polem-
ical exchanges which greeted the publication of J .C. Dent's work in the
1880s, the suppression of William LeSueur's biography in the pre-war
period, or even in the ongoing visions of his grandson, William Lyon
Mackenzie King. 34 This liberal tradition had many contradictory ele-
ments: it combined a democratic-radical justification of rebellion by the
masses with an unapologetically Whig view of the subsequent results of
the rebellions. It also substituted vituperation for analysis in dealing
with the Family Compact. Ryerson, unfortunately, incorporated much
of the Whig strain as well as the more radical and he too tended only to
caricature the compact." Nevertheless, when compared with the new
historical hegemony of Creighton, Craig and Ouellet, which dismisses
the rebellions as reactionary farces, Ryerson's work still has consider-
able value. His typification of the revolts as bourgeois-democratic, for
example, still stands.

On the other hand, his discusison of the class
forces involved in the revolts while suggestive remains underdeveloped
and somewhat schematic. The revolts did not have to be led by an
industrial bourgeoisie to justify their categorization as bourgeois-
democratic." Nevertheless the ongoing importance of Ryerson's
interpretation is evident in the recent work of young Quebec Marxist
scholars such as Denis Moniere and Roch Denis. Even more interesting
is the sympathetic reading it has recently received from Fernand

French Canada or Quebec?

Ryerson's 1937 treatment of the rebellion in Lower Canada sets his
work off from the rest of Canadian historians almost as totally as his
membership in the Communist Party. His view of the patriotes as en-
gaged in a struggle for national independence, which was later rein-
forced in Unequal Union, stands out as a major contribution. Carl
Berger's summary of the views of Ryerson's professional contem-
poraries indicates the latter's uniqueness: "The English-Canadian
historian, like the community in which he wrote, did not fundamentally
accept the French-Canadian groups as anything more than a minority
with certain rights within the province of Quebec. The idea of two
equalities was utterly foreign to his mind."!" Moreover, Ryerson's view
of the patriotes provides a striking contrast with Donald Creighton's
nearly simultaneous dismissal of "the economic and cultural inferiority
of the French Canadians," which was much more in keeping with pre-
valent English Canadian attitudes. 39 Ryerson, however, did not
sufficiently credit nationalism as a force in the rebellion. If anything, in
an attempt both to reassert the connections between Upper Canadian
and Lower Canadian experiences and to avoid the dreaded "bourgeois
nationalism" which communists mortally feared, he actually under-
played nationalist sentiment. This is especially evident in his more pol-
emical writings both in Clarte and in his 1937 anti-nationalist tract, Le
reveil du Canada francais. Yet the other possibility was always present
in Ryerson's work and Clarte not only carried critiques of right-wing
nationalism but also published a special issue in honour of 1837 and
began in the fall of 1937 to sell portraits of Papineau. Thus in acknowl-
edging nationalism as a force and in increasingly perceiving its progres-
sive potential, Ryerson was moving towards the more complex formula-
tion of his second book, French Canada:A Study in Canadian


Mainly written while underground, the book analyzes "the problem
of the relations of French and English Canada ... by probing deep
beneath the surface of our past and present history; by abandoning two-
dimensional surface concepts, and laying bare, in depth, the actual un-
folding of the social and economic forces on which rests the life of every
national community." Quebec is here a "minority nation. "40 In the first
part of the book Ryerson delineates a "democratic tradition" by
analyzing the contributions of Papineau, Lafontaine, Dorion, Riel and
Laurier. Again in treating the rebellion he defends the rebels as
"democratic, patriot and internationalist," and engages in an effective
polemic against Groulx and Creighton,"! In moving on to Lafontaine
and Dorion, however, Ryerson argues that the coming of responsible
government in 1848 and the subsequent Confederation of 1867 brought
with them "political equality." In his self-critical preface to the new
edition of French Canada, Ryerson now argues that here he succumbed
"to the liberal whig interpretation of history." Further he draws outthe
obvious political implication which followed: that if the bourgeois-
democratic revolution had been successful by 1867 in gaining "political
equality" for Quebec, then any discussion of self-determination in the
present could only be bourgeois nationalism and thus reactionary. He
now points out that "what was wrong with this line of reasoning was
both its counter-factual basis and its flawed theoretical approach.v'P
This self criticism, which closely resembles his similar concern,
expressed when Unequal Union was translated and published in
Quebec," to some degree underestimates Ryerson's own contribution.
For example, there can be little question that it was the thrust of his
work with its emphasis on the democratic struggles of the Quebec
people and their economic inequality in Confederation which helped
pave the way for the Communist Party's eventual recognition of
Quebec's right to self-determination. Equally it should be noted that
even in 1943 under the pressure of Anglo-French tensions regarding the
war, the crypto-fascism of the Duplessis years, and the overt fascism of
some Quebec nationalists, French Canada still asserted that' 'the demo-
cratic struggle of the French Canadian people during the whole of the
preceding period (1763-1867) had been a struggle for the right of
national self-determination, for their right as a nation to choose their
own form of state." Further, he argued, "Insofar as Quebec is con-
cerned, Dominion-Provincial relations have to do not simply with 'pro-
vincial rights' but with the deeper problem of English-French Canadian
national relationships.' ,44

Nevertheless, this same problem reoccurs in the first edition of
Unequal Union, not in reference to 1867, but to 1848. In the original
Ryerson argued, as he had in French Canada, that the coming of re-
sponsible government' 'marked a key stage in the bourgeois democratic
revolution ... from which the peoples of the Canadas could advance
toward wider self-government and a fuller national equalitv.t"" In the
1972 French version, Ryerson caught his interpretative error and added:
Mais cette presence meme servait a masquer un aspect important de la
realite: a savoir, Ie fait que cette nouvelle autonomie au sien de l'Empire
(home rule, responsible government) comportait Ie refus de I'autodeter-
mination, du droit de self-government, de la nation
canadienne-francaise .... Ce qui s'est affirme en 1848 est la realisation
d'une mesure fort modeste de democratie dans Ie cadre d'une suprematie
anglo-capitaliste, etayee par la puissance de I'Empire.
In the slightly revised 1973 English version, he went even further:

Concession of self-government to the Anglo-Canadian colonial bour-
geoisie was conditional on assurance of a "proper subordination of the
French" - to whose numerical minority status was superimposed a polit-
ical mechanism with built-in guarantees of British-imperial stability. Con-
ceded "from above," the Canadian bourgeois revolution was, in its lim-
ited way, successful; the French-Canadian one was not. 46
Again we see further movement on the national question and the histor-
ical interpretation of Quebec.

Although Ryerson's analysis of Quebec from 1937 to 1981 has
changed considerably, his revisions seem minor compared with events in
Quebec or with the almost total rewriting of English Canadian historical
views and those within Quebec as well. By English Canadian historical
standards, Ryerson has possessed a remarkable sensitivity to, and in-
sight into, Quebec history. The rapid development of Quebec historical
writing in the last two decades, and especially the arrival of serious
Marxist scholarship has gone a long way both to corroborate some of
Ryerson's early work and also to fulfil his invocation for "further
exploration." We still await the "full-scale, 'three-dimensional'
history" to "do justice to social structure and national realities," but
there has been significant movement in that direction.f?

Canada's Industrial Revolution

The "unequal union" of confederation has been one major theme of
Ryerson's work and the rise of industrial capitalism has been the other.
Part two of Unequal Union, "Capitalist Industrialism," and especially
the chapters surveying the development of manufacturing in the 1840s
(chap. 9), railroad development (chap. 12), and the further growth of
industry in the 1850s (chap. 13), have undoubtedly helped redirect the
attention of Canadian historians away from the staple trades. The
second half of the nineteenth century had always been the period least
considered by the staples school. The demise of fur, timber, and central
Canadian wheat, and the advent of New Ontario, western wheat, and
hydro-electricity, the staples of Toronto school writing, left an awkward
fifty-year gap from responsible government to Laurier. The transition in
Canadian historical writing which came after World War II partially
filled this gap with heroes (Creighton's Macdonald, Careless's Brown),
or with heroics (Berton's Canadian Pacific Railway), but told us little
about economic development. Equally, economic historians offered
little, skipping over the period as quickly as possible in order to come to
the Laurier "industrialization" period as can be best seen in Easter-
brook and Aitken's standard text ." Ryerson's work has helped fill that

This contribution was especially important because in the 1950s anti-
Marxist historians in England had made a frontal assault on the notion
of an industrial revolution. There the influence of Dobb's Studies in the
Development of Capitalism and the writings of the Historians Group of
the Communist Party helped defeat the auack.f In Canada there was
no ideological attack, simply a consensus that nothing of consequence
had happened until the twentieth century. Here the work of Clare
Pentland (unfortunately much of which remained unpublished during
his lifetirnej.i" and then the publication of Unequal Union, were crucial
in establishing the existence of nineteenth-century industrialization.

The insights of Pentland and Ryerson in this area have been instru-
mental in the transformation, over the last fifteen years, of Canadian
and Quebec historical writing on the second half of the nineteenth
century. It should be noted, however, that here again Ryerson suggested
only the initial outlines of approach, and his work could be criticized for
not digging deeply enough to document the nature of Canada's
industrialization. His later reflections on the theme of industrial
transformation are contained in his telling critique of Tom Naylor's
History of Canadian Business." The key importance of Ryerson's
emphasis on capitalist industrialization is two-fold: first, it helps us to
understand the process of nation-building within a colonial context, a
process which differentiates the settler-colonies from other colonial
experiences; and, second, it directs our attention to the creation of a
working class. 52 The recognition of this last historical process represents

Ryerson's final major contribution.

Ryerson, curiously, has written less about the development of the
nineteenth-century Canadian working class than one might expect. This
failing stems partially from the 1873 terminal date of Unequal Union,
but it also comes out of his lack of primary research. None of his prede-
cessors, whose work he was able to recast in the political, national, and,
to some degree, economic realms provided him with material on the
working class. What there was he utilized - Ratz on 1872, Pentland on
navvies, Cooper on ship labourers, Szoke on Szalatnay, Catherine
Vance on the 1830s and Lipton on the trade union movement - but all
of this added up to relatively little. 53 I suspect that Ryerson's problem
here may in part relate to the original National Affairs Monthly division
of labour in 1946 when labour history was hived off from the People's
History project. There may also have been an implicit avoidance on
Ryerson's part, since in this realm the party, especially with reference to
the twentieth century, had shown considerable interest - an interest,
one hastens to add, that led to wooden, orthodox, and, most often, un-
critical and self-congratulatory writing. In sum, party writing on Cana-
dian workers led only to the CPC, and party writing on the CPC itself
never rose above hagiography. 54

Whatever the reason, Ryerson's work, while always sensitive to the
presence of the common people, does not engage in any specific analysis
of these groups in pre-industrial society, nor does it examine closely the
emergence of a working class. In fact, in my estimation, his comments
at the close of Unequal Union regarding the emergence of working-class
political forces during the Nine-Hour Movement of 1872 and with the
publication of The Ontario Workman tend, if anything, to under-
estimate the strength of the young working-class movement." Never-
theless, his tentative suggestions have led to a growing body of literature
both in Quebec and in Canada. 56

But this is to stop at Unequal Union, and to omit Ryerson's direct
contribution in the 1970s to the writing of working-class history. With-
out attempting to assess this more recent work, it must be noted that
with a number of colleagues at the Universite du Quebec a Montreal,
Ryerson involved himself in a collective project on the history of
Quebec workers' political movements which resulted in the publication
of a collection of documents and a chronological history in the
mid-1970s, as well as numerous theses.? In addition, he served as chief
editor of the collection, Histoire des Travailleurs Quebecois, of the
Regroupement de chercheurs en histoire des travailleurs quebecois. No
doubt this work contributed to the emergence of another collective ef-
fort in which Ryerson was involved, 150Ans de Lutte: Histoire du mou-
vement ouvrier au Quebec, 1825-1976, a very successful popular history
of Quebec workers sponsored by the CSN and CEQ and published in
1979. 58

Some belated recognition of Ryerson's contribution to Canadian his-
torical writing has also been forthcoming in the 1970s. Elected to the
council of the Canadian Historical Association in 1974, he served a
three-year term and then chaired a committee to organize Canada's par-
ticipation in the 1980 World Historical Congress in Bucharest. In ad-
dition, the March 1980 McGill Conference on Class and Culture:
Aspects of Canada's Labour Past, organized by Bryan Palmer, was ded-
icated to Ryerson and included tributes by David Frank and Alfred

Ryerson's other major contribution of the last decade, however, has
stemmed from his ongoing involvement in Quebec. As an established
analyst of the Quebec Left for English Canadian and American jour-
nals.l? and as a link to the older world of the Quebec Left which was
part of Ryerson's youth, he has played an important role in the Quebec
of the 1970s. Moreover, he has continued to make active political inter-
ventions.P'' Finally, of late, he has commenced a process of re-evaluating
his own personal history, the first elements of which are evident in his
recollection, "Comrade Beth," for, after all, Bethune's Montreal was
Ryerson's as well. 61


Stanley Ryerson - revolutionary, intellectual, teacher. A conclusion
can only be premature, for Ryerson's career is certainly anything but
over. How does one assess, moreover, the contributions of revo-
lutionary intellectuals in non-revolutionary periods? One cannot turn to
the evaluations of the bourgeois historical profession, for one hardly
awaits their acclaim for Marxism. Yet, as has been suggested earlier,
Ryerson has managed of late to win grudging admiration and accept-
ance even there. Although fitting Carl Berger's profile of a Canadian
historian born before World War I, Ryerson was not considered for
systematic evaluation in The Writing of Canadian History. Yet inthe
brief notice he receives, Berger's comments suggest Ryerson's unusual
sensitivity to French Canada and his willingness to consider the rebellion
of 1837 as a serious social movement.P The only systematic published
consideration of Ryerson by Norman Penner is, however, more critical.

No doubt influenced by the battles of 1956-57, Penner unmercifully
pillories the CPC for confounding "theory and tactics" and for
subordinating theory "to the needs of the day. "63 That there is a large
element of justifiable criticism here is unquestionable, yet Penner in his
comments on Ryerson's writing on Quebec far too narrowly interprets
its aim. Moreover he confuses the "use" the party made of the work
with the work itself, going so far as to cite a Sam Carr review to prove
"the subordination of theory to tactics.' '64 Finally, there is a historicism
about Penner's critique which fails to recognize Ryerson's relative
uniqueness among Canadian historians.P

This defence of Ryerson is not an apologia. As I have tried to point
out, much of his historical work contains serious problems, but he and
it must be regarded in their own historical context if we are ever to ap-
proach a Marxist understanding of the history of Canadian Marxism.
Similarly, the political decisions he made - especially those of 1956-57
and 1968-69 - demand to be considered in a similar context of the
history of the communist movement. The works of Fournier and of
Comeau/Dionne have commenced that process in Quebec, but we need
similar studies in Canada."

Ryerson appears to have begun such an examination. In 1973, in con-
sidering Starobin's remarkable analysis of the post-war CPUSA,
Ryerson referred to his own' 'uncompleted process of examen de cons-
cience." Dropping hints along the way, however, he alluded to "the
international influence" of Browderism, to "the throwing into reverse
of the processes that the 20th Congress had seemed to inaugurate," to
"a tacitly institutionalized intellectual, political dependence on what
was seen as a world revolutionary movement whose historic centre of
gravity resided outside the country," and, finally, to "a self-righteous
(and self-defeating) sectarianism." Yet he also noted that "a certain
toughness of historical sinew" accompanied the "stubborn durability of
problems, not the least of them, planetary.v''?

Five years later, in "Comrade Beth," he reflected again on his own
experience which, of course, had roots similar to Bethune's. Here he
pursued the question of democracy which, as we have seen, had con-
cerned him increasingly throughout the 1960s. "The issue is
democracy," he wrote, "not 'formal,' merely, but in substance and in
depth," not something which can be shelved as an irrelevancy, "a mat-
ter of action now." Worrying the issue of socialist democracy further,
he noted that "The 'sect' is but the power-structure 'writ exceedingly
small" and that "the ingrown arrogance of dogmatism ... was just as
likely to rub out personal identities as it was to fabricate 'cults of
personality' ." For Bethune, the solution lay in his committed and
courageous efforts in Spain and China; for Ryerson, it lay in his battle
against the continued subservience of the CPC to the Soviet Union as
evidenced by its acceptance of the events of 1968. After the Twentieth
Congress of the CPC, Ryerson withdrew to consider his differences with
the party, and in 1971 formally severed his ties to the CPC. 68

Recently, of course, there has been a political retreat from the gains
of the 1960s and the re-emergence of a Marxist-Leninist movement
seemingly intent on replicating the errors of the past. In addition, there
has arisen a Marxist theory which Edward Thompson and others have
argued reflects that politics.P? Ryerson too has raised his voice in that
fight, denouncing the "woodenly mechanistic pseudo-Marxism ... of
not a few leftist intellectuals in Quebec." "The resulting variant of
'structuralist Marxism'," he argued, "excludes the subject, conscious-
ness, culture - all of which exist only in the realm of the imaginary" for
these thinkers. Moreover, "a lordly contempt for 'the empirical'
exempts the 'nco-Marxist' from study of the specifics. ,,70 Although not
a "reasoner" of 1956, Ryerson has now joined his voice to theirs in the
critique of certain forms of Marxism. In addition, in his 1980
contribution to the political economy session in honour of Brough
Macpherson, Ryerson noted:

Not the least of C.B. Macpherson's massive and perceptive contribution
to social theory is that he takes democracy seriously. What I meanby
that, is that instead of yielding tothe fashionable whim of those on the
left for whom democracy is merely a formal, tactical-instrumental device
in the class struggle, he holds firm to democracy-as-content, as a funda-
mental human value."!

Ryerson, engaged in an earlier "examen de conscience" in the 1960s,
had endorsed enthusiastically Garaudy's call to end "the cramped con-
ception of Marxist-Leninism simply as a position to be defended, a for-
tress to be held ... while one peers out over the battlements of all who
are not 'our people'." In that same period he had also issued a clarion
call to Canadian Marxists to study "the main feature of Canadian
reality" in order to "explain Canada, her past and present, her relation
to the profound process of world transformation of our time." This
study, of course, has been a significant part of Ryerson's life. 72
Ryerson, as he wrote of Norman Bethune, has been "a committed
communist," "a consistent antifascist, anti-imperialist, a Canadian
democrat and internationalist." Like Bethune, he too recognized that
"national equality and self-determination are the only possible direction
for any socialist advance." And, finally, like Bethune, although he has
made mistakes, he too "was not mistaken.' m


This article is the second part of a revised paper first delivered in May 1981. As
usual, more material has appeared in the interim. The major recent addition is
Canada's Party of Socialism: History of the Communist Party of Canada
1921-1976 (Toronto, 1982). This committee-written text, commenced by Tim
Buck, then continued by John Weir and later Norman Freed, was completed by
Gerry Van Houten. A rather predictable volume, it has little to offer on Ryerson
other than a rebuttal of his position on Czechoslovakia and an acknowledgement
of his contributions on the Quebec question.

I. Ryerson, "Our Fathers Fought for Our Freedom: Louis Joseph Papineau
and 1837," Worker, 28 September 1935; idem, "God be Thanked for These
Rebels!" New Frontier 1, no. 2 (May 1936): 6-8.
2. For a brief discussion of the international context, see Norman Penner's
"The Socialist Idea in Canadian Political Thought" (Ph.D. diss., University
of Toronto, 1975), p, 219ff.; and his Canadian Left: A Critical Analysis
(Scarborough, 1977), pp. 105-6. For a brief discussion of Canadian
communist historiography see also Phyllis E. Clarke, "Application of
Marxist Thought to Canada" (Ph.D. diss., University of Toronto, 1977),
esp. chap. 7.
3. See the following articles in Worker: J.W., "Section 98 in 1817," 14
September 1935 (on Robert Gourlay); idem, "Communist Bearers of Great
Tradition," I, 3 October 1935 (on W.L. Mackenzie); C.H., "Heroes from
Canada's Past," I, 22 February, 14 March 1936 (on Pierre du Calvet,
Thomas Walker and Pierre Bedard); John Weir, "How They Stole Canada, "
14 September 1935; Stephen Brandon, "Fifty years of the C.P.R.," 9
December 1935; and C.H., "Maintaining Law and Order, 1837 and 1936,"
24 March 1936. (J.W. may well have been J.F. White, formerly editor of
Canadian Forum, who had moved to the left of the League for Social
Reconstruction. C.H. is listed as Charles Huot in Clarte versions.)
4. Betty Ratz, "United Front in Toronto - 1872," New Frontier 1, no. 3 (June
1936): 18-20; Leo Warshaw, "Social Planning for Canada," New Frontier I,
no. 2 (May 1936): 20-3. Among the editors of New Frontier were Leo
Kennedy, Dorothy Livesay, J.F. White, Betty Ratz, Felix Walter, A.J.M.
Smith and S.l. Hayakawa.
5. Eric Hobsbawm, "The Historians Group of the Communist Party," in
Rebels and their Causes: Essays in Honour of A.L. Morton, ed. Maurice
Cornford (London, 1978), pp. 22-3. See also Raphael Samuel, "British
Marxist Historians, 1880-1980: Part One," New Left Review 120 (1980):
21-96. For the French tradition see David Caute, Communism and the
French Intellectuals (London, 1964), pp. 276-99.
6. Penner, Canadian Left, chap. 3. (See n. 2 above.)
7. Carl Berger, The Writing of Canadian History (Toronto, 1976), p. 63.
8. Gustavus Myers, History of Canadian Wealth (1914; reprint ed., Toronto,
9. Ryerson, "Acknowledgements," in his The Founding of Canada: Beginnings
to 1815 (Toronto, 1972), p. 330.
10. Mike Merrill, "Interview with E.P. Thompson," Radical History Review 3
(Fall 1976).
11. For a communist commentary on Innis, see Phyllis Cohen (Clarke), "On Dr.
Harold A. Innis," National Affairs Monthly (NAM) 10, no. 2 (February
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
1953): 29-30. In addition, see: Ryerson, "Marxism and the Writing of
Canadian History," NAM 4, no. 2 (1947): 46-51; idem, "Postscript," in his
Founding of Canada, p. 328 (See n. 9 above); idem, "Postscript," in his Le
Capitalisme et la Confederation: Aux sources du conflit, Canada-Quebec,
1760-1873 (Montreal, 1972), p. 513; and idem, "Conflicting Approaches to
the Social Sciences, "Marxist Quarterly 1 (1962): 46-64.
12. On People's History, a theme worthy of lengthier consideration than is
possible here, see Raphael Samuel, "People's History," in his People's
History and Socialist Theory (London, 1981), pp. xiv-xxxviii. See also one of
Ryerson's direct inspirations: A.L. Morton, A People's History ofEngland
(London, 1938). Finally, see Peter Burke, "People's History or Total
History," in Samuel, People's History, pp. 4-9.
13. John Weir, "Our History," NAM 1 (1944): 116-9.
14. Penner, The Canadian Left, pp. 168, 85; see also idem, "Socialist Idea,"
pp. 188-9.(See n. 2 above.)
15. Ryerson, "Writing of Canadian History." (See n. 11 above.)
16. Ryerson, "A Note on Marxism and Canadian Historiography," in Founding
of Canada, p. 326.
17. See Ryerson's "Foreword" to his Founding of Canada, p. vii. See also David
Frank, "Stanley Ryerson - An Appreciation" (Paper delivered at the
conference, Class and Culture: Dimensions of Canada's Labour Past, McGill
University, 1980).
18. "Decisions of National Affairs Conference on Marxist Studies," NAM 4
(1947): 51. There are Margaret Fairley papers at the University of Toronto,
but they are mainly cultural in focus.
19. Ryerson, "Re-conquest," NAM 6,no. 1 (January-February 1949): 3-5.
20. See NAM 6, no. 1 (January-February 1949), especially Jacqueline Cahan,
"Labour in World War I," pp. 35-40; and I. Wilson, "Bay Street Spreads
Out," 11-15. Both Cahan and Wilson were University of Toronto graduate
students at the time. The relationship of Clare Pentland's work to that of
these NAM study groups remains unclear to me, but I am almost certain
there was some interaction. Later contributions of interest included Joseph
Levitt, "Aspects of Confederation," NAM 6 (1949): 215-20; Jim Henry,
"The Development of the Catholic Syndicates," NAM 6 (1949): 196-200;
and later, Ben Swankey's four-part series on Riel in NAM 9 (1952).
21. Ryerson, Founding of Canada, pp. vii-viii. Maggie Bizzell of Progress Books
in Toronto has kindly provided the following production figures for
Ryerson's books. French Canada: A Study in Canadian Democracy (1943;
1944; 1980): total of 3,000 copies; Founding of Canada (1960; 1963; 1972;
1975): total of 12,000 copies; Unequal Union: Confederation and the Roots
of Conflict in the Canadas, 1815-1873 (1968; 1973; 1975): total of 11,500
22. Ryerson, Unequal Union (Toronto, 1973), p. vi. (See n. 21 above.)
Studies in Political Economy
23. Ryerson, 1837: The Birth of Canadian Democracy (Toronto, 1937), p. 10.
24. Donald Creighton, "Review," Canadian Historical Review 19 (1938): 73-4.
25. Ryerson, 1837, pp. 26, 35, 37. (See n. 23 above.)
26. Ibid., pp. 63-4, 68, 76.
27. Ibid., p. 127.
28. Creighton, "Review." (See n. 24 above.)
29. B.K. Sandwell, "Review," Saturday Night 58 (15 January 1938): 3.
30. Frank Underhill, Canadian Forum 17 (December 1937): 296-7.
31. Berger, Canadian History, p. 217. (See n. 7 above.)
32. Samuel, "British Marxist Historians," pp. 26-7. (See n. 5 above.)
33. Hobsbawm, "Historians Group," p. 43. (See n. 5 above.)
34. On Dent, see Donald Swainson's introduction to J.c. Dent, The Last Forty
Years (1881; reprint ed., Toronto, 1972); on Lesueur, see A.B. McKillop,
ed., A Critical Spirit: The Thought of William Dawson LeSueur (Toronto,
1977) and his introduction to William LeSueur, William Lyon Mackenzie: A
Reinterpretation (Toronto, 1979), pp. vii-xxx.
35. This particular problematic, common to all "people's history" and especially
prevalent in the popular front period, is explored in Samuel, "British Marxist
Historians," pp. 39-42; and in Samuel, "People's History," pp. xxvii-xxx
(See n. 12 above.)
36. For a discussion of a very different type of bourgeois-democratic revolution,
see, for example, Eugene Genovese, From Rebellion to Revolution:
American Slave Revolts in the Making of the Modern World (Baton Rouge,
37. Denis Moniere, Le developpement des ideologies au Quebec (Montreal,
1977); and Roch Denis, Luttes de classes et question nationale au Quebec
1948-1968 (Montreal, 1979). A recent translation of Moniere is Ideologies in
Quebec: The Historical Development (Toronto, 1981). See also Fernand
Ouellet, "La formation d'une societe dans la vallee du Saint-Laurent: d'une
societe sans classes a une societe de classes," Canadian Historical Review 62
(1981): 407-50, esp. 440-4.
38. Berger, Canadian History, p. 184.
39. Alfred Dubuc, "The influence of the Annales School in Quebec," Review I
(Winter 1978): 123-45. For a slightly revised version in French see Revue
d'histoire de l'amerique francoise 33 (1975): 357-86.
40. Ryerson, French Canada (Toronto, 1943), pp. 21, 23.(See n. 21 above.)
41. Ibid., pp. 36-7.
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
42. Ryerson, "Preface," in his French Canada (Toronto, 1980), pp. 5-7.
43. Ryerson, "Postscript," in his Le Capitalisme et la Confederation, pp. 508-9.
(See n. II above.) "La racine de I'erreur theorique est a chercher, me semble-
t-il, dans une sous-estimation radical de I'importance du facteur national
dans Ie processus historique."
44. Ryerson, French Canada, pp. 63-4, 71. (Emphasis added.)
45. Ryerson, Unequal Union (Toronto, 1968), pp. 168-9.
46. Ryerson, Unequal Union (Toronto, 1973), pp. 168-9; and idem, Le
Capitalisme et la Confederation, pp. 226-7.
47.0n Quebec history, see: Dubuc, "Annates School in Quebec" (See n. 39
above); and Gilles Paquet and Jean Pierre Wallot, "Pour une meso-histoire
du xix" Siecle Canadien," Revue d'histoire de l'amerique francoise (RHAF)
33 (1979): 387-425. For important critiques of Fernand Ouellet, whose work
stands strongly in opposition to Ryerson's, see: Pierre Tousignant, "Le Bas-
Canada: Une etape importante dansl'oeuvre de Fernand Ouellet," RHAF34
(1980): 415-36; Phillipe Reid, "L'emergence du nationalisme canadien-
francais: I'ideologie du Canadien (1806-42)," Recherches Sociographiques
(RS) 21 (1980): II-53; and Nicole Gagnon, "Revue," RS 19 (1978); 408-1 I.
See also Pierre Savard, "Un quart de siecle d'historiographie Quebecoise,
1947-1972," RS 15 (1974): 77-96. Note, however, Ouellet's interesting new
work - for example, his "La formation d'une societe." (See n. 37 above.)
48. For a brief discussion of this see Gregory S. Kealey, "Looking Backward:
Reflections on the Study of Class in Canada," History and Social Science
Teacher 17 (May 1981).
49. Hobsbawm, "Historians Group," pp. 38-9.
50. See H.C. Pentland, Labour and Capital in Canada, 1650-1850 (Toronto,
1981). There are further plans to publish or republish the rest of his writings
as well. On Pentland, see Gregory S. Kealey "H.C. Pentland and the Writing
of Canadian Working-Class History," Canadian Journal of Political and
Social Theory, 3 (1979); and Paul Phillips, "Introduction," to Pentland,
Labour and Capital, pp. v-xliii.
51. Ryerson, "Who's Looking After Business: A Review," This Magazine 10,
nos. 5 & 6 (1976): 41-6.
52. On attempts to place the settler colonies in a "world historical" setting, see:
Philip McMichael, "Settlers and Primitive Accumulation: Foundations of
Capitalism in Australia," Review 4 (1980): 307-34; and Glenn Williams,
"Canadian Industrialization: We Ain't Growin' Nowhere," This Magazine
9, no. I (1975). 7-9; and idem, "Canada: The Case of the Wealthiest
Colony," This Magazine 10, no. I (1976): 28-32.
53. Ratz, "United Front" (See n. 4 above); H.C. Pentland, "Labour and the
Development of Industrial Capitalism," Canadian Historical Review 29
(1949), and idem, "The Lachine Strike of 1843," ibid, pp. 255-77; Istvan
Szoke, We are Canadians (Toronto, 1954); Catherine Vance, "1837: Labour
and the Democratic Tradition," Marxist Quarterly 12 (1964): 29-42 and her
Studies in Political Economy
"Early Trade Unionism in Quebec," Marxist Quarterly 3 (1962); Charles
Lipton, The Trade Union Movement of Canada, 1827-1959, 3rd ed.
(Toronto, 1973).
54. I will not include all such work. The list would be too long. "Classics"
include Oscar Ryan, Tim Buck: A Conscience for Canada (Toronto, 1975);
and Louise Watson, She Fought for Us (Toronto, 1976). On the party itself,
see Tim Buck, Lenin and Canada, (Toronto, 1970), and his Thirty Years
(Toronto, 1952). For a searing critique of Buck as historian, see Ian Angus,
Canadian Bolsheviks: The Early Years of the Communist Party of Canada
(Montreal, 1981) , esp. pp. 80-6, 217-24.
55. Ryerson, Unequal Union, pp. 420-3. See, for contrast: Gregory S. Kealey,
Toronto Workers Respond to Industrial Capitalism (Toronto, 1980); Bryan
Palmer, A Culture in Conflict (Montreal, 1979); and Gregory S. Kealey and
Bryan Palmer, Dreaming of What Might Be: The Knights of Labor in
Ontario, 1880-1902 (New York, 1982).
56. There have been many recent evaluations of this literature. For examples,
see: Bryan Palmer, "Working-Class Canada: Recent Historical Writing,"
Queen's Quarterly 86 (1979): 594-616; David Bercuson, "Through the
Looking Glass of Culture," Labour/Le Travailleur 7 (1981); and Gregory S.
Kealey, "Labour and Working-Class History in Canada: Prospects in the
1980s," Labour/Le Travailleur 7 (1981).
57.L 'Action politique des ouvriers Quebecois (Fin du xix" steele d 1919),
(Montreal, 1976) and Chronologie des mouvements politiques ouvriers au
Quebec de la fin du 19" siecle jusqu'a 1919 (Montreal, 1975).
58. Ryerson, et aJ. 150Ans de Lutte: Histoire du mouvement ouvrierau Quebec,
1825-1976 (Montreal, 1979).
59. See following bibliography for contributions to Canadian Dimension, This
Magazine, Marxist Perspectives, and Studies in Political Economy.
60. See Ryerson, "Nos debats difficiles," Socialisme Quebecois 24 (1974): 79;
idem, "Memoire a la commission parlementaire chargee d'etudier la 'Charte
de la langue francaise' au Quebec," in his Le Capitalisme et la Confederation
(Montreal, 1978), pp. 350-64; and his sharp criticisms of the Quebec "M-L"
left in Canadian Dimension, This Magazine and Marxist Perspectives.
61. Ryerson, "Comrade Beth," in Ryerson, Wendell MacLeod, and Libbie
Park, Bethune: The Montreal Years;An Informal Portrait (Toronto, 1978),
pp. 136-67.
62. Berger, Canadian History, pp. 183-217.
63. Penner, Canadian Left, p. 168.
64. Ibid., pp. 113-20; quotation at p. 120.
65. For a congruent critique of Penner, see Leo Panitch, "Canada's Socialist
Legacy," Canadian Dimension 13, no. 3 (August-September 1978): 38-44.
These comments apply with even more force to Brian McDougall, "Stanley
Ryerson and the Materialist Conception of History: A Study in the Stalinist
Distortion of Marxism (M.A.) diss., Carleton University, 1981).
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
66. Marcel Fournier, Communisme et Anticommunisme au Quebec (1920-1950)
(Laval, 1979); Robert Comeau and Bernard Dionne, Les Communistes au
Quebec, 1936-1956 (Montreal, 1980). Compared to the American
situation, work on and information about the Canadian party is not very
developed. In the United States a number of ex-communists in the 1960s and
1970s have written excellent, critical reflections on the American party
experience. Of these, see especially: Joseph R. Starobin, American
Communism in Crisis: 1943-1957 (Cambridge, Mass., 1972); George
Charney, A Long Journey (Chicago 1968); Peggy Dennis, The
Autobiography of an American Communist: A Personal View of a Political
Life 1925-1975 (Westport, Conn., 1977); Jessica Mitford, A Fine Old
Conflict (New York, 1977); Vera Buch Weisbord, A Radical Life
(Bloomington, 1977); AI Richmond, A Long Viewfrom the Left, Memoirs of
an American Revolutionary (Boston, 1973); Max Gordon, "The Communist
Party of the 1930s and the New Left," Socialist Revolution 27 (1976): 11-66;
Jon Wiener, "The Communist Party Today and Yesterday: An Interview
with Dorothy Healey," Radical America II, no. 3 (May-June 1977): 23-45;
Peggy Dennis, "On Learning from History," Socialist Revolution 29 (1976):
125-43; and Peggy Dennis, "A Response to Trimberger," Feminist Studies 5,
no. 3 (1979): 451-61. On 1956 and the American party see Maurice Isserman,
"The 1956 Generation: An Alternative Approach to the History of American
Communism," Radical America 14, no. 2 (1980): 43-51, and the excellent
novel by Clancy Sigal, Going Away, A Personal Memoir (Boston, 1962). For
approaches to the study of communism, see "Communism in Advanced
Capitalist Societies, special issue of Radical History Review 23 (1980),
especially articles by Buhle, Waltzer, and Gordon and the interview with
David Montgomery. In Canada, little activity has taken place and some of it
has been farcical. See, for example, the party's behaviour over the Tim Buck
memoirs. Compare Oscar Ryan, Tim Buck: A Conscience for Canada
(Toronto, 1975) with William Beaching and Phyllis Clarke, eds., Yours in the
Struggle: Reminiscences of Tim Buck (Toronto, 1977). Finally, a recent,
excellent study of the CPUSA is Maurice Isserman, "Peat Bog Soldiers: The
American Communist Party During World War II" (Ph.D. diss., University
of Rochester, 1979).
67. Starobin, American Communism. (See n. 66 above.) Ryerson's review is in
Canadian Forum (February 1973): 40-2.
68. Ryerson, "Comrade Beth," pp. 162-3. (See n. 61 above.) Ryerson in this
passage is drawing heavily of Jean Paul Sartre's remarkable essay, "The
Socialism That Came in from the Cold, " written by Sartre as an introduction
to the translation of Antonin J. Liehm, Generace (Vienna, 1968). The French
version, published as Trois Generations (Paris, 1970), is the one Ryerson
cites. I have used the American edition, published as The Politics of Culture
(New York, 1973). This remarkable book is a series of interviews conducted
by Liehm with leading Czech intellectuals and completed in May 1968 -
after the flowering of the Prague Spring, but before the intervention of the
Soviet and Warsaw Pact troops. Sartre's introduction (and Joseph
Skvorecky's response) are remarkable indictments of the Soviet Union and
eastern bloc "socialism." Ryerson's reflections on and use of Sartre here are
of considerable interest. It is worth noting, however, that he deletes from his
quotation Sartre's sharpest indictment. See Canadian Tribune, 10 March
1971, for the terse announcement: "the CEC now declares that Stanley
Ryerson is no longer a member of the Communist Party of Canada."
69.E.P. Thompson, The Poverty of Theory (London, 1978). See also Bryan
Palmer, The Making of E.P. Thompson: Marxism, Humanism, and History
(Toronto, 1981). For an interesting commentary on Stalinism which goes
beyond easy dismissal, see Alexandre Adler, "Stalinism and the History of
the Worker's Movement: It Was Not a Simple Deviation," International
Labor and Working-Class History 20 (Fall 1981):1-6.
70.Ryerson, "The Canada/Quebec Conundrum," Marxist Perspectives 10
(1980): 149-50.See also his earlier intervention in such debates, calling for
openness "sans ce genre d"exclusions' dont l'effet d'inhibition pourra nous
center cher." Idem, "Nos Debats Difficiles," Socialisme Quebecois
24 (1974):79.
71.Ryerson, "Property and Some Limitations on Liberty," in Papers Presented
at the Fifty-second Annual Meeting of the Canadian Political Science
Association (1980), p. 12.
72.Ryerson, "In France: 'The Week of Marxist Thought'," Marxist Quarterly
I: 93-4; and idem, "Conflicting Approaches to the Social Sciences" (See
n. 11 above.) See also idem, "Our Work with Ideas," Viewpoint 3, no. 5
(June 1966):57-62.
73.Ryerson, "Comrade Beth."


Bibliography of Stanley Brehaut Ryerson
The following bibliography should not be regarded as complete. It isbased on an
extensive,but by no means complete, reading of the Canadian communist press.
It has not attempted to trace Ryerson's foreign publications. The bibliography is
organized in four parts: books and pamphlets, editorial work, articles and
journalism, and reviewsof Ryerson's works.

Abbreviations: CT - Canadian Tribune; LV - La Victoire; MQ - Marxist
Quarterly; NAM - National Affairs Monthly.

I. Books and Pamphlets
1937 Le reveil du Canada francais. Montreal: Les
Editions du Peuple. (Under pseudoE. Roger.)
1937 1837: The Birth of Canadian Democracy.
Toronto: Francis White.
1938 The Present Situation in Quebec. Toronto:
Communist Party of Canada.
What Montreal needs - now! Montreal:
Communist Party of Canada.
1940 La Conscription, c'est l'esclavage. Montreal: Ed.
du P.C.C. (Under pseudoE. Roger).
1943; 1944; 1980
1946; 1950
1960; 1963; 1972; 1975
1968; 1973; 1975
1972; 1978
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
The Dissolution of the Communist
International. Toronto: Ontario Communist
Labor, Total War Committee.
French Canada: A Study in Canadian Democ-
racy. Toronto: Progress.
Drew, Dorion, Duplessis contre Ie Canada
francais. Montreal: PDP.
Two Peoples, One land, One future. Toronto:
Labour Progressive Party (LPP).
Le Canada francais: sa tradition, son avenir.
Montreal: Editions la Victoire.
Notes on How to Study for Students Group
Leaders, Instructors. Toronto: LPP.
A World to Win: An Introduction to the Science
of Socialism. Toronto: Progress.
The LPP and the Arts: A Discussion Bulletin by
S.B.R. Toronto: LPP.
What is Socialism? An Introductory Course.
Toronto: LPP.
Why be a Doormat? Toronto: LPP.
Which side are you on? A Question for Messrs.
Coldwell, Lewis and Millard. Toronto: LPP.
The Founding of Canada: Beginnings to 1815.
Toronto: Progress.
The Open Society: Paradox and Challenge. New
York: International.
Unequal Union: Confederation and the Roots of
Conflict in the Canadas, 1815-1873. Toronto:
Le Capitalisme et la Confederation: Aux sources
du conflit, Canada-Quebec, /760-1873. Mon-
treal: Parti Pris.
Chronologie des mouvements politiques ouvriers
au Quebec de la fin du 1fJ' steele jusqu'a 1919.
Montreal: Les presses de l'universite du Quebec.
(With others.)
L 'Action politique des ouvriers Quebecois (Fin
du xix" steele a 1919). Montreal: Les presses de
l'Universite du Quebec. (With others.)
Studies in Political Economy
1978 Bethune: The Montreal Years, An Informal
Portrait. Toronto: Lorimer. (With Wendell
MacLeod and Libbie Park.)
1979 150 Ans de Lutte: Histoire du mouvement
ouvrier au Quebec, 1825-1976. Montreal:
Confederation des syndicats nationaux-
Corporation des enseignants du Quebec. (With
Celine Saint-Pierre, Helene David, and Louis
II. Editorial Work
1932-33 Young Worker (Toronto).
1935-39 La Clarte (Montreal).
1941-44 L V (Montreal).
1944-47 NAM (Toronto).
1962-66 MQ (Toronto).
1966-68 Horizons (Toronto).
1972-80 Collection Histoire des Travailleurs Quebecois.
Montreal: Regroupement de chercheurs en
histoire des travailleurs Quebecois.
1979-81 Socialist Studies (Toronto).
III. Articles and Journalism
March-April "Education and the Proletarian Path, I."
Masses 1. no. 8.
17 April "The Canadian Student Movement, I." Young
13 May "The Canadian Student Movement, II." Young
30 June "What does the CCF offer us? Paradise - or a
Blind Alley?" Young Worker.
"The Canadian Student Movement, III." Young
May-June "Education and the Proletarian Path, II."
Masses 1, no. 9.
14 January
7 February
1 April
4 May
1 June
20 July
7 September
7 September
28 September
28 September-12 October
2-30 November
7 December
21 December-4 January
21 January
2 February
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley RyersonII
"Out of the Frying Pan." Masses 1, no. 12:6-7.
"War in the East." Masses 1, no. 12: 13-4.
"Ou va-t-il? La trajectoire de l'honorable R.B.
Bennett." Clarte.
"Une honte dont on est fier." Clarte. (Quebec
"Vers un theatre social." Clarte
"Marasme intellectuel. " Clarte (Review of Les
"Indignation grandit parmi les marchands
montrealaist " Clarte.
"Les Nuits de Saint-Petersburg," Clarte.
(Review of Soviet film.)
La Peinture emancipee." Clarte. (Soviet art
"Ce que M. H.H. Stevens ne dit pas." Clarte.
"Henri Barbusse, Defenseur desapprimes."
"Henri Barbusse, Comrade, Writer, Soldier of
the Revolution." Worker.
"Our Fathers Fought for Our Freedom: Louis
Joseph Papineau and 1837." Worker.
"Louis Joseph Papineau: Revolutionnaire
Canadien." Ctarte.
La Tromperie du 'Credit Social'." Clarte,
"Concentration fasciste dans l'union natio-
nale." Clarte.
"Un des Autres: Louis Riel." Clarte.
"Le Premier Habitant de la 'Laurentie' ou M.
Gouin Somnambule." Clarte.
"Le Culte de 'Duce' quebecois." Clarte.
Studies in Political Economy
22 February
"Quebec in Ferment." The Worker.
21 March "Lettre ouverte a la Nation." Clarte.
"God be Thanked for These Rebels!" New
Frontier 1, no. 2: 6-8.
11 June
"La vie d 'un des notres menacee: Response Ii une
provocation. Interview avec E. Roger," Clarte.
20 June
"Quebec a la crise des chemins." Clarte,
11 July "La vie d'un des notres menacee." Clarte.
25 July "The Choice before Quebec." Daily Clarion.
3 October
"Le Front Populaire et M. Duplessis." Clarte.
7 November "Le Fascisme tel qu'il est." Clarte.
14 November "Le Canada et la Defense Imperiale." Clarte.
21 November "Les Canadiens francais veulent-ils Ia guerre?"
28 November "Isolement-ou defense de la paix?" Clarte.
12-26 December "L'Education anti-nationale de M. Lionel
Groulx." Clarte.
20 February "La Rearrnernent au Canada." Clarte.
"La Mexique qui souffre et qui lutte." Clarte.
27 February "Le Mexique: Pays d'ombres et de lumieres"
March "Mexican Day-Break." New Frontier 1, no. 11:
13 March "Pourquoi ne met-il pas sous clefs Ies exploiteurs
du peuple?" Clarte.
20 March "La Liberte d'organisation ouvrier en danger."
April "Mexico's Age of Enlightenment." New
Frontier 1, no. 12: 12-13.
10 April "Le Debat au parlement du Quebec reflete
l'opposition populaire." Clarte.
"Nous trainera-t-on a la remorque des
irnperialistes." Clarte.
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
24 April "Le Premier Mai et la Tradition de 1837."
8-15 May "Faiblesse de la Doctrine Separatiste." Clarte,
(Review of O'Leary.)
22 May "La Rebellion de 1837 - Bataille pour la
Democratie!" Ctartei:
"Cents ans de Capitalisme dans Ie Quebec."
19 June "La Regime trustard destruit nos Foyers!"
3 July "L'Ecouerante Ironie du Congres de langue
francaise." Clarte.
to July "Mm, Hamel et Drouin, vendu deja. " Clarte.
17 July "Vers un pti des ouvriers et des cultivateurs au
Quebec." Clarte.
24 July Review of "'Le Feu de la Riviere-du-Chene' -
1837." Clarte.
31 July "Les Liberaux n'ont-ils rien appris?" Clarte.
7 August "M. Paul Gouin et Ie Corporatisme 'Liberal'."
20 November "Maurice Duplessis: Briseur de Promesses!"
27 November "Reaction can be Defeated." Daily Clarion.
4 December "M. Duplessis deshonore la memoire de 1837."
25 December "L'idee de I'unite populaire gagne du terrain en
Quebec." Clarte.
1 January "Protestation de S.B. Ryerson." Clarte. (After
home raided under Padlock Law.)
22 January "Une lecon salutaire a M. Houde." Clarte.
29 January "L'ouverture de deux parlements." Clarte.
5 February "Duplessis propose Ie corporatisme pour les
fermiers." Clarte.
12 February "La pacte confederatifet Ie peuple quebecois."
Studies in PoliticalEconomy
19 February "La fascisme s'organise." Clarte
12March "La crise du nationalisme: M. Paul Bouchard se
vend." Clarte.
19March "La lutte se poursuit toujours contre la
legislation anti-ouvriere!" Clarte.
30 April "La parti Liberal et l'Opposition populaire."
14May "La Tradition democratique au Quebec."
28 May "vers un Front democratique au Quebec."
4 June "L' Avenir du Parti Liberal en Jeu." Clarte.
"Les Liberaux honnetes peuvent encore faire
quelque chose." Clarte.
18 June "La Convention Liberale." Clarte.
16July "Une reforme s'impose dans Iesysterne des taxes
a Quebec et a Montreal." Clarte.
30 July "Les taxes provinciales du Quebec." Clarte.
20 August "Le qu'il faut, c'est l'unit." Clarte.
10 September "Vers l'unite democratique du Quebec." Ctarte.
22 October "Pour raffirmer l'unite contre Duplessis, Fred
Rose se retire." Clarte.
29 October "Discours de S.B. Ryerson a C.B.M." Clarte.
"La Nationalisme au Service du Progres."
20 November-20 May 1939 "1837-38: La Naissance de la Democratie
Canadienne." Clarte.
I May "French Canada's Place in the Fight for a true
Canadian Peace." Daily Clarion.
13May "L defense nationale du Canada." Clarte.
10June "Le jugement de Greenshields - un signal
d'Alarme!" Clarte.
15 July "II ya 150ans ... Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite."
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
4 October "Le destin Socialiste de I'homme, " Clarte.
(Review of history of the Soviet Communist
March "French Canada: Thorn in the Side of
Imperialism." The Monthly Review: 25-30.
I August "Des reves de M. Cardin aux realites de M.
Hull." LV.
8 August "Du travail pour notre deuxierne bureau." LV.
22 August "Le problerne de notre survivance." LV.
"'Le Devoir' a aussi ses troubles." LV.
29 August "LE travail anti-national du politicailleur
Duplessis." L V.
19 September "Brisons I'influence des Munichois de chez
nous." LV.
19 December "Qu'on arrete Ie 'docteur' Gabriel Lambert."
6 February "Pour renforcir la democratie canadienne a la
veille de I'action offensive." LV.
20 February "Quebec en voie de transformation." LV.
13 March "La Guerre, L'Action Catholique, et les
communistes." LV.
20 March "La securite sociale et Ie Canada francais.' LV.
"L'Hon. Valmore Bienvenue, les Liberaux et
I 'anti-comrnunisme." LV.
1 May "La reforrne scolaire et I'avenir des enfants."
5 June "La dissolution de I'LC. et la legalite du parti
communiste." LV.
16October "Canadian War Policy and Wages in Quebec."
30 October "Democracy in Quebec and National Unity."
Studies in Political Economy
6November "Vers un parti dereform et d'action nationale.'
November "Education and the Clubs." Club Life 1, no. 1.
II December "Pour I'avenir du Canada francais.' LV.
March "IOOth Anniversary ofMarxism." Club Life 1,
no. 5.
18-25 March "Le Marxism et la lutte pour I'avenir, 1 et H."
April "By Way of a Birth Certificate." NAM.
May "Days of Decision in French Canada." NAM I,
no. 1.
8 July "M. Bouchard explore I'O.J.C." LV.
22 July "Quelle changement voulous-nous?" LV.
5 August "Comment appuyer M. Godbout dans St.
Louis." LV.
26 August "Un an de lutte pour l'unite Canadienne." LV.
September "The Lesson of Quebec." NAM 1, no. 6: 163-5.
7 October "Cette question de Coalition." LV.
November "Marxism, Victory and the Post-War." NAM I,
no. 8: 228-30.
December "Crisis of Canadian Unity." NAM I, no. 9: 258.
January "Lenin on 'New Waysof Thinking'." NAM 2,
no. I: 17-21.
February "Canadian Labor and Latin American Labor."
NAM 2, no. 2: 52-6.
July-August "The United Nations." NAM 2, no. 6: 183-6.
September "Atomic Energy - and Marxism. NAM 2, no.
7: 233-5.
October "Study Outline - National Resolution." Club
Life 2, no. 8.
November "Soviet Policy vs. the Saboteurs of Peace."
NAM2, no. 9.
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
February "Canadian Imperialism andWorld Politics."
NAM 3, 2: 37-40.
March "UNO: The Real Issues." NAM 3, no. 3: 70-1.
April "The Would-be Wreckers of the Peace." NAM
3, no. 4: 102-4.
June "Break the Logjam of Reaction." NAM 3, no.
6: 163-5.
July "A Great Party for Great Tasks." NAM 3, no.
7: 200-2.
October "The National Question and Canadian
Imperialism." NAM 3, no. 10: 296-303.
December "The Electoral Victory of American Toryism."
NAM 3, no. 12: 355-6.
"Paris, New York, Ottawa." NAM3, no. 12:
February "Marxism and the Writing of Canadian
History." NAM 4, no. 2: 46-51.
February-March "The Party and the lOOth Anniversary of
Marxism." Club Life 4, no. 5: 133-9.
December "Democracy and the Arts: The Need for
Action," NAM 4, no. II: 376-80.
March "Karl Marx has only just begun to live." NAM
5, no. 3: 86-90.
June "Working-class Philosophy." NAM 5, no. 6:
"Canadian Imperialism: Satellite of Wall
Street." NAM 5, no. 6: 184-8, 207.
July "How welldo we fight for the Party?" NAM 5,
no. 7: 220-3.
January-February "Re-conquest," NAM 6, no. I; 3-5.
March "The Party in Action." NAM 6, no. 2: 75-85.
Studies in Political Economy
October "The New Task of the Party." NAM 6, 9: 307.
December "Man of the Party of Communists." NAM 6,
no. 11: 377-9.
April "Problems of Communist Leadership." NAM7,
no. 4: 13-23.
June "Making the Turn." NAM7, No.6: 47-52.
January "Some Problems of Cadre Work." NAM 8, no.
I: 34-41. (With Harry Hunter.)
March "The Party in the Fight for Peace." NAM8, no.
3: 36-51.
September "Just Beginningto Roll." NAM 8, no. 9: 25-6.
October "Initiative and Determination." NAM8, no. 10:
July "A Note about Work with People." NAM9, no.
7: 51-4.
10November "Colonel Drew's Insane Dream of Conquest."
March "The Proud Title: Member of the Party." NAM
10, no. 3: 15-23.
13April "Reach the People - Build the Movement."
May "Reach the People - Build the Movement."
NAM 10, no. 5: 35-40.
11May "The Scandal in Steel." CT.
April US Invasion Repulsed, 1812-1814." NAM II,
no. 5: 3-26.
May-June "In the Fight for Canada: Build the Party -
NFLY - Press!" NAM II, no. 6: 47-55.
October "What Kind of People are Fighters for our
Program?" NAM II, 10:23-30.
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
23 April "Where Working People Rule." CT.
12November "Thirty-nine Years After." CT.
February "Getting Our Bearings: And Correcting a
Dangerous 'List to Starboard'." NAM: 11-12.
I April "Letter." CT.
8 April "Letter." CT.
August-September "Our Program and our study of Marxism."
Marxist Review 15, no. 6: 39-43.
August-September "Review of Aptheker's History oj the American
People." Marxist Review 17, no. 6: 40-1.
"Interaction de la conscience sociale et de la
conscience nationale." In Quel Avenir Attend
l'homme? Paris: Presses Universitaires.
January-February "Historians' Debate at Stockholm." Marxist
Review 18, no. 77: 26-31.
March "Some Trends in the Social Sciences in
Canada." Marxist Study Centre Bulletin: 1-16.
"Conflicting Approaches to the Social
Sciences." MQ I: 46-64.
"In France: 'The Week of Marxist Thought'."
MQ I: 93-4.
"The Tangled Skein of 1812." MQ
2: 16-23.
"So Little for the Mind of Labor." MQ
2: 1-8.
March "The American 'Way of Life': Some Illusions
and Realities." World Marxist Review 5, no. 3:
Studies in Political Economy
"Notes on Freedom and Social Structure." MQ
6, no. 23-33.
"Our National Question." MQ 7: 2-4.
"1763-1%3: In the Beginning was the
Conquest." MQ 7: 12-20.
"Eugene Forsey, P.E. Trudeau, and the
Question: What is a Nation?" MQ 7: 21-6.
June "Communists and Democracy: Problems of
Individual Freedom in the Present Ideological
Struggle." World Marxist Review 6, no. 6:
December "The Paradox of the 'Open Society'." World
Marxist Review 6, no. 12: 39-46.
"The 'Canada Debate'." MQ 8: 2-9.
"Realism and Reality." MQ 9: 40-7.
"Problems of Man, Critique of Our Epoch:
Philosophy of Today's World." MQ 10:2-17.
"1864 Charlottetown-Quebec, Bessemer-St.
Martin's Hall." MQ 11: 1-3.
"Parliaments, Personalities, Power." MQ
"Dr. Norman Bethune." MQ 12: 59-62.
"Selma-Manquang - Ottawa." MQ 13:40-2.
"Crisis of the Canadas: The Present State." MQ
15: 1-3.
"The Obstinate Reality." MQ 15: 36-7.
"Questions in Dispute." MQ 15: 56-69.
April "La Pensee de Marx au Canada." Cite Libre
76: 17-22.
"Formation of Two National Communities,
English Canadian and French Canadian in the
XVII to XX Centuries." MQ 16: 55-9.
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
"Issues, Arguments, Understanding." MQ 17:
May "'Camelot' and 'Revolte' ." Socia/isme 8: 85-92.
"Canadians in Spain." MQ 18: 1-2.
"Social Science, the Pentagon and Quebec."
MQ 18: 77-88.
"Horizons." Horizons 19: 1-2.
June "Our Work with Ideas." Viewpoint 3, no. 5:
"Review of Dupre, The Philosophical
Foundations of Marxism." Dialogue 5. no. 4:
April "L'avenir economique et national au Quebec est
lie au socialisme." Socia/isme: 12-13, 37-43.
November "Impact of the Idea of October." World Marxist
Review 10, no. II: 42-4.
26 February "Obituary: Margaret Fairley." CT.
16 October "Marx and World Philosophy." CT.
"It's Getting Harder to Dodge the Point."
Horizons 24: 1-2.
"Economy and Class Forces in Nineteenth-
century Quebec." Horizons 25: 85-7. (Review of
Fernand Ouellet.)
"Grand Illusions." Horizons 26: 1-3.
"Marx and Modern Philosophy." World
Marxist Review II: 10-11. 103-5.
February "For Broader Approaches." Convention '69
2: 18-21.
"Seven Years and a New Start." Horizons
28: 1-3.
"National Policies and the Federal State."
Horizons 28: 58-9.
Studies in Political Economy
May Review of Cameron Nish in Revue du Centre
d'Etude du Quebec 3: 74-7.
January "Technology, Nationalism
Canada! Quebec Problematic."
Research Newsletter 4: 1-12.
and the
June-July "Riel vs. Anglo-Canadian Imperialism."
Canadian Dimension 7, nos. 1-2: M7-M8.
"Le social et Ie national dans le 'Revell
Quebecois'." In Sociologie de l'imperialisme,
ed. H.A. Malek, pp. 543-67. Paris: Anthropos.
February "1848-1867." Horizons Research Newsletter 6.
"Introduction" to Gustavus Myers, History of
Canadian Wealth. Toronto: Lorimer.
"Quebec: Concepts of Class and Nation." In
Capitalism and the National Question in
Canada, ed. Gary Teeple, pp. 211-27. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.
February "Review of American Communism in Crisis:
1943-1957 by Joseph Starobin." Canadian
Forum: 40-2.
'''Race,' 'Nationality,' and the Anglo-Canadian
Historians." Canadian Jewish Outlook 11: 3-4,
"Nos debats difficiles." Socialisme Quebecois
24: 79.
"Social Credit in Quebec." Queen's Quarterly
81: 278-83.
"Who's Looking After Business?: A Review
This Magazine 10, nos. 5-6: 41-6. (Review of
Naylor, History of Canadian Business.)
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
"Mutations potentielles des rapports de force
Canada/Quebec." La modernisation politique
du Quebec, ed. E. Orban, pp. 55-78. Quebec:
Boreal Express.
April "An Openingin Quebec." Canadian Dimension
12, no. 2: 28-9.
July "Le parti quebecois: de la nation-communaute
au pouvoir etatique?" Politique Aujourd'hui
(Paris): 7-8, 23-28.
"The Issue of Equality." In Philosophers Look
at Canadian Confederation, pp. 161-5,
Montreal: Canadian Philosophical Association.
May "Canada/Quebec: Ie savoir fragmente, la
demangeaison interdisciplinaire." Socialist
Studies I: 77-84.
"The Canada/Quebec Conundrum." Marxist
Perspectives 10: 138-51.
Spring "Scenario pour un cauchemar - a eviter." Les
Cahiers du Socialisme 5: 4-13.
May-June "Why I'll Vote Yes." This Magazine 14:4-7.
"Property and Some Limitations on Liberty."
In Papers Presented at the Fifty-second Annual
Meeting of the Canadian Political Science
Autumn "After the Quebec Referendum: A Comment."
Studies 'in Political Economy 4: 139-46.
"Class and Nation - A Variant on 'Nothing else
but' ." In Proceedings. Canadian Political
December "Apropos de Les Syndicats Nationaux ... de
Jacques Rouillard." Revue d'histoire de
l'amerique francoise 35: 397-406.
Studies in Political Economy
IV. Reviews of Ryerson's Works
1837: The Birth of Canadian Democracy
John Gregory in New Advance (December 1937).
Donald Creighton in Canadian Historical Review 19 (1938): 73-4.
W. Rigby in The Worker, 12 November 1937.
B.K. Sandwell in Saturday Night 58 (15 January 1938): 3.
Frank Underhill in Canadian Forum 17 (December 1937): 296-7.
Revue lnternationale du Livre (Paris), (1938).
French Canada: A Study in Canadian Democracy
A.R.M. Lower in Canadian Journal of Economics and Political
Science 10 (1944): 529.
Sam Carr in Canadian Tribune, 16 October 1943.
R.S. Kenny in Canadian Tribune, 4 December 1943.
L.P. (Louise Parkin?) in Canadian Forum 23 (January 1944): 236.
B.K. Sandwell in Saturday Night 59 (30 October 1943): 1.
B.K. Sandwell in Canadian Historical Review 25 (1944): 200-1.
Gonzalve Poulin in Culture 5 (1944): 93-4.
A.S.P. Woodhouse in University of Toronto Quarterly 13 (1944):
The Founding of Canada: Beginnings to 1915
Lionel Groulx in Revue d'histoire de l'amerique francaise 15
(1961-62): 297-300.
Leslie Morris in Marxist Review 18, no. 178 (March-April
1961): 25-9.
Gustave Lanctot in Canadian Historical Review 42 (1961): 147.
H.R. Percy in Canadian Author and Bookman 30, no.
(Autumn 1964): 18-9.
J.H.S. Reid in Queen's Quarterly 68 (1961-62): 513-5.
Robin W. Winks in American Historical Review 66 (1960-61):
Gregory S. Kealey/Stanley Ryerson II
The Open Society: Paradox and Challenge
Choice 2 (1965): 710.
Richard Lane in Marxist Quarterly, 16 (1966), 88-93.
Unequal Union: Confederation and the Roots of Conflictin the Canadas,
Choice 5 (1968): 1362.
Ramsay Cook in American Historical Review 74 (1968-69):
W.O. Ormsby in Histoire Sociale, 4 (November 1969): 121-8.
Fernand Ouellet in Canadian Historical Review 50 (1969): 315-20.
Frank Park in Canadian Forum 48 (June 1968): 68.
Le Capitalisme et la Confederation: Aux sources du conflit, Canada-Quebec,
] .C. Bonenfant in Revue d'histoire de l'amerique francoise 28
(1974-75): 121-2.

No comments:

Featured Story

A timely reminder:: Seymour M. Hersh on the chemical attacks trail back to the Syrian rebels, 17 April 2014

Seymour M. Hersh on Obama, Erdoğan and the Syrian rebels Vol. 36 No. 8 · 17 April 2014  London Review of Books pages 21-24 | 5870 words ...