June 29, 2020

Bill Barr and the Ghost of Fascism: Lawlessness in Trump’s Fascist State, By Henry Giroux | June 28, 2020

Bill Barr and the Ghost of Fascism

Lawlessness in Trump’s Fascist State

By Henry Giroux | June 28, 2020

Joan Walsh writing in The Nation rightly states that “Barr’s decline into blatant but ineffectual lawlessness is proof that Trumpism is a degenerative disease.” To prove her point, she writes:

…as Barr has gotten more brazen in his attempts to subvert the law, he’s gotten sloppier. His four-page memo of lies about the Mueller report last year fooled too much of the media, at least temporarily. There’s been more skepticism about his shocking interventions to reduce his department’s own sentencing request for Roger Stone, and to drop perjury charges against former national security adviser Michael Flynn (though Flynn admitted the crime). Both moves resulted in career attorneys resigning and widespread criticism from the legal establishment and the media.^[5]

Shamelessly, Barr issued a directive to National Guard soldiers and police to attack individuals peacefully protesting the police killing of George Floyd in Lafayette Square in order to clear a path for Trump’s walk to St. John’s Episcopal Church for a photo op. In the photo op, Trump stood before the church awkwardly holding a bible in his hand, echoing a history one associates with the Ku Klux Klan and iconographic images right out of D. W. Griffith’s 1915 racist film, The Birth of a Nation.
On Barr’s order “National Guard soldiers and police proceeded to club peaceful protesters with batons and fire tear gas canisters into crowds as Trump delivered a speech on the nationwide uprising sparked by the killing of George Floyd.”^[6] One pastor, Michael Wilker, one of the leaders of the Washington Interfaith Network called Trump’s actions an “abomination,” placing Trump’s actions in the context of an earlier fascist history. According to Wilker,
During Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler used the symbols of the Lutheran church—our own church—as a way to divide Christians from one another, and especially to deny the humanity of Jews in Germany. It’s the same thing Trump is doing here: he is using the symbols of the church as a way to divide the church from one another and to divert our attention from the actual suffering and killing that’s going on.[It was] a demonic act.^[7]
Wilker’s comments indict both Trump, Barr, and the other ignominious luminaries that stood with Trump in front of St. John’s church. In addition, Barr’s support for Trump’s silly Bible photo op cannot be separated from the speech Trump gave in the Rose Garden before the police and National Guard attacked the peaceful protesters. In that speech, Trump appointed himself as the “president of law and order” and came close to declaring war on the American people. As Kristen Clarke put it on Democracy Now:

Here, Trump single-handedly seeks to deploy the military to states all across our country over the objections of state officials and with the sole and singular purpose of silencing Americans. In many ways, this is the death of democracy, because people who are out right now have one singular goal: to ensure that at this moment we not turn our backs on the long-overdue work that’s necessary to rid our nation of the scourge of police violence that has resulted in innumerous deaths of unarmed African Americans.^[8]

In spite of the overwhelming evidence of a police culture in the US rooted in racism, Barr has stated publicly that “he did not believe racism was a systemic problem in policing, echoing other top administration officials’ defense of an important part of President Trump’s base as protests against police killings of unarmed black people continued across the nation.”^[9] Barr along with Trump’s acolytes are not simply the victims of bad judgment, they lack a moral compass, embrace the banner of white supremacy, willingly support what appears to be racial anxieties about the decline of “white civilization,” and have emerged as a menace to the American people and to democracy itself. A strong believer in an imperial presidency, Barr has relinquished the role of the justice department as an independent agency and has repeatedly attempted to subvert the law he should be upholding.
In light of such actions and the refusal of the Republican members of Congress to speak out against such activities, it is not surprising for conservative journalist George Will to declare that Barr and Trump’s congressional enablers “gambol around [Trump’s] ankles with a canine hunger for petting.”^[10] This criticism is not unfounded given Barr’s legal and ideological cover for Trump’s dangerous lackeys, such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senator Lindsay Graham, both of whom shamed themselves again during the impeachment hearings. For example, McConnell’s Vichyite propensity for collaboration with the White House was on full display when he publicly denounced the impeachment process and as an unabashed defender of Trump stated that he would work hand in hand with the Trump administration on the impeachment process to make sure Trump would not be removed from office.
In addition, Senator Lindsay Graham stated that he had already made up his mind about Trump committing a criminal conspiracy, which he dismissed, and that he would do everything he could to make impeachment “die quickly” in the Senate.^[11] As was well noted in the mainstream press, Republican senators decided not to hear evidence, never took seriously the charge of impeachment, and in doing so shamed themselves by refusing to “use the opportunity to rid the country of a president whose operative value system—built around corruption, nascent authoritarianism, self-regard, and his family’s business interests—runs counter to everything that most of them claim to believe in.”^[12] Such blind and dangerous support for Trump the vulgarian warrants Will’s claim that Trump is a “malignant buffoon” and that those who support him should be removed from office.^[13]
There appears to be no limits to Barr’s defense of the indefensible, particularly as a way of placating Trump’s vindictive and vengeful actions towards those he believes have wronged him or his close associates. In June of 2020, Barr convinced Trump to fire, Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States attorney in Manhattan. Berman had pursued a number of cases on members of Trump’s inner circle that irked Trump. The latter include the arrest and prosecution in 2018 of Michael D. Cohen, Trump’s longtime lawyer and fixer, an investigation into the wrongdoings of a Turkish state-owned bank (an investigation Trump had promised Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, he would end), and more recently Berman’s office had started an inquiry into Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s close supporter and personal lawyer. Speaking on CNN, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, stated that Barr “is the second most dangerous man in the country.”^[14]
Since Trump’s impeachment, he has fired 6 inspector generals, weakening the power of the federal government’s internal watch dogs to conduct oversight of their various agencies. Not by coincidence, Steve Linick, an inspector general at the State Department was investigating Mike Pompeo. Barr’s use of the Department of Justice as a tool to implement the president’s personal and political demands was on full display when a justice department official recounted to Congress that Barr had intervened in a sentencing recommendation “because of politics.” Aaron S. J. Zelinsky, a prosecutor, stated that Bar overrode the decisions of career prosecutors to “seek a more lenient prison sentence for Mr. Trump’s longtime friend Roger J. Stone Jr.”^[15] This is not merely about corruption and incompetence, but lawlessness, which is the essence of fascist politics. As Hannah Arendt noted in her work on totalitarianism: “If lawfulness is the essence of non-tyrannical government and lawlessness is the essence of tyranny, then terror is the essence of totalitarian.”^[16]
Some influential commentators such as Cass Sunstein have argued that America’s system of checks and balances protects the US against the threat of a full-blown authoritarianism. Bill Barr has made it clear that the law is just as susceptible to the reactionary forces of political power as is any other institution and can succumb to the depths of depravity and even worse. A criminal state is not contained by the law; in fact, it corrupts it as has been made clear by the rebellions taking place across the globe in the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd by police who believe they are above any just notion of the law. Trump and Barr are apostles of white supremacy, avatars of racial cleansing, and their lawlessness is a testimony to their belief in a politics of disposability. Nazi Germany proved with frightening clarity that the rule of law and its institutions can be easily transformed and implemented into agents of state violence, if not domestic terrorism. What Trump and Barr have proven with utmost audacity and little regret is that no institution is immune from the reach and power of a fascist politics. As William Robinson points out, one of the first elements of a fascist politics is the emergence of the state as a reactionary and repressive political power. In addition, the state is reconfigured to meet the needs of the financial and corporate elite, and on the cultural front the emergence and mobilization of fascist wannabe groups such as nativist movements, neo-Nazis, right-wing militia groups, and corporate controlled right-wing media apparatus.^[17] Trump and Barr support all of these elements, and wear their commitment to lawlessness and state violence like a badge. The thousands marching in the streets and the Black Lives Matter movement have forcefully maintained that lawlessness is not about the transgressions of a few bad cops, however egregious, or a few corrupt politicians such as Trump and Barr, or even a Republican Party dominated by white supremacists and Vichy apologists. They have made it clear that the struggle is about dismantling a system that has made violence its organizing principle and echoes a past in which horrors of that past must not be either normalized nor repeated.
Notes.
1 Adorno, Theodor W., “The Meaning of Working Through the Past,” Guild and Defense, trans. Henry W. Pickford, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010), p. 213. ↑
2 Tamsin Shaw, “William Barr: The Carl Schmitt of Our Time,” New York Review of Books (January 15, 2020). Online: https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2020/01/15/william-barr-the-carl-schmitt-of-our-time/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NYR%20Daily%20Tamsin%20Shaw&utm_content=NYR%20Daily%20Tamsin%20Shaw+CID_fab36e70a506d2d42e8747691ecb4ebd&utm_source=Newsletter&utm_term=William%20Barr%20The%20Carl%20Schmitt%20of%20Our%20Time ↑
3 Eric H. Holder, “William Barr is unfit to be attorney general,” Washington Post (December 11, 2019). Online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eric-holder-william-barr-is-unfit-to-be-attorney-general/2019/12/11/99882092-1c55-11ea-87f7-f2e91143c60d_story.html ↑
4 James Risen, “William Barr Has Turned the Justice Department Into a Law Firm With One Client: Donald Trump,” The Intercept (June 22, 2020). Online: https://theintercept.com/2020/06/22/william-barr-has-turned-the-justice-department-into-a-law-firm-with-one-client-donald-trump/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=The%20Intercept%20Newsletter ↑
5 Joan Walsh, “As Bill Barr Flails, Trump Is Losing His Roy Cohn,” The Nation (June 22, 2020). Online: https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/william-barr-berman-trump/ ↑
6 Jake Johnson, “’He Must Resign’: Attorney General Barr Personally Ordered Police Assault on Peaceful DC Protesters, Report Says,” Common Dreams (June 2, 2020). Online: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/06/02/he-must-resign-attorney-general-barr-personally-ordered-police-assault-peaceful-dc ↑
7 Cited in Susan B. Glasser, “#BunkerBoy’s Photo-Op War,” The New Yorker (June 3, 2020). Online: https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-trumps-washington/bunkerboys-photo-op-war ↑
8 Amy Goodman, “‘A Declaration of War Against Americans’: Trump Threatens to Deploy Military to Quell Protests,” Democracy Now (June 2, 2020). Online: https://www.democracynow.org/2020/6/2/trump_insurrection_act_military_against_protests ↑
9 Katie Benner, “Barr Says There Is No Systemic Racism in Policing,” New York Times (June 7, 2020). Online: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/us/politics/justice-department-barr-racism-police.html ↑
10 George Will, “Trump must be removed. So must his congressional enablers,” The Washington Post (June 1, 2020). Online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/no-one-should-want-four-more-years-of-this-taste-of-ashes/2020/06/01/1a80ecf4-a425-11ea-bb20-ebf0921f3bbd_story.html ↑
11 Peter Wade, “Trump Sycophant Lindsey Graham: ‘I Will Do Everything I Can to Make Impeachment Die Quickly’ in the Senate,” Rolling Stone (December 14, 2019). Online: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-sycophant-lindsey-graham-i-will-do-everything-i-can-to-make-impeachment-die-quickly-927279/ ↑
12 Anne Applebaum, “History Will Judge the Complicit: Why have Republican leaders abandoned their principles in support of an immoral and dangerous president?,” The Atlantic (July/August 2020). Online: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/07/trumps-collaborators/612250/ ↑
13 Ibid. ↑
14 Rachel Frazin, “Schiff calls Barr ‘the second-most dangerous man in the country’,” The Hill (June 25, 2020). Online: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/446895-schiff-calls-barr-is-the-the-2nd-most-dangerous-man-in-the-country ↑
15 Nicholas Fandos, “Justice Dept. Officials Outline Claims of Politicization Under Barr,” New York Times (June 24, 2020). Online: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/us/politics/justice-department-politicization.html ↑
16 Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: Harvest Book, 1973), p. 464. ↑
17 William Robinson, “How Capitalism’s Structural and Ideological Crisis Gives Rise to Neo-Fascism,” The Real News, [February 5, 2020]. Online https://therealnews.com/stories/capitalism-structural-ideological-crisis-neo-fascism ↑

June 22, 2020

America Surrendered to Coronavirus — the Result is a Tidal Wave of Death

Coronavirus in America has done something bizarre, nightmarish, and gruesome.

America’s line towers over the rest of the world. And then, unlike many other countries, rich and poor, it doesn’t decline. It doesn’t crest, like a wave. Instead, it plateaus.

The only accurate way to describe it, I think is this. America has had a tsunami of death.

Americans struggle these days, asking: is this the first wave? What about the second wave? The descriptions feel wrong because they are. America doesn’t have a wave. America has a tsunami.

There’s a very, very big difference.

Do you see how odd that chart looks? How it’s strangely, grotesquely misshapen, lopsided, humpbacked? It doesn’t look like a wave because it’s not one. No crest, no trough. It is something else entirely, that points to a very different story unfolding.

The strange, unfamiliar, weird shape of this chart — it contains multitudes. It tells the story of a catastrophic, terrible, and needless tragedy — one so surreal that I have to reach back into history to really explain it well. Let me begin here.

When we encounter a pandemic, we — modern people — expect something like a wave. We instinctively look for one. We see in our minds something like this. An exponential rise, a crest, and a rapid fall. That never happened in America, and it is not about to happen anytime soon, but we’ll get to that.

The wave is the shape we expect in this day and age when it comes to a pandemic for one of two reasons. One, some killer diseases, like Ebola, burn themselves out — let’s leave those aside for now. Two, measures are put in place to “flatten” the exponentially rising curve. Hence, the shape of a wave — a rising crest, and a falling trough — develops. A disease spreads, and we tamp it down. If we’re very good at this — preventative measures, limiting the spread of a disease, and so forth — then we get a proper wave. We have “crunched” the curve — meaning we’ve produced a recognizable trough. Or at least we’ve flattened it, meaning we’ve made the crest fall.

That’s what happened in many countries, from New Zealand to South Korea to Vietnam. They tested, traced, took swift, decisive action. The wave-shape emerged. Explosive rise — sudden, swift fall. Crunch. Others flattened the curve — Italy, France, Germany. Not quite such a symmetrical wave — but a decisive decline, nonetheless.

Here’s my point. We’re used to thinking of “waves” precisely because we ‘re lucky enough to live in an age in which we can combat and thwart disease, quickly and decisively. Waves are things we make.

But it wasn’t always like this.

If we don’t, or couldn’t, take measures, though — fast, strong, quick enough — what happens? Well, centuries ago, there would just be an exponential rise, and then a long, long decay. The rise might take a year or two — but then that disease might take a very, very long time to go away. How long? In the middle ages, for example, it took centuries for the plague to finally relent. From their perspective, “waves” would recur every five years or ten years or so — but looking at it over time, we’d see the strange, misshapen hump of a tsunami, with water bubbling on top, a disease that spread like wildfire — but plateaued, before decaying.

Think of a disease like smallpox. Sometime in the deep past, it emerged. Bang! There wasn’t a wave. There was an explosion, and then a tsunami. One that never really relented, until the 1970s, after the invention of the smallpox vaccine. Before that, smallpox just took up permanent residence in the human population, at a stable level of infection. No wave. Just a terrible plateau, that went on generation after generation. See the difference?

We expect a “wave” precisely because we live in a modern world. We have tools and mechanisms and ways to combat the spread of disease. Back then?

The world was poor, and civilization was ignorant of how disease worked. And so disease like polio and smallpox and the plague so forth spread like wildfire, in huge, terrible pulsations. People had some basic idea that disease was contagious — but nobody really knew quite how. There was no choice but to suffer this terrible hump-backed shape, which represents so much pain and terror, over and over again. Smallpox’s tsunami — not wave — lasted for much of human history.

We are not in that era of history anymore. We know how disease works. And people have enough resources to isolate themselves for a few weeks and months, for that very reason. We have modern governments and societies, too, who, putting all that together, should be able to act to protect societies decisively and swiftly.

We should never, ever see a tsunami shape like the one we do see in America. Ever again in history. That’s why this shape looks so unnatural, so weird, so eerie and strange because it is, at this juncture of human history.

It’s frightening because it’s something out of our experience. It harkens back to much, much darker times in history, times made of ignorance and poverty, which are the true handmaidens of disease and death.

This weird, misshapen tsunami-like chart feels so unnatural, so strange, because it is. It’s something we should expect to see from a plague in medieval times, or a smallpox explosion somewhere in farm country before modern theories of disease really emerged.

This eerie tsunami shape, in this day and age — it carries a deep meaning in it, therefore. It is the kind of thing we’d only really expect to see in failing societies, in failed states, in countries that can’t function as modern, civilized ones, but resemble something much more like medieval or feudal or tribal ones than 21st century democracies.

And that is exactly what we do see.

Which other countries have Coronavirus charts which resemble America’s — that misshapen hump? It’s really, really not a club you want to be a member of. Britain, Russia, Brazil. Probably places like Pakistan and India will join that list. Dirt poor countries with few resources at all, spread across Africa and Latin America. It’s only a dismal collection of the world’s failed states mirrors America’s experience. We don’t see that bent hump-shape anywhere in the world outside failed societies, and desperately poor ones, or both.

June 21, 2020

Wasp Network review: Penélope Cruz dazzles in Cuban political thriller, The Independent

She plays Olga Gonzalez, whose husband René, without warning, left behind his family and fled from Cuba to Miami in 1990, Source: The Independent

Dir: Olivier Assayas. Starring: Penélope Cruz, Édgar Ramírez, Gael García Bernal, Ana de Armas, Wagner Moura. 15 cert, 123 mins.

Wasp Network, a political thriller about Cuban espionage, ends with a masterclass in expression from Penélope Cruz. Her face, blotchy and streaked with tears, slides imperceptibly between readings of love and loss. A smile comes first, then a choked sob. She’s doing her best to be strong for her children, but we’re watching a woman faced with the depth of a sacrifice that was not her own choosing.
Cruz plays Olga Gonzalez, whose husband René (Édgar Ramírez), without warning, left behind his family and fled from Cuba to Miami in 1990. There, he declared himself a defector. What Olga doesn’t know is that he’s part of the Wasp Network, a group of state-funded spies who have infiltrated anti-Castro groups within the exile community in America. Soon they discover that Brothers to the Rescue, a humanitarian organisation that helps refugees make the dangerous crossing, has links to the drug trade and to a series of bombings of Havana hotels. The aim is to disrupt the tourist trade and tank Cuba’s economy, crippling Fidel Castro’s rule.
René is later joined in the cause by pilot Juan Pablo Roque (Wagner Moura, star of Netflix’s Narcos). In Miami, they meet fellow exile Ana Magarita Martinez (Ana de Armas), who’s recently escaped a violent relationship. She falls for Roque’s movie-star looks, but his Rolex and $2,000 suits are proof he’s hiding something from her. When she tries to question it, his subsequent threats hang over her head like a dagger. And so these two women, Ana and Olga, are forced to carry a burden whose true nature they can’t even be privy to.
Director Olivier Assayas offers a political thriller that’s rich in detail, but primarily invested in human cost. It’s exactly what should be expected of the French director, whose past work – including 2012’s Something in the Air and 2016’s Personal Shopper – has shown a deep empathy for those feel sidelined by society. Paranoia is filtered here through the film’s female characters – they may not be the central focus of the plot, but you’re always aware of their souls quietly withering away back home.
The men, meanwhile, execute their orders with dutiful solemnity. González and Roque answer to Gerardo Hernandez (Gael García Bernal), the appointed ringleader – a suitably stern, grizzled presence. Wasp Network is adapted from Fernando Morais’s The Last Soldiers of the Cold War: The Story of the Cuban Five; Assayas’s film stumbles when it comes to plotting out such a vast and complex history. His approach seems to favour treating individual events as snatches of memory. Each time the screen fades to black (as it has a tendency to do), we never know quite where and when in the narrative we’ll be dropped into next. It can be confusing at times.
Made with the full cooperation of the Cuban authorities, Assayas’s film indulges in gorgeous, kaleidoscopic visions of the heat-baked streets of Havana. Yet, though he’s always had the heart of a revolutionary, the director is careful here to keep his tone even and documentary-like. Wasp Network may carefully document what’s politically at stake, but its real concerns lie with the those ready to make impossible sacrifices – for love or country.

June 15, 2020

The Pandemic Road to Serfdom Joel Kotkin Essay 05.01.2020

The Pandemic Road to Serfdom

Joel Kotkin

Essay

05.01.2020

Our Covid-era oligarchs are fitting us for feudalism.

Even before the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, America, like most higher-income countries, was already heading toward a neo-feudal future: massive inequality, ever-greater concentrations of power, and increasingly widespread embrace of a uniform (albeit secular) religion. The pandemic, all too reminiscent of the great plagues of the Middle Ages, seems destined to accelerate this process.
This can be seen by looking at something that many Americans, particularly conservatives, often long to ignore: class. In contrast to the post-World War II order, which engendered growing opportunity for the middle and working classes, the last few decades have seen the rapid concentration of wealth in virtually every major country in Europe and Asia.
The oligarchic class now owns as much as 50% of world’s assets. Just five companies—Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft—account for over 20% of the market capitalization of the entire S&P 500 index.
Today’s new oligarchs constitute a modern-day equivalent of the Medieval aristocracy. Like the barbarians who seized control of land during the demise of Rome, they seem well-positioned to benefit from the emerging social distance-driven recession. The dislocation caused by the pandemic has greatly expanded the financial assets of the country’s increasingly hegemonic giant banks. But the biggest long-term winners are the big tech firms that dominate digital pathways at a time when the analog world, already failing, now faces inexorable obliteration.
Today’s other ascendant class is what I call the clerisy, who today fulfill the role played by the clergy in the Middle Ages. Known as the First Estate in pre-revolutionary France, the clerisy today is largely secular but consists of the key influencers in the media, academia, the upper bureaucracy and the ever-expanding “non-profit” sector. This new middle class enjoys something of a symbiosis with the oligarchic elites who mainly finance non-governmental organizations and the universities, and tends to a share a similarly progressive world view.
The people losing out most in the pandemic are the remnants of what was once dubbed the Third Estate: the commoners, long the bastion of democracy and liberal ideas. Millions of owners of small businesses have been devastated by the lockdowns, their lifetime investments allowed to turn to dust because the clerisy has declared them “non-essential” and hopes to keep them in lockdown well into the summer.
Worse still, as the promise of becoming business owners and homeowners has faded—particularly for the young—many increasingly fall into the insecure “precariat” of gig and part-time workers. These modern-day serfs are suffering the most from the pandemic. Millions of low-wage workers in hospitality, retail, and restaurants have lost their jobs and possess only meager prospects of getting them back in the near- or even medium-term future. Many others, largely low-wage service workers in “essential” jobs, are still working, but at high risk to themselves, often without adequate health and other protections.

How the Pandemic Drives Oligarchic Power

The new regime of social distancing, likely to remain influential for years to come, works most directly for the interests of the technologized oligarchy. The long-term decline of travel, convention, and traditional entertainment may mean disaster for millions of workers and many businesses, but it represents an enormous opportunity for those who can deliver food, goods, diversions, and experiences over the relative safety of digital networks.
But as jobs are destroyed on Main Street, others, like those at well-positioned Amazon, are created by the hundreds of thousands. It is also a rosy new dawn for online collaboration applications like Zoom, Google Hangouts, Facebook Rooms, Microsoft Teams, and Slack, the fastest-growing business app on record. Also greatly enhanced will be those who provide the infrastructure for the conquering digital economy, including chipmakers like Intel and cloud-computing behemoths like (yet again) Amazon and Microsoft.
The pandemic seems likely to further consolidate the tech industry shift from its garage-based startup past, with firms like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon increasingly resembling Japan’s long-dominant keiretsu. The pandemic may have squashed many new companies that are now short on capital. In contrast, the oligarchic firms, which control upwards of 80% of such key markets as search, social media, cloud computing, and computer operating systems, now enjoy an even greater edge in garnering ever more of the nation’s technical talent.
Ultimately the pandemic will provide the new elite with opportunities to gain control of a whole set of coveted industries, from entertainment and media to finance and space travel. Perhaps most concerning will be their ability to control all aspects of information as the last vestiges of local and small-town journalism face Covid-driven “extinction level” events. What is now left of the “legacy” media—the Atlantic, Time, the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times—has fallen increasingly under their control. Nine of the 13 richest people under age 40 are in the tech industry: the odds are favorable that the new elite will maintain their control over information for generations.

The Secular Priesthood

The barbarians who seized Roman lands took advantage of chaos to fuel their ascendancy in what became the Middle Ages. Pestilence-driven depopulation and weakened political institutions enabled them to establish their hegemony over shrinking economies. Yet to assure their power, the Medieval aristocracies needed more than just swords and armor: they needed a belief system that would allow them to control the lower classes effectively.
Today this role is played by a far-reaching “expert class” teeming with highly-credentialed functionaries. The power of the “expert” professions—education, consulting, law, policymaking, and health and medicine, to name a few—has waxed in recent decades. To a large extent, the gradual demise of the analog economy is hastened by medical experts—at least those largely favored by the media—who call for lockdowns and restrictions that could easily extend to summer and even, according to Ezekiel Emanuel, lead medical advisor to Joe Biden, as long as eighteen months.
Like their Medieval counterparts in the old First Estate, members of today’s clerisy see their intrusions motivated not by self-interest but rather the good of society. They constitute “the privileged stratum,” as the French leftist Christophe Guilluy argues in his recent book Twilight of the Elites, operating from an assumption of “moral superiority” that justifies their right to instruct others.
From the pandemic to the climate, many of the expert class’s marquee predictions have been exaggerated or even plain wrong. (In the 1970s, hysteria among educated elites was mostly directed toward dire predictions that our natural resources, including energy and food, were about to run out, leading to imminent mass starvation.) Like the Medieval clergy, the clerisy, especially in the dominant media and academia, rarely takes itself to task. Instead, it makes deference to “the science” into a form of quasi-religious zealotry. For some, the pandemic is being hailed as “test run” for the true green agenda of less material progress and, ultimately, “de-growth.”
The parallels with the Middle Ages are profound. The lockdowns and economic depression associated with the pandemic will help, as Psychology Today suggests, cure “the human beast,” a phraseology not too distinct from early Christian assessments of humanity’s capacity for sin. This “eco-medievalist” view sees the pandemic as the latest punishment meted out by an increasingly angry and wounded Mother Nature. Conservatives, some of whom predict the pandemic will undermine support for climate extremism, fail to understand the mass appeal of a media-powered movement largely couched in quasi-religious terms.

The Coming Crisis of the Third Estate

In contrast, the pandemic has proven an utter disaster for much of the Third Estate. The most evident damage can be seen at the malls, or on Main Street, where millions of small firms have been forced to close and, at least in some locations, may be forced to stay locked down for many more months—even as some states and, in some parts of Europe, whole countries, are opening up.
In the aftermath of the lockdowns, small independent firms will be harder-pressed to compete against larger competitors with better access to capital and better positioning to wait out the pandemic. In the coming months, we might see many of our favorite local gyms and bars, or taco stands and family-owned Chinese restaurants, replaced by either online options or larger chains.
Well-financed large restaurant chains moved to the front of the line to secure their place atop the food chain, but the National Restaurant Association estimates that more than 8 million restaurant employees have been laid off or furloughed since the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak in March. This represents more than two-thirds of the 12 million employees that were working at the nation’s eating and drinking establishments in February.
Sadly these workers, and local business, can’t expect much help from Washington’s current stimulus plans. Even the Wall Street Journal admits the stimulus plan is “putting Wall Street ahead” of competing Main Street businesses. Republicans may talk a good game about smaller firms, arguably Trump’s strongest base, but at the end of the day they tend to take direction from large, globalized corporations and well-connected financial interests. Democrats, for their part, have little interest in smaller business as these tend to be owned by conservatives and are not amenable to unionization.
The generation of workers clipped by the Great Recession is now suffering the largest share of the job losses. Even those still working are stuck in the precariat, with little ability to control working conditions, terms of employment, or guarantees for health coverage. Such workers may try to use their leverage as “essential” to boost wages and improve conditions. We already see labor strife at Amazon, Instacart, Perdue, and McDonald’s. If nothing else, as Michael Lind suggests, the pandemic could “alter the balance of power among workers and employers.”
With the yeomanry thundering mostly from the Right, the protests of “essential” blue-collar workers could help boost the socialist cause. Roughly half of American households have no emergency savings and face an uncertain future as jobs disappear. A new class of ex-workers now finds the dole a more amenable or viable option than hard and dangerous work for relatively low pay. Bernie Sanders may have lost the nomination, but the message he ran on is amplified at a time when soup kitchens, as during the Depression, are now serving New York artists, writers, and musicians. The pandemic will likely increase the strong socialist tendency among both millennials and the successor Z generation.
More dangerous still may be the potential return to anarchy, particularly in the barrios and ghettos of the nation. In New York, the working-class transit-dependent communities of the outer boroughs can’t flee to second homes, work at home, walk to work, or take cabs like the Manhattan rich. As occurred in the wake of the great aerospace depression in Southern California in the early ’90s, diminished prospects can help light the flames of violent anarchy from the home on up. Family violence is already increasing in many countries.
Add to this toxic stew the fact that some jurisdictions, citing infection fears, have released dangerous criminals onto the streets. Crime has predictably spiked from New York to San Francisco. Even before the pandemic set in, the big American cities—unable to curb large homeless populations spreading filth and Medieval disease—took on the hazardous cast of ancient Rome, Victorian London, New York’s Five Points, or the favelas and ghettos of Third-World cities like Sao Paulo, Mexico City, or Manila. The rising number of people unable to pay rent—now one in three—could provide fodder for a new round of urban disorder.
Ultimately such disorder threatens the power of both the oligarchs and the clerisy. Their likely response may be embracing what I call “oligarchal socialism,” where the very notion of work disappears in favor of a regime of cash allotments. This notion of providing what Marx called “proletarian alms,” widely supported in Silicon Valley, could prove a lasting legacy of the pandemic. This is how Rome, as slaves replaced the middle orders, kept its citizenry in line, and how the Medieval order in times of economic stress relied on the charitable efforts of the Church.
The virus that now dominates our daily lives may soon begin to slowly fade, but it will have a deep, protracted impact on our society and class structure. Covid-19 will likely leave us with conditions that more resemble feudalism than anyone could have imagined just a few years ago.

Joel Kotkin is the Presidential Fellow in Urban Futures at Chapman University and executive director of the Urban Reform Institute. His forthcoming book, The Coming of Neo-Feudalism, is out from Encounter later this spring.

@joelkotkin

June 12, 2020

Jacob Cohen:“The Zionists have become masters in the art of propaganda” Publié le 12 juin 2020

Jacob Cohen:“The Zionists have become masters in the art of propaganda”

Publié le 12 juin 2020

Mohsen Abdelmoumen: What is your analysis of the annexation of the West Bank this July 1?
Jacob Cohen: The Zionist regime is not crazy enough to annex the entire West Bank, because then it would have to naturalize all Palestinians. It only wants to annex the « useful » West Bank, i.e. the Jordan Valley, thus preventing a possible Palestinian State to control its own borders and the large Jewish settlement blocs. It would thus continue to have a submissive and cheap labor force at its disposal, and the cooperation of a docile Palestinian police force to maintain colonial order.
It is not sure that this annexation will take place on July 1. Zionists are pragmatic people and know how to step back to jump better.
But in any case, annexation or not, the Zionists will never give up these territories they claim. The Jordan Valley is already implicitly recognized to them by all the great powers, even Russia, to ensure « the security of Israel ». And no one can imagine that the Zionist regime would bring 700,000 settlers below the Green Line.
These are the main lines of a possible Israeli-Palestinian agreement, and the Palestinian Authority pretends to believe, madly or stupidly, that it could recover the whole of the West Bank.
How do you explain that twenty ministers of the Israeli government are of Moroccan origin? Israeli security and defense companies are based in Morocco. How do you analyze these facts? Is not Morocco a real launching pad for the normalization policy advocated by the Zionist entity of Israel?
Only ten ministers have a distant connection with Morocco, which they do not care about. It is the Judeo-Zionist lobby in Morocco, led by the « sayan » (Mossad agent) André Azoulay, advisor to the monarchy for forty years, who does everything to maintain the illusion of perfect understanding between Morocco and its former Jewish citizens. Everything is done in Morocco to rekindle an almost extinguished flame. This to allow the visit of Israelis to Morocco, tourists, artists, businessmen, to push towards an official normalization of Israeli-Moroccan relations.
It is true that Morocco, since the installation of Mossad in that country in the 1950s to send Moroccan Jews to Israel, and the agreement obtained from Hassan II in 1961 for this purpose, is Israel’s de facto ally and support for its legitimization in the Arab world. In 1986, in the middle of the Intifada, the King received with great pomp the Israeli leaders Rabin and Peres.
Furthermore Morocco, on the other hand, which needs American diplomatic support to ensure its stranglehold on Western Sahara, does everything possible to please Israel, whose influence on American institutions is known.
How do you explain the strategic redeployment of the Zionist entity of Israel throughout Africa?
This redeployment had begun in the fields of construction and agriculture as early as the 1960s, after African independences. A redeployment stopped by the June 1967 war and the military occupation of vast Arab territories. The non-aligned movement at the time was still very influential.
The Oslo Accords restored some good repute to the Zionist regime, because it was assumed that it would give a State to the Palestinians in the long run.
Africa from the 1990s was no longer this non-aligned bloc sensitive to a form of international justice. It had joined the globalist circuit and security issues had become paramount.
Israel had become an important and feared partner. Did it not contribute to the amputation of the southern part of Sudan? Its networks in East Africa are very active and their strike force is well known.
Finally, little by little, the Zionist regime has managed, something inconceivable 20 years ago, to win the diplomatic support of many African countries in crucial votes in international institutions.
Algeria is one of the few countries that does not recognize Israel. Doesn’t Algeria still remain a permanent target of the Zionist entity of Israel?
All Arab countries are a permanent target of the Zionist entity. Even countries that submit are not definitively spared. Thus, even Morocco is not immune to Mossad’s attempts to stir up separatism in the Berber areas. If for no other reason than to keep the pressure on this country and make it understand that it has an interest in keeping its nose clean.
Let us remember the fate of Iraq and Syria, which the Zionist regime contributed to destroying.
Algeria will not escape the Zionist vindictiveness, which will try to reach it in one way or another. But this country is far away, not very sensitive to foreign influence, sitting on a large income, with a long history of national resistance, and a strong sense of patriotism. This is what makes it one of the few countries to stand up to the Zionist entity. And because of its geographical position and size, it is a country that is essential to regional security and therefore preserved.
We know the weight of the Zionist lobby in the United States through AIPAC. What is the weight of the Zionist lobby in Europe?
No difference except from a formal point of view. In the United States, the Zionist lobby has a legal existence, with its recognized networks of influence, its buildings in Washington and elsewhere, its congresses, where any candidate for an important post, be it senator or president, must appear and express his support to Israel.
Whereas in Europe, the lobby is more discreet but no less effective. Practically all European countries have banned the BDS movement, and adopted the definition of anti-Semitism proposed by a Jewish organization fighting against the « Shoah ». With this in particular that any criticism of Israel is equated with anti-Semitism. European countries have not even been able to implement their resolution to label products that come from the Zionist settlements in the West Bank.
In France, at the CRIF (note: Representative Council of Jewish Institutions in France) dinner, the entire establishment of the French Republic, including the President, bowed down and received instructions from the Judeo-Zionist lobby.
The European Union has set up a body to combat anti-Semitism headed by the German Katharina Von Schnurbein. How do you explain the fact that the European Union is setting up a body to defend Israel’s interests with European taxpayers’ money and that there is no hesitation in condemning all those who are against the criminal and fascist policies of Israel by calling them anti-Semites?
« Antisemitism » has been an extraordinary discovery of the Judeo-Zionist lobby in Europe. Of course, we know the history of the Second World War. But for the past 30 years or so, this lobby has been working hard to make it the greatest scourge of the 21st century. A few arranged or staged attacks, a few so-called verbal aggressions, a few desecrations that come in at the right time, a swastika lost here or there, and all the media networks are being used to make it look like there’s a resurgence of anti-Semitism. European governments are under pressure. They cannot afford any weakness.
But from criticism of Israel, we move on to anti-Semitism. The argument is fallacious, but it works. When you criticize Israel, you stir up « hatred » against that country and European Jewish citizens, and thus anti-Semitic aggression. Therefore, Israel should not be criticized. Anti-Zionism becomes an offense because it is equated with anti-Semitism. Pro-Palestinian demonstrations are banned because they lead to anti-Semitism.
Anti-Semitism has become a kind of blank cheque given to the Zionists to do whatever they like in Palestine without being worried, condemned or criticized.
You are a great anti-Zionist activist and a defender of the just cause of the Palestinian people. In your book « Le printemps des Sayanim » (The Spring of the Sayanim), you talk about the role of the sayanim in the world. Can you explain to our readership what sayanim are and what exactly is their role?
The « sayanim », in Hebrew « those who help », are Jews who live outside Israel and who, by Zionist patriotism, collaborate with the Mossad in their fields of activity.
They were created as early as 1959 by the Mossad chief at the time, Méir Amit. They’re probably between 40,000 and 50,000. Victor Ostrovsky, a former Mossad agent and refugee in Canada, talks about it for certain cases. He estimated that in the 1980s, in London alone, there were 3,000 sayanim.
What is their utility? Mossad recruits sayanim who work voluntarily in all major areas. For example, the media: these Jewish journalists or press bosses around the world will orient information in such a way as to favor Israel at the expense of Arabs.
In the United States, the Jewish power in the film industry is well known. Just an example. In 1961, Hollywood produced the film « Exodus » with Paul Newman, which tells the story of the birth of Israel in 1948 from a Zionist point of view. This film has shaped Western consciousness for at least a generation.
The same could be said for the financial institutions based in New York and dominated by Judeo-Zionists.
In France, advertising, publishing, the press, television, university, etc. are more or less controlled by « sayanim ».
It is therefore easy to understand the Zionist lobby’s strike force, a strike force that remains moreover invisible.
Isn’t Zionism, which is the direct product of the Talmud and the Jewish Kabbalah, an ideology that is both racist and fascist?
If we take Zionism in its political sense, that is, in the nationalist vision of the political movements of the 19th century, it was a secular and progressive ideology. It had seduced tens of thousands of activists, particularly in Russia and Poland, who sought to realize their revolutionary ideal outside the progressive movements of the time. They wanted to transform the Jewish people, to make it « normal ».
Despite these characteristics, these activists, upon arriving in Palestine, had excluded the Arabs from their national project from the outset. The seeds of racism were already planted. The Arabs had to be expelled or got rid of somehow. Even the kibbutzim, the flagships of « Zionist socialism », did not admit Arabs within them.
Wars and conquests, especially of the « biblical » cities in the West Bank, have plunged Israeli society into a messianic fascism and racism that no longer even hide. The latest « Law on the Nation of the Jewish People » clearly establishes racist elements, such as the possibility for a Jewish municipality to refuse Arab inhabitants, even though they have Israeli nationality.
Doesn’t the just cause of the Palestinian people need a more intense mobilization in the face of the criminal offensives of the fascist Israeli colonial army? Don’t you think that the role of BDS is very important to counter Israeli fascism?
For the reasons I mentioned earlier, the Zionist regime has managed to stifle, at least in part, the legitimate demands of the Palestinian people. As far as the media and relations with the governments of the major powers are concerned, the balance is tipped in favor of Zionism. That’s a fact. Even the majority of Arab countries, for reasons that cannot be confessed, are turning away from it.
BDS is an extraordinary weapon, but as I said, it is increasingly banned in the West because it is considered as an » anti-Semitic » movement. It’s absurd, sure, but it’s so. Example: Germany withdrew a European prize from a woman writer because she had tweeted pro-BDS a few months before.
How do you explain that at a time when freedom-loving Westerners support BDS, Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, Emirates, Qatar, etc. are normalizing their relations with the Zionist entity of Israel as part of the « deal of the century » spearheaded by Jared Kushner?
Historically, these monarchies have never supported the Palestinians, or at least with lip service, because they feared the revolutionary potential of the Palestinian movements in the 60s and 70s. The Arab world was then divided between « conservatives » and « progressives ». Following the example of Hassan II mentioned above, these monarchies were just waiting for the historic opportunity to normalize their relations with the Zionist regime. It is in their interest, the interest of the castes in power. We have seen what could happen to nationalist or progressive Arab regimes (Iraq, Syria, Libya). They were given a choice: fall in line and collaborate with Israel or some « Daesh » or separatist movements will drop on them. These monarchs do not have the suicidal instinct for a Palestine that has become an increasingly evanescent myth.
What is your opinion about the infamous blockade that the Palestinian people are suffering in Gaza while the world is in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic?
The Zionist regime is submitting the people of Gaza to a concentration camp quasi-regime. Why quasi? Because the Zionist conqueror remains just below, cynically and intelligently, the level that could no longer leave the world indifferent. The blockade is not hermetic, allowing to pass through it in dribs and drabs at the occupant’s discretion, just enough to not sink. The fishing area is reduced or increased so as to keep this sword of Damocles on any fisherman who dares to go out. Electricity is limited to a few hours a day. Information from the inside is reduced, travels are limited. Israel even took the liberty about two years ago of banning European parliamentarians from entering the Gaza Strip. All the more so as Egypt’s complicity makes it possible to maintain this situation, and the Palestinian Authority withhold all payments to officials in Gaza. The world is given the impression that the Gazans are struggling, indeed, but that they had something to do with it, because they launch a few rockets from time to time and Hamas is considered a « terrorist » organization. The Zionists have become masters in the art of propaganda, with the complicity of Western governments. And Gaza is paying a terrible price.
You have been threatened and attacked on several occasions, including by the LDJ (Jewish Defense League), for supporting the cause of the Palestinian people and for being anti-Zionist. How do you explain the fact that in France, a country that prides itself on being a State governed by the rule of law and which is a champion of human rights and freedom of speech, fascist militias like Betar (note: radical Zionist Jewish youth movement), LDJ, CRIF, which defend the interests of Israel can act with impunity?
First there is the history of the Second World War and the Vichy regime, which leaves a sense of guilt, a feeling cleverly exploited by the Judeo-Zionist lobby with the multiplication of films on the Shoah which are shown over and over again on French channels.
Then there is the action of the « sayanim » very presents in the media and other institutions, and who terrorize, the word is not too strong, all those who deviate even a little. Take Dieudonné (note: French humorist, actor and political activist), he has been made the devil to such an extent that he can be assassinated with impunity. On the other hand, saying two or three wrong words to Eric Zemmour (note: French political journalist, writer, essayist and polemicist) in the street, and the President of the Republic calls him on the phone for 40 minutes.
Finally, there is great cowardice on the part of French intellectuals, journalists and politicians who do not say what they think. The fear of the CRIF is paralyzing them. Remember Etienne Chouard, a very famous intellectual who became well known during the referendum on Europe in 2005 and for his support for Yellow Vests. He was summoned to explain himself about the gas chambers on the site « Le Média« . The unfortunate man tried to clear out. He’s been bombarded with insults. He went to apologize on « Sud Radio« . He has since lost all credibility.
How do you explain the fact that all the media remain silent about the crimes of the Zionist entity of Israel and do not give voice to people like you? Where is the freedom of speech those western countries brag about? In your opinion, doesn’t the mass media serve an oligarchy?
Modern media are not supposed to track down the truth and proclaim it. See the way they treated covid19 and big-pharma. See also the coverage of Presidents Trump and Putin by these media, or the Syrian case. The major media belong either to the State (public radio and television) or to the financial oligarchies, all of which are, as I have shown, close to the interests of the Zionist lobby. So, when they boast about being free and promoting freedom of speech, they’re just self-promotion by brazenly lying. Moreover, the tendency in the name of this « freedom to inform » is to track down the so-called fake news, in fact the information that don’t fit the mould. And as long as this balance of power lasts, the crimes of the Zionist entity will be silenced or diminished, and the rights of the Palestinian people will be ignored.
In your opinion, weren’t the Oslo Accords a big scam that harmed the Palestinians by depriving them of their rights?
The Oslo Accords were one of the finest diplomatic scams of the century. With the Palestinians’ consent. In a SM (sadomasochistic) relationship, the master and the slave freely assume their role. The Zionist master found in Arafat the ideal slave to play the role.
I say this with great sadness and rage. But the reality is there. Arafat disappeared from the international scene in 1992. When Rabin beckons him, he no longer holds back. He was about to come back into the limelight.
It’s Rabbi’s stroke of genius. Israel was in a very difficult, let’s say catastrophic situation. The Intifada showed an over-armed and brutal army of occupation in the face of stone-throwing kids. The Palestinian cause was at the top. If Rabin had contacted Barghouti, the leader of the Intifada, the latter would have had strict and inflexible demands: Independence or nothing.
Arafat has given up everything. On all the sensitive issues, the refugees, Jerusalem, the settlements, the borders, the independent State, Rabin told him: « we will see later ». And Arafat agreed.
And furthermore, he delivered 60 % of the West Bank under the total sovereignty of Israel. This is the Zone C, on which the major cities of occupation are built.
Ultimately, Arafat could have realized after 2 or 3 years that he had been manipulated, that the Zionists will never give him a State, and slam the door, and put the occupier back in front of his responsibilities. But no, he continued until his death and Mahmoud Abbas is continuing along the same path, which lead to the progressive strangulation of what remained of Palestine.
But for Rabin, and the Zionist regime, the gain was fantastic. Israel was no longer the occupant. The whole world was pretending to proclaim the need for 2 States. It was just a matter of being patient and negotiating. The Zionist regime has thus restored much of its international credibility and legitimacy.
We saw the United States and the whole world shocked by the way George Floyd was murdered by a police officer. However, Palestinians suffer the same abuses on a daily basis, as this hold (a technique known as strangulation) is often used by the Israeli army, Tsahal. How do you explain the fact that nobody protests this? The world was rightly moved by the murder of George Floyd, why does it not react when Palestinians are murdered?
We keep coming back to the same problem. It is the media that make the news. And who controls the media? The Palestinians do not have a voice for the reasons mentioned above. Because when the media decides to inflate a problem, they do.
Interview realized by Mohsen Abdelmoumen
Who is Jacob Cohen?
Jacob Cohen is a writer and lecturer born in 1944. Polyglot and traveler, anti-Zionist activist, he was a translator and teacher at the Faculty of Law in Casablanca. He obtained a law degree from the Faculty of Casablanca and then joined Science-Po in Paris where he obtained his degree in Science-Po as well as a postgraduate degree (DES) in public law. He lived in Montreal and then Berlin. In 1978, he returned to Morocco where he became an assistant lecturer at the Faculty of Law in Casablanca until 1987. He then moved to Paris where he now focuses on writing. He has published several books, including « Le commando de Hébron » (2014), « Dieu ne repasse pas à Bethléem » (2013), « Le printemps des Sayanim » (2010), « L’espionne et le journaliste » (2008), « Moi, Latifa S. » (2002).
He has a blog and performs on YouTube where he discusses various topics.
Published in American Herald Tribune June 11, 2020: https://ahtribune.com/interview/4217-jacob-cohen.html

June 11, 2020

A Century of Struggle between Left-Right Camps in the Ukrainian Canadian Community, By Richard Sanders

https://bit.ly/2T6yyDQ

Canada’s WWI-era internment of about 5,000 Ukrainian immigrants is still memorialised as a defining moment in this community’s history. Because the narrative of these forced-labour camps is so key to rendering this community’s self-identity, many Ukrainian Canadians remain understandably indignant if not traumatised by this state-sponsored crime against humanity.
Canada’s first slave-labour camps (1914-1920) were also a turning point in our national tradition of using mass internment to control perceived enemies of the state. By WWI, Canadian authorities were already entrenched in the genocidal habit of holding Aboriginals captive on reserves and in church-run boarding schools. However, the War Measures Act of 1914 ushered in a new, 20th-century pattern of physical containment that targeted European and Asian civilians.
WWI was not the last time that Ukrainians were corralled into Canadian prison camps. Over the ten decades since then, the guardians of Canada’s “Peaceable Kingdom” have relied on three other major programs of mass civilian incarceration. These social-control programs to physically immobilise supposed threats to Canada’s political and economic order, were also intended to intimidate and deter other members of the public from becoming (more) politically active.
To understand why some Ukrainian Canadians have been disproportionately targeted for internment, we must recognise that for more than a century this ethnic community has been sharply divided along political lines. By putting themselves on one side or the other of a political boundary separating Left from Right, Ukrainian Canadians have segregated themselves into two distinct, rival camps.
It is also instructive to understand the political alliances that these two factions have forged with those outside their shared ethnic base. For example, those on the Ukrainian-Canadian Right have built strong ties to successive, antiCommunist government bureaucracies and national security establishments, whether led by the Liberals or Conservatives.
Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Left has always worked with radical, multiethnic unions and political parties. In struggling for peace, justice, labour rights and other causes, progressive Ukrainian Canadians have teamed up with leftists of Finnish, Jewish, Russian and Anglo heritage, as well as with radical Croats, Serbs, Hungarians, Poles, and others. For their trouble, these leftists has been targeted for surveillance, intimidation and internment by Liberal and Conservative regimes alike.
The Ukrainian Canadian Left has included a diverse range of activists from moderate reformers and social democrats, to radical socialists and Marxists. Despite this, government authorities and the Ukrainian Right have denigrated the entire spectrum of Ukrainian progressives by labelling them all Communists.
Those on the Right side of the po- litical fence have closely identified with Ukrainian nationalism and have found great unity in their fervent opposition to anything even hinting of socialism. To members of this camp, anyone entertaining Marxist ideas, or even willing to cooperate on a common cause with socialists, has been denounced as a Communist.
The Left-Right schism has also been reflected in differing attitudes to monarchism and imperialism. The nationalist camp has included those seeking a Ukrainian monarchy akin to the British system. This faction was led by veterans who came to Canada after losing the fight for independence during the civil war in Soviet Russia (1918-1921). (These nationalists, shared a keen interest in antiCommunism with the Canadian, British and other imperialist powers that intervened in this conflict to squash Russia’s 1917 revolution.)
Ukrainian monarchist émigrés are said to have been “eager to demonstrate loyalty and commitment to Canada and the [British] Empire by participating in military exercises with the Canadian militia.”1 Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Left has long distinguished itself with decidedly anti-imperialist and anti-monarchist ideologies.
Religion has also been a major factor in the Right-Left schism. The Ukrainian Left has been skeptical of religious elites, if not prone to reject the church entirely for supporting slavery, imperialism and other crimes. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian Right has largely embraced either the Catholic or Orthodox faith. Ukrainian monarchists, for example, were tied to Catholicism which has long been this ethnic community’s dominant religious force. Other Ukrainian Canadian nationalists embraced AngloProtestantism after conversion to evangelical churches. But, regardless of their religious leanings, ultranationalists have seen Leftists as reflecting the twin evils of communism and atheism.
Early Rifts and Alliances
The unscalable wall between Ukrainian leftists and their conservative brethren has been evident since the turn of the 20th century. At that time, Ukrainians in western Canada’s urban centres were organising cultural, educational and artistic activities. By 1903, Ukrainian activists in Winnipeg formed social groups sponsoring concerts and plays. Peter Krawchuk, in his book, Ukrainian Socialists in Canada, 1900-1918, noted that:
     "these reading clubs or societies met with a great deal of opposition from reactionary groups and individuals who did not wish to see the Ukrainian immigrant workers organised, especially since most of these societies were under the leadership of radicals and socialists. Particularly strong was the opposition from the clerics of the Ukrainian Catholic...and Greek Orthodox... churches.”2
This factionalism had its roots in the Ukraine. During the late 1800s, the Ukrainian Radical Party, in the Hapsburg provinces of Galicia and Bukovyna, confronted the Ukrainian Catholic Church’s control over the peasant population. Divisions in Canada, explained Ukrainian Canadian historian Orest Martynowych,
     "first appeared within the immigrant community when members of the village intelligentsia [in Canada], who had been influenced by the Radical movement [in the Ukraine], attempted to establish the life of the Ukrainian peasant immigrant masses on enlightened and rational foundations.”3
Martinowych has described several factions that “struggled to retain or to capture the allegiance of the immigrant masses” within Canada’s Ukrainian community. Each of these “mutually antagonistic camps” used a unique narrative, he says, to “capture” the imagination of their fellow Ukrainians. To build identities and institutions free of Catholic control, these camps organised around three main foci: (1) conversion to evangelical protestantism, (2) solidarity among working-class socialists, and (3) Ukrainian nationalism associated with the Orthodox church.4
After the failed Russian revolution (1905-1907), thousands of Ukrainians fled Czarist repression. In 1907, when Ukrainians in Winnipeg formed a section of the Socialist Party of Canada (SPC), they provided a meeting place for radicals of other ethnic backgrounds. Before long, many Ukrainian socialists felt they were getting second-class treatment by the SPC’s Anglo leaders. They also objected to the party’s “Impossibilist” doctrine which opposed efforts to “reform” capitalism. (The SPC’s antireformist views led it to reject international solidarity campaigns, oppose union activism and dismiss the idea of taking any steps towards women’s equality.5)
In 1909, when representatives of eleven Ukrainian socialist groups from western Canada met in Winnipeg to split themselves away from the SPC, they created the Federation of Ukrainian Social Democrats (FUSD).6 The next year, the SPC’s German and Jewish branches in Winnipeg also broke with the party and worked with the FUSD and others to build a multiethnic, social democratic party.7
Winnipeg was a centre for Ukrainian language publications including the Canadian Farmer (1903), the Presbyterian Church’s Dawn (1905), the Ukrainian Voice (1910) for nationalists who later founded Canada’s Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and the Ukrainian Catholic Church’s Canadian Ruthenian (1911).8 The first issue of FUSD’s Robochyi Narod (Working People) in 1909, described the split between socialists and nationalists in the Ukrainian community.9
By 1911, many Ukrainians, Jews, Germans, Poles and other nonAnglos left the SPC to form the Social Democratic Party of Canada (SDPC). This reformist party vowed to “support any measure that will tend to better conditions under capitalism.” It eventually elected an alderman and a Mayor in Ontario, two MLAs in BC10 and two Manitoba MLAs in Winnipeg North (1915 and 1920). By helping build the SDPC, Ukrainian social democrats strengthened working-class solidarity across a variety of ethnic divides.
Ukrainians, both Left and Right, joined cross-cultural alliances that were defined by politics, not ethnicity. Ukrainian Social Democrats, said Martynowych, “were convinced that the interests of Ukrainian labourers and those of Ukrainian businessmen and government employees were fundamentally at odds.” For this reason, he explained, they “refused to support ‘bourgeois’ Ukrainians who entered politics.” For instance, during Winnipeg’s municipal elections in 1911 and 1914, and the provincial race in 1915, they
     "opposed Ukrainian candidates like Theodore Stefanik, a Conservative agent, and Taras Ferley, an Independent Liberal, and chose...to support Anglo-Canadian and Jewish Social Democratic and Labour candidates.”11
During Manitoba’s 1914 election, the Ukrainian Right teamed up with former Premier Sir Rodmond Roblin’s Conservative Party. Notably, Bishop Budka, the Winnipeg-based leader of Canada’s Ukrainian Catholics, was credited with the Tories’ re-election.12 In fact, it “was generally conceded that the Roblin regime held on to office because of the [rightwing] Ukrainian vote.”13 However, within a year, a huge corruption scandal forced the Conservatives to resign and, in 1915, the Liberal’s took power.
Bishop Budka

World War I Conscription:
For and Against
In 1915, with the help of Ukrainian radicals in Winnipeg North, the SDPC elected its first Manitoba MLA, Richard Rigg. In 1917, he resigned to run federally. Rigg and his Ukrainian allies, opposed Borden’s WWI conscription policy and called for the nationalisation of banks and major industries. “[I]f the state had adopted the policy of the conscription of money, industry and natural resources,” said Rigg, “there would be absolutely no necessity for the passing and enforcing of any scheme to conscript men.”14
During WWI, Ukrainian social democrats spoke out against the war and conscription. “The war brings nothing good to the poor, only losses, and ever more victims,” they said in September 1914. “From a moral point of view war is a crime of present-day society. For workers the war is of no use at all.”15
In contrast, the Ukrainian Right supported WWI. To prove their loyalty to Canada, these nationalists still commemorate the Ukrainians who enlisted by anglicising their names or pretending they were Russians. One of their greatest heroes, Corporal Filip Konowal, received the Victoria Cross from King George V in 1917.16
Canadian governments have also raved about the Ukrainian Right’s aid to imperialism. In 2014, Chris Alexander, Canada’s first resident Ambassador to Afghanistan, stated that as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, he was
     "very proud that in our Discover Canada guide...we recall that the first Victoria Cross anywhere in the British Empire awarded to one who was not born in that empire went to Corporal Filip Konowal, born in Ukraine, who showed exceptional courage in the battle of Hill 70 in 1917.”17
But the Ukrainian Right was not always so sure which empire to support. On July 27, 1914, Ukrainian Catholic Bishop Nykyta Budka—who the Vatican sent to Canada in 1912—issued a pastoral letter to his flock of 80,000. In it he said that:
     "all...Austrian subjects ought to be at home...to defend our native country Whoever will get a call to join the colours ought to immediately go to defend the endangered Fatherland.”18
Embarrassingly enough, just a few days later, on August 4, Britain declared war, and Canada stepped into line. Within two days, Budka issued a second letter stating:
     "We to-day, as faithful citizens of this part of the British Empire...have before us a great and solemn duty, to flock to the flag of our new land, and under this standard to give our blood and lives to its defence.”19
Although Budka’s flip-flop was a total about-face, he had remained entirely consistent in his decree that Ukrainian Canadians should fight. The Bishop had merely reversed direction on which imperialist army they should kill and die for. Many, like socialist Peter Krawchuk, thought Budka should share blame for the fact that Ukrainians were soon forced into Canadian internment camps. By his “chameleon-like action,” Krawchuk said, the          "bishop saved his own skin, but his first pastoral letter gave the Canadian government reason to regard all Ukrainian immigrants from Austro-Hungary as ‘enemy aliens.’”20
The First Red Scare:
When Right Informed on Left
Top officials of Canada’s state security establishment used Bishop Budka as a highly-placed informant in their domestic war against Ukrainian socialists. Research by historian Donald Avery cites once-secret documents to demonstrate that
     "Dominion security officials had regarded Bishop Budka as a firm ally against the Bolshevik element in the Manitoba Ukrainian community since the fall of 1918.”21
As an informant, Bishop Budka exaggerated the threat of Ukrainian socialists. In a letter from Ernest Chambers, Canada’s Chief Press Censor (1915-1919), to Martin Burrell, Secretary of State (1917-1919), Chambers reported:
     "Bishop [Budka] states that there is a distinct and well organized revolutionary Bolshevik movement in Canada, looking to the overthrow of all established authority and to the introduction into Canada of the chaotic conditions of affairs which exist today in Russia. He mentioned the Robotchy Narod and Rabotchy Narod as being mouthpieces of those... engineering this revolutionary movement.”22
One week later, on September 27, 1918, Borden’s Cabinet bypassed Parliament to issue Order-in-Council PC 2384. This decree banned 14 leftist groups and anyone even linked to them could get five years in prison and a $5,000 fine. (Over $74,000 in 2015.) Five of the groups were either Russian or Ukrainian, including the Ukrainian Social Democratic Party (USDP). Its paper, Robotchyi Narod, had just been informed on by Bishop Budka.
In October 1918, just weeks after Budka’s denunciation reached the Secretary of State, the Jewish Ukrainian editor of Rabotchy Narod—the other socialist paper fingered by the Bishop—got a three-year sentence, and a $1,000 fine ($14,700 in 2015). A campaign in his support quickly united many radical Anglo labour activists with Ukrainian Canadian socialists.23
The Ukrainian Left was well aware that there were spies in their midst. A 1917 issue of Robotchy Narod urged its readers to tell Anglo-Canadians that “we are not ‘Austrian’ or ‘Galician,’ or a wild, uneducated people as portrayed by ‘our own native’ undercover agents, who have sold out and are traitors to our people.” On this split between the USDP and the Ukrainian Right, Avery noted that “those opposed to the Bolsheviks often appealed to Canadian security agencies, supplying information about Ukrainian socialists.”24
When the government outlawed the USDP in 1918, police raided their offices across the country. At that time, they had 1,800 paid-up members in 54 branches.25 Depending on whether they were naturalised citizens or unnaturalised “enemy aliens,” police either ordered them to stop work or interned them. Within months, the USDP renamed itself the Ukrainian Labour Temple Association.26 In 1925, they grew to become the Ukrainian Labour-Farmer Temple Association (ULFTA).
ULFTA was then, by far, the largest secular group of Ukrainian Canadians. By 1929, they had 187 branches, four publications, several schools and 63 libraries.27 Saskatchewan alone had ULFTA Labour Temples in 25 communities. Besides holding cultural events, they defended labour rights, started literacy programs and organised political campaigns.28 ULFTA’s Winnipeg temple was a key meeting place before and during the 1919 Winnipeg General Strike. Since then, Labour Temples have hosted countless events for radicals of diverse backgrounds across Canada.
The Dirty Thirties:
Rounding up the Reds
By 1930, a third of Canada’s Communists were Ukrainian. The rest were almost all Jewish or Finnish. In 1931, the RCMP raided Communist offices, took documents and arrested nine. Seven were sentenced to five years in prison. Three of the jailed leaders were Ukrainian, including Matthew Popovich, an ULFTA activist and former editor of Robotchy Narod. However, thanks to the Canadian Labour Defense League, and its petition—with 459,000 signatures—all were released from prison in 1934. (See p.33 "Cdn. Labour Defence League")
The Depression served as a convenient pretext for rounding up masses of Canadians citizens who had long been seen as a threat to the establishment. Between 1932 and 1936, more than 170,000 single, unemployed, urban men were forced into army-run “Relief Camps.” As during WWI, authorities could not contain their phobia that this particular demographic was prey to radicalisation by socialist agitators. Although the 1930s’ forced-labour program did not specifically target newcomers, many ended up in the camps.
In outlining the internment plan, General Andrew McNaughton29 was clear about its political purpose. He told Methodist Prime Minister R.B. “Iron Heel” Bennett that: “In their ragged platoons, here are the prospective members of what Marx called the ‘industrial reserve army, the storm troopers of the revolution.’”30 McNaughton also told Bennett that “[b]y taking the men out...of the cities” and forcing them into remote work camps, “we were removing the active elements on which the ‘red’ agitators could play.”31
In When Freedom was Lost, Regina-based political science professor Lorne Brown cites numerous official letters and memos revealing this prime function of Canada’s labour camps. For example, Roderick Finlayson, the PM’s executive assistant, wrote in October 1933 that it “would be a great mistake to lose sight of the main objective” of the camps, “namely to keep urban centres clear from such single men as more readily become amenable to the designs of agitators.”32
The camps themselves bred agitators who led hundreds of strikes. They also formed the Relief Camp Workers’ Union (RCWU) which held many events at ULFTA Labour Temples. As RCWU leader Ronald Liversedge recalled, in “every crisis” of “the hungry thirties,” the
     "Ukrainian Labor Temple was a refuge for labor in distress. In Vancouver, thousands of relief camp workers at different periods found at the Temple sleeping accommodation.”33
In 1938, when the RCWU’s successor group held a month-long strike in Vancouver, Mounties threw tear gas into the building and clubbed those who fled. Some 10,000 to 15,000 protested the police brutality which injured dozens. “We tore up sheets to make bandages and set up a first-aid station in the Ukrainian Labour Temple,” said Mildred Liversedge.34
Ukrainian Right Saluted Nazism
While ULTFA was central to struggles for working-class justice during Canada’s “hungry thirties,” the Ukrainian Right had a very different agenda. Martynowych has revealed what he called “disturbing” evidence that by 1931, Canada’s largest Ukrainian nationalist groups were pushing the notion that dictatorship is better than democracy. They also lavished much praise on German Nazism and Italian Fascism.
Martynowych studied the three largest Ukrainian nationalist groups in Canada: the Ukrainian Catholic Brotherhood, the Ukrainian National Federation (UNF) and the United Hetman Organization. Their newspapers, leaders’ letters, as well as RCMP and External Affairs’ documents show that from the early 1930s, Ukrainian veterans who fought the Soviets in the 1918-1921 civil war,
     "played a highly influential role in major Ukrainian-Canadian organ-isations [and] shared an affinity for Nazi Germany, sympathized with its domestic and foreign objectives, and displayed an alarming indifference to the fate of its Jewish victims.”35
By 1931, Canada’s top rightwing Ukrainian organisation, the UNF, was cheering Nazi leaders and their programs. Its official weekly, Novyi shliakh (New Pathway), said that in the Ukraine they wanted to create, Jews would be denied citizenship. By 1933, when Hitler was taking legislative powers away from Parliament, outlawing opposition parties and dissolving unions, the UNF heralded Nazi victories over democracy and hailing Germany as the model for Ukrainian nationalists. “We may welcome with joy the triumph of the new German world over the old world,” said the UNF, and “we can in large measure model our own national liberation struggle and our future nation-building efforts on it.”36
The UNF was founded and led by immigrants with close ties to the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), a European group promoting Ukrainian independence from the USSR, Poland and Czechoslovakia. In subservience to the OUN, the UNF openly supported sabotage, armed robbery and political killings. The OUN was “anti-Semitic, markedly military, authoritarian, and anti-democratic” and was “outlawed in Poland for...campaigns of murder and terrorism.”37 So said Watson Kirkconnell, an Oxford-trained Canadian poet, linguist, founder of Canada’s Baptist Federation, Fellow of Canada’s Royal Society and recipient of the Order of Canada.38 During his WWI military service he guarded two Ontario prison camps: Fort Henry in Kingston, and “the internment camp for Ukrainians in Kapuskasing.”39
Although Kirkconnell did call the UNF a “modified branch” of the OUN, he parroted their rationale for supporting Nazism. “It was not that they favoured the Nazi regime and its political ideals,” he wrote in 1940. They merely “deduced the desirability of...German intervention” as the best route to Ukrainian statehood.40
The antiCommunism of Kirkconnell—and his close friends among Canada’s Ukrainian Right—was rooted in religion. “Communism,” Kirkconnell wrote, is in “essence... a sin against the Holy Ghost, and its deepest iniquities are iniquities towards God, and man in the image of God.”41 In support of Canada’s ultranationalist Ukrainians, he said:
     "Some 99 per cent...are strongly religious and detest the Communist group [the AUUC] for its attempts to destroy Christianity among Ukrainian Canadians. They would as soon sleep with a rattlesnake as admit the atheist revolutionaries to their councils.”42
Kirkconnell saw the UNF’s antiRed gospel as an asset in battling godless socialism, at home and abroad. The Christian narratives that he shared with the UNF, helped justify their ties to Nazism and the OUN’s antiSemitic terror.
The OUN, said Per Anders Rudling, openly welcomed the Holocaust. To exemplify this, Rudling, a historian at Sweden’s Lund University, cites an official OUN publication which stated:
     "Jews will not have the right to own land. They will work as common labourers. If not—as forced labour… He who does not speak our language, who does not call himself a Ukrainian ...this person is a zaida [slur for ‘outsider’] and your enemy and must leave the land or die on it. The Muscovite, the Pole, and the Jew were, are, and will always be your enemies!”43
The OUN’s official “Decalogue of Commandments” included:
     "7. You shall not hesitate to commit the largest crime if the good of the cause requires it.
8. The enemies of your nation shall be met with hatred and deceit....
10. Aspire to expand the strength, riches, and size of the Ukrainian State even by means of enslaving foreigners.”44
UNF support for OUN terror was not mere rhetoric. Between 1928 and 1939, the UNF and Canada’s Ukrainian War Veterans Assoc. (UWVA) raised $40,000 for the “combat” and “liberation funds” of the OUN, and its precursor, the Ukrainian Military Organization.45 (This was the equivalent of $600,000 in 2015.) The UWVA was founded in Winnipeg in 1928 by veterans of the failed war for Ukrainian statehood (1918-1921). During that war, Canada and a dozen other capitalist countries invaded Soviet Russia to overthrow the revolution. Later, it was the UWVA’s “dedication and hard work,” says the UNF, that led to its formation in 1932:
     "The UNF was the child of the UWVA .... These...veterans were the true knights in shining armour who fulfilled their mission to God, their comrades-in-arms and country!”46
Another key UNF member group in the 1930s was Canada’s Ukrainian Catholic Brotherhood (UCB). Researcher Anton Shekhovtsov notes that only a small minority of Ukrainian Catholic priests during the interwar period opposed fascism. The rest were either “clerical collaborators” who “saw the OUN as an instrument for proselytising the expansion” of their church, or, outright “clerical fascists” whose “explicitly pronounced religious totalism...served to legitimate violence against the Ukrainian nation’s ‘foes.’” For example, an editorial in the Lvov Diocese’s official paper stated on April 17, 1931:
     "Ukrainian nationalism must be ready to use all means of struggle against communism, not excluding mass physical extermination, even at the cost of millions of human lives.”47
Canada’s UCB was seemingly captured by just such “clerical fascists.” Its paper, Buduchnist natsii (Future of our Nation), featured many proNazi and antiSemitic diatribes. A 1939 article is described by Martynowych as implying “that Hitler was the God-sent saviour of the German people.”48 UCB leader, Father Wasyl Kushnir, invoked that favourite Nazi bogeyman, the Jewish-Red conspiracy. “Let our culture be national rather than serve the international Jew,” preached Father Kushnir at the First Ukrainian Catholic Workers’ Congress in 1937.49
Another member organisation of the UNF was Canada’s United Hetman Organization (UHO), a Ukrainian monarchist group led by Michael Hethman. In the late 1930s, his letters, lectures and articles promoted Hitler, Mussolini, Franco and Japanese militarism. Especially important, he said, was Ukrainian cooperation with Nazism in “the great armed struggle” of “nationalism” against “Judeointernationalist” forces, because Germany “inscribed the destruction of Bolshevism on its banner.”50
In 1936-1937, when Winnipeg North elected a Communist school trustee, two Communist aldermen and a Communist MPP, the UCB teamed up with the UHO. Their campaign blamed the “unbridled greed” of “Jewish-Muscovite terrorists” and a “Bolshevik-Jewish clique” for “suck[ing] the last juices out of” Ukraine. Their phobic scaremongering went so far as to warn that godless communists were going to burn down Canadian churches and impose the death penalty on priests, nuns, the faithful, and Ukrainian nationalists.51
In the 1930s, while Canada’s Ukrainian Right was singing the praises of Hitler and fabricating phoney, incendiary threats by imaginary blood-sucking Judeo-Communists, the Ukrainian Left was arousing government concerns with its unbending support for antiFascist causes. For example, when ULFTA joined worldwide Communist efforts to unite progressives in “Popular Fronts” against fascism, RCMP spies reported that the delegates at its 1935 convention spoke at every turn about
     "Fascism, war and the defence of USSR ...also the freeing of political prisoners throughout the world, strikes, wage-cuts and working conditions and how to abolish capitalism and fight fascism.”52
During the Spanish Civil War, 1936-1939, many Ukrainian Canadian socialists volunteered to fight against Franco’s fascist regime. By 1938, at least 200 of these Ukrainian leftists had joined the International Brigade’s Mackenzie-Papineau Division. Half of them were killed in Spain.53
WWII prison camps

World War II:
Outlawing and Interning the Left
During WWII, Canada was again a virtual dictatorship. In fact, Prime Minister Mackenzie King’s Liberal government was even more repressive than Borden’s Conservatives had been during WWI. (King wrote glowingly in his diaries about the friendly meetings he had with Mussolini, Hitler, Gestapo-founder Hermann Göring, SS Gruppenführer Konstantin von Neurath and other Nazis. Besides being a hardcore antiSemite, King greatly admired Europe’s Nazi and Fascist leaders for their ardent zeal in persecuting Communists.)54
The Liberal’s most draconian excess in WWII was to intern tens of thousands of Canadians in forty, army-run facilities. Some of the forced-labour camps from WWI and the 1930s, were back in business, with a vengeance, holding supposed enemies of the state. Besides interning 22,000 Japanese Canadians, 632 Italians and 847 Germans, the government also forced about 2,300 Jewish and communist refugees, who had fled Nazi Europe, into Canadian POW camps. (See p.39.) King’s government also interned hundreds of Canadians who were deemed guilty of either pacifism or communism.
This repression began in September 1939 when Liberals dusted off the Conservative’s 1914 War Measures Act. King’s cabinet escalated its war against civil liberties by imposing the “Defence of Canada Regulations.” This law waived habeas corpus rights and allowed the internment without charge of anyone they even suspected might potentially act in a “manner prejudicial to the public safety or the safety of the state.”55 Besides interning leftists, 325 publications were banned.
In June 1940, Canada outlawed 16 groups and their publications. Eleven of these groups were antiFascist and proCommunist, including ULFTA and its affiliate, the Canadian Ukrainian Youth Federation. This draconian move was welcomed by nationalist Ukrainians. They, said political scientist Reg Whitaker, “had been calling for years for the police to smash their rivals’ organisations and deport the lot back to the Soviet Union.”56
Also banned were the Communist Party, the Young Communist League, the League for Peace and Democracy, and the Canadian Labour Defence League, which all included many Ukrainian activists. Other ethnically-based groups were also banned, including socialist associations of Finnish, Russian, Polish, Croatian and Hungarian activists.57
Meanwhile, only five fascist groups were banned, including the German Nazi Party, the National Unity Party, and the Canadian Union of Fascists.58 Even the Ukrainian groups that hailed Hitler and Nazism went untouched, and there were no known arrests of UNF or UHO members.59
In July 1940, Canada began what Peter Krawchuk called a “general arrest of the leading cadre of the Ukrainian progressive movement.”60 As editor of ULFTA’s daily paper, Narodna Hazeta (People’s Gazette), he went into hiding for two months before being arrested. The Ukrainian Right benefited from the ban. Between December 1940 and April 1941, they began published Narodnia Gazeta, “an antiSoviet weekly, sent to former subscribers” of “Narodna hazeta in a bid to win their sympathies.”61 How they got ULFTA’s mailing list is not explained. In Krawchuk’s narrative of the July 1940 arrest of 17 Ukrainian radicals, he describes going to Hazeta’s Winnipeg offices and being told: “police were just here looking for the editors and rummaging through the offices.”62
        In his book, Interned Without Cause, about antiFascists like himself who were locked up in Canada’s WWII prison camps, Krawchuk says leftwing internees included English and French Canadians, plus “Ukrainians, Jews, Hungarians, Germans, Scandinavians, a Finn and a Pole.”63 Most of antiFascists in the Kananaskis prison camp, near Banff Alberta, were Ukrainian. Another AUUC activist interned there, Myron Kostaniuk, recalled that its Commandant, Lt.-Col. Watson,
     "ordered that one communist be placed with 11 fascists in each of the huts or shanties that held 12 people, [telling] the German representatives ‘to wipe the floors with them.’”64
(This was not Kostaniuk’s first internment. In 1932, he had served “seven months hard labour” for leading 600 people in Sudbury’s May Day parade. While many of the marchers were clubbed by police and right-wing vigilantes, eighteen Finns and Ukrainians were arrested because the rally used a Red Flag instead of a Union Jack.65)
About 130 antiFascists were interned during WWII: 39 at Kananaskis, Alberta, 70 at Petawawa, Ontario, and 20 more in various prisons. About one-third of Canada’s communist internees were Ukrainian.66 Among the first antifascists arrested was Jacob Penner, a Russian-born Communist alderman who represented Winnipeg North from 1933 until 1960. J.S.Woodsworth, leader of the NDP’s predecessor, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, refused to help gain the release of Penner and other Reds from Canadian prison camps. (See p.35 "Why the Social Gospel turned a Blind Eye to Mass Internment.")
After Germany invaded the USSR in 1941, the Canadian government had “a delicate problem,” said professors Gregory Kealey and Reg Whitaker. While interned “pro-communist Ukrainians” were “vociferously supporting the war,” Canada’s “anti-Soviet nationalist Ukrainians” were not interned, although many had Nazi loyalties that “might be considered suspect.”67
Even after Canada and the Soviets were allied to fight Nazism, Canadian Communists remained locked up. This was “after most suspected German and Italian fascists had been paroled,” said historian John Thompson. Most Communists were not released for another year, and the last was interned until September 1942. The RCMP commissioner justified this, said Thompson, because Canada’s “large foreign population” was a “fertile ground for agitators.”68 In Krawchuk’s words, Communists remained interned because their “activity in the Canadian labour movement ...was hostile to the ruling class.”69
The WWII-era repression of radicals went far beyond holding them captive. Canada’s “Custodian of Enemy Property” stole from the Left to give to the Right. At least one leftwing group’s printing press was confiscated for use by an antiCommunist paper.70 Far worse however was the transfer of ULFTA buildings to the Ukrainian Right. In Krawchuk’s words, at the
     "very same time that the government was applying unjust measures against Ukrainian antifascists and had confiscated their property, it had honoured the Ukrainian friends of Hitler and Mussolini and had handed over into their disposition the Ukrainian Labour Temples in a series of localities.”71
Winnipeg Labour Temple

In 1943, the Civil Liberties Association of Toronto campaigned for the return of 108 ULFTA halls that were seized in 1940.72 However, an outspoken voice for the Ukrainian Right, Lubomyr Luciuk—a political science professor at Canada’s Royal Military College—falsely claimed that only 16 Labour Temples were seized. In reality, “[s]ixteen of the Labour Temples were sold at prices that were up to 85% less than the assessed property values,”73 said Suzanne Hunchuck. Luciuk did correctly note that some ULFTA halls were “sold to rival Ukrainian Canadian organisations, mainly local branches of the UNF or Ukrainian Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox parishes.”74 For example, ULFTA’s Winnipeg, Montreal and Edmonton Labour Temples were all “sold,” at fire-sale prices, to Canada’s proNazi UNF.
The government burned thousands of books that they took from ULFTA libraries in Calgary, Oshawa and Fort William. And, while half of ULFTA-Edmonton’s 1000 books were burned, the rest were dumped. ULFTA libraries in Winnipeg were sold for recycling as were five tons of ULFTA Toronto’s books.75
The crusade against ULFTA forced the Ukrainian Left to reorganise itself, just as they had done during the First Red Scare. In 1940, ULFTA reconstituted itself as the Association of United Ukrainian Canadians. Between 1940 and 1945, it raised $700,000 from its members for “Victory Bonds, the war effort and war orphans of Ukraine.”76 (This was the equivalent of about $10 or $11 million in 2015.)
Consolidating the Ukrainian Right
While “the Canadian government attacked left-wing Ukrainians exclusively,”77 it was simultaneously working to strengthen the Ukrainian Right. In 1940, the government unified antiCommunists into the Ukrainian Canadian Committee (UCC). As the group’s own narrative of this now states:
     "The federal government...moved to arbitrate differences within the [Ukrainian Right] community. It sponsored a meeting in Winnipeg, in November 1940, which led to the formation of the Ukrainian Canadian Committee, known as the Ukrainian Canadian Congress since 1989. This national coordinating body...spoke for all but the Communists, who rejected it and were rejected by it...”78
To Krawchuk, “fabricating the notorious UCC” in 1940 was a Canadian government ploy to “mask the pro-Hitler orientation of the leaders...of the nationalist forces” as well as to “strike a blow...at the Ukrainian progressive movement.”79
The ultraright UNF, being the strongest grouping of Ukrainian nationalists at that time, had a major role in creating, organising and leading the UCC. Another key group was Canada’s monarchist United Hetman Organization (UHO) with its “uniformed members, and strong ties to the Ukrainian Catholic hierarchy.”80 A secret 1941 RCMP report on the UHO, by Ukrainian undercover agent Michael Petrowsky, said its “evil spirit” centred around leader Michael Hethman. Although Petrowsky was an antiCommunist playwright, translator and spy, he reported that the UHO was a “potential danger”:
     "This clique has anti-democratic and pro-German tendencies.... These people secretly endorse Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union. They still hope that Hitler will create a Ukraine with [Hetman] Skoropadsky enthroned as the supreme leader....”81
Another group under the UCC banner was the Ukrainian Workers League, led by Danylo Lobay, a former ULFTA activist. In 1949, the Winnipeg Free Press reported that the League was “Out to Battle Red Influences” and that a Lobay resolution to this effect was passed by the UCC’s Winnipeg Branch. The resolution asked “all loyal Canadian citizens to be on guard against the destructive activity of Communist elements...carrying on subversive work.” It praised Canadian and US governments for their “steadfast defence of the Christian world against the inroads of the Communists in the international forum.”82
Canada’s Ukrainian Catholic and Orthodox churches have always been central to the UCC. Kushnir, who spouted anti-Semitic and proFascist beliefs for the Catholic Brotherhood in the 1930s, became the UCC’s longest-serving president, holding that position for 25 years, from the UCC’s creation in 1940 until 1953, and then again between 1959 and 1971.
The Orthodox church was represented within the UCC by the Ukrainian Self-Reliance League (USRL). After forming in 1927, it “quickly emerged as the leading rival” of ULFTA socialists. The USRL’s founding president, Wasyl Swystun, had—at age 20—been J.S.Woods-worth’s chief researcher for his government report, Ukrainian Rural Communities in 1917. As a key USRL activist within the Nazi-leaning UNF, Swystun helped create the UCC in 1940. He was the Vice President of its Presidium and the first Chairman of its coordinating body. However, in 1943, Swystun quit the UCC. By 1946, he had joined the AUUC in decrying UCC support for Ukrainian Nazis.83
The UCC was brought together by the Nationalities Branch of the Liberal government’s War Services Department. Throughout WWII, said historian Franca Iacovetta, the Branch “engaged in political surveillance” and “censorship” of the “ethnic left wing press.”84 Key to the government’s creation of the UCC were two friends of the Ukrainian Right: Tracy Philipps, an upper-crust British imperialist, soldier and spy; and Watson Kirkconnell, the WWI prison-camp guard turned poet-academic, who is called “the architect” of the Nationalities Branch.85
Another Branch bureaucrat with a major hand in creating the UCC was Vladimir Kysilewsky (anglicised, Kaye). Iacovetta calls Kaye an “active leader within the nationalist, antiCommunist Ukrainian-Canadian community.”86 With both parents from Ukrainian Catholic clerical families who were descended from nobility, he served in Austria’s WWI Army. Then, when fighting the Poles and the Soviets (1919-1920), Kaye was the liaison officer at Britain’s military mission in Odessa, Ukraine.87 In the 1930s, he worked for the Ukrainian Bureau, a nationalist centre in London England, funded by Prince Leon Mazeppa von Razumovsky, a Ukrainian-US veteran of WWI, who claimed descent from Ukraine’s last Hetman (i.e., its supreme political/military ruler).88
Martynowych described Kaye as a moderating influence on Ukrainian nationalists, saying “totalitarian organizations and ideologies that made idols out of the ‘worker’s state’ or ‘the nation’ were equally abhorrent to Kysilewsky.”89 While privately concerned about Ukrainian chauvinism, says Iacovetta, “Kaye and his ilk did not say so publicly.”90 While Kaye helped unite antiCommunists to create, organise and lead the UCC, groups like the AUUC —with their antiFascist vision of a “worker’s state”—were shunned and targeted.
The “Second Red Scare”
After WWII, Kaye’s efforts to capture the hearts and minds of newcomers came under a new bureaucratic cover, namely Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s Citizenship Branch. (See p.33 "The Next Generation: Charles Woodsworth, Our Man in Saigon") Kaye’s posting as its chief liaison officer (1945-1954) corresponded with Canada’s “Second Red Scare.” During that period, he “continued to put plenty of energy into fighting the Ukrainian-Canadian left and seeking ways of undermining it.”91
As Iocovetta has noted, Citizenship Branch worked with
     "anti-Communist groups and communities in an effort to combat communism and undermine and discredit left-wing ethnic Canadian groups and their newspapers.... [W]ith the help of journalists, [they] openly denounced the Communist press, directly encouraged the anti-Communist newcomers...to start their own newspapers and then sought to bolster their role as ‘democratic tools’ of integration.”92
Iocovetta cites a speech in which Kaye preached that Communism was “a Godless religion...with all the violent attributes of a militant” faith, using propaganda to “arouse mass psychoses.” Ironically, Kaye himself was inciting mass fears of a devilish Red Menace bent on world domination. As Iocovetta said, Kaye’s work “reflected the anxieties and hysteria of Canada’s political and social elites.”93
Gatekeepers, Spies and Terrorists
Kaye epitomised the state’s post-WWII “gatekeepers” who strived to force newcomers into the mould of antiCommunism. Iocovetta notes that while Cold-War citizenship officials pretended to be “enlightened liberal integrationists who, unlike earlier assimilationists, would guide, not dictate, newcomers’ adaptation” to Canada, gatekeepers like Kaye shared the “ideological agenda of a ruling elite that encouraged new groups to ‘flourish’ so long as they did not threaten the authority of the dominant groups.” While bragging about “Canadian democracy” and “freedoms,” officials wanted “a loyal and obedient citizenry.” To get this they urged “Canadians and newcomers...to spy on neighbours and help quash signs of dissent.”94
And “spy” they did. For example, an RCMP informant, spying on a meeting at the Toronto Labour Temple in 1949, described AUUC efforts to stem the tide of fascist Ukrainians.95 Although between 1920 and 1945, immigration officials rejected most east Europeans, in the late 1940s and early 1950s, gatekeepers allowed 30,000 to 37,500 largely ultraright, antiSoviet Ukrainians to enter Canada.96
Lobbying for this mass influx was Canada’s Ukrainian Right, which informed the Liberal government that: “These displaced persons, if assisted to settle in Canada, would spearhead the movement and combat Communism.”97 And “combat” they did. Luciuk describes their welcomed impact on Ukrainian Canadian socialists:
        "Canada’s civil servants and gatekeepers... had certain expectations about the role these militantly anticommunist and anti-Soviet political refugees would play in undermining the influence of the Ukrainian Canadian Left. Their presumption was well founded, and they were...well served, for shortly after the displaced persons began arriving..., these ‘newcomers’ actively challenged pro-Soviet groups like the Association of United Ukrainian Canadians [AUUC].”98
Fresh from the Nazi’s unfinished, antiRed war in Europe, some ultraright Ukrainian newcomers were open to using violence. On Thanksgiving Sunday 1950, the Toronto Labour Temple was bombed during a children’s concert. The attack leveled part of the hall, injured eleven, and coincided with an AUUC campaign to stop the immigration of far-right Ukrainians.99
Scared that involvement in “the Left might well endanger life and limb,” and “increasingly worried about the RCMP, which, allegedly, was collaborating with the Ukrainian nationalists, sheltering them from exposure,” many left the AUUC in “fear of falling prey to terrorism.” The government, said Luciuk, allowed “nationalists a chance to emasculate their opponents,” and “debilitate... that element within the Ukrainian Canadian society which had long represented nothing but trouble for the authorities.”100
While the post-war incursion of ultranationalists had a terrifyingly malevolent impact on Canada’s Ukrainian Left, it was a godsend for the Right. The influx swelled their antiCommunists’ ranks, breathed life into the government-created UCC, and fuelled Cold War phobias.

Nazi SS Veterans come to Canada
Canada’s postWWII newcomers included thousands of Ukrainian veterans from military formations tied to Nazism. These groups, still venerated by Canada’s Ukrainian Right, are now listed as national members of the UCC: (1) The “Society of Veterans of Ukrainian Insurgent Army–UPA [Ukrayins’ka Povstans’ka Armiya]” (see pp.44-45 "Glorifying Ukrainian-Canadian Veterans of OUN/UPA Terrorism") and, (2) The “Brotherhood of Veterans 1st Division UNA [Ukrainian National Army] National HQ.”101 (See pp.48-49 “Waffen SS Galician Division Revered by Canada’s Ukrainian Right.”)
The irreconcilable split between the Right and Left camps of Ukrainian Canadians peaked in 1950, when the UCC and AUUC fought over Canada’s admission of thousands of veterans from the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician). This Nazi SS Division is what the UCC now euphemistically calls the “1st Division UNA.” This whitewashed name was only given to the Galician SS on April 25, 1945, a mere 13 days before its surrender to the Allies.102
After WWII, while most of the 15,000 captured Galician-SS soldiers were interned by British forces at a camp in Rimini, Italy, thousands were in US camps in Germany and Austria. Although the US freed its share of these Nazi veterans in 1947, Britain moved its 8,000 Ukrainian SS veterans to the UK.103
In 1946, Canadian and British political, military and intelligence officials allowed UCC president Kushnir to visit interned Galician SS veterans in Europe. The UCC campaign to bring these veterans to Canada was opposed by the AUUC which called them “war criminals” and “former collaborators with German occupation authorities.”104 The Canadian Jewish Congress also denounced this flood of former SS soldiers.
In 1950, the Liberals opened Canada’s gates to welcome between 1,200 and 2,000 veterans of the Waffen-SS Galician Division.105 This was heralded as a humanitarian victory by Canada’s Ukrainian Right, which still continues to salute these veterans as heroes of the noble, antiCommunist crusade for Ukrainian nationhood.
The repeated mantra of Ukrainian nationalists is that the Galician SS did not aid the Nazis but merely fought Canada’s Soviet allies in order to gain Ukrainian freedom from the evils of communism. They were, as Myroslav Yurkevich put it, “anti-Soviet, not pro-Nazi.” To prove this, Yurkevich (senior editor of the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies at the University of Alberta) quoted from Galician-SS recruitment bulletins calling for the destruction of “the Bolshevik monster, which is insatiably drinking our people’s blood.” Yurkevich said this rhetoric was “inflated, but...perfectly accurate.”106
No one disputes the antiRed credentials of the Galician SS or its Ukrainian Canadian admirers. At issue are the vehement denials of those who blindly refuse to see that this Nazi SS division was “pro-Nazi.” A concerted effort is required to remain unconscious of this obvious reality. As Rudling says, Canada’s Ukrainian Right has “an ideological narrative, based upon selectivity, omission, and focusing on (and inflating) crimes committed by others against [their]... imagined community.” Such mythmaking, he says, “passes over in silence atrocities committed by the OUN, UPA, Waffen-SS Galizien, and other Ukrainian armed forces in the service of Nazi Germany.”107
Stuart T. Wood, RCMP Commissioner (1938-51)

Stuart T. Wood, RCMP Commissioner (1938-51)

The Cold War
Profunc: Internment/Surveillance
While the 1945 armistice ended WWII, it did not stop the war against communism that the Nazis had spearheaded. Although Canada’s Soviet allies suffered 30 million deaths, and the Red Army was instrumental in defeating fascism, the USSR and communism in general was soon rebranded as the West’s worst enemies.
Throughout the Cold War, the Ukrainian Canadian Left was continuously targeted for surveillance and internment. In contrast, the Ukrainian Right continued to receive the very generous support of its allies withinthe Canadian government.
In 1950, while the UCC rejoiced that Mackenzie King’s Liberal government had released thousands of Ukrainian SS veterans from UK internment camps by granting them Canadian citizenship, it began a top-secret plan to intern thousands of Canadian citizens who were active in the AUUC and other left-leaning groups.
This long-hidden, Cold-War program was in operation from 1950 until the early 1980s. Each year during those decades, successive Liberal and Conservative governments tasked the RCMP to prepare detailed lists of Canadians who were to be rounded up in case of war, insurrection, public disorder or some vague “national emergency.” Underpinning this government program of mass captivity was the notorious War Measures Act of 1914.
The program’s name was Profunc, a contraction of “prominent functionaries.” Although usually described as a plan to intern Communist Party (CP) leaders, it was much more. The government’s sights were aimed not just at top CP officials, or even key activists in what RCMP functionaries called “the Communist movement.” Profunc used the Red Scare as a pretext to monitor tens of thousands of people involved in peace, solidarity, labour and other issues. (For examples, see pp.7 and 35.) In short, Profunc was not just about interning top Communists, it was about spying on and subverting a large social movement.
In a “Top Secret” 1950 letter describing Profunc’s origins, RCMP Commissioner S.T.Wood told Liberal Justice Minister Stuart Garson that in case of war,
"the first task of this Force [i.e., the RCMP] is a colossal one in that we must detain or maintain surveillance over approximately 16,000 Communist Party members, and something over 50,000 sympathizers.”108
For decades, even before Profunc, the Mounties had been amassing thousands of files on the radical Left. “The PROFUNC program was not created out of thin air,” said the CP in 2010, “it was a more organized and sweeping version of earlier repression.” Putting Profunc into its historical context, it noted that the
"mass suppression of civil rights and democratic freedoms has been a constant political factor from the origins of this country. The military defeat of the Métis resistance struggles, the War Measures Act, the mass internments of ethnic groups during the First and Second World Wars, relentless police attacks against the labour movement.... [F]rom its very beginnings, the Canadian capitalist state has used the police, military, courts and spy agencies against its ‘enemies.’”109
To create Profunc, the RCMP used their files on those “known or suspected to be part of the Communist movement.” From these files they selected those to “be considered for internment should a national emergency demand this action.” The RCMP initially used a “card index system” that “listed and graded” activists “according to their importance in the movement.” This system for “carding” Communists, “subversives” and their “sympathesizers,” evolved into “the Profunc system.” In a “Top Secret” 1957 document about Profunc, the RCMP said “the object of the system is to eventually card every known and suspected subversive in Canada over and above these prominent functionaries.”110
Ottawa-based historian John Clearwater, who uncovered the Profunc files, said that when the plan began in 1948, the Liberal cabinet’s defence committee suggested interning 2,500.111 At its peak (1954-1962), annual lists “approved” for internment, averaged 2,700 names. The RCMP also created annual lists of activists for whom not enough evidence existed to justify their internment. For example, in 1954, the Profunc list had 6,558 names, but only 2,710 of these were to be rounded up.112
Under Profunc, the RCMP planned to strike a sudden blow against the radical Left by carrying out mass arrests across Canada. Thousands were to be taken from their homes and forcibly interned on “M-Day,” or “Mobilization Day.”113 Activists were not targeted for committing any crimes. They were to be held captive—indefinitely and without trial—for their legal political beliefs and actions. Those who resisted would face severe discipline and could be shot dead if trying to escape.
Profunc also specified which groups would be banned. First on the list was the Communist Party of Canada. Since its creation in the early 1920s, it consisted largely of Ukrainians, Finns and Jews. The Quebec party, and the Young Communist Leagues, were likewise outlawed. Profunc also targeted four so-called “Front Organizations” and seventeen “Ethnic Organizations.” All were to be outlawed during a war, or vaguely-defined emergency.
Profunc’s alphabetical listing of “Ethnic Organizations” was bookended by two leftwing Ukrainian groups. The first was the AUUC, while the last was the Workers’ Benevolent Association (WBA). Created in 1922 by the AUUC’s forerunner, the WBA provided health insurance, a retirement home and an orphanage for its members. Although “frowned on” by Canada’s Communist Party, which said “such tactics would undermine the class struggle by placating the working class,” the Ukrainian Left “continued to promote and expand”114 the WBA. The WBA grew beyond its Ukrainian roots in Manitoba to include Russians, Ruthenians and Poles in six provinces. By 1963, when the WBA was joined by the Independent Mutual Benefit Federation (IMBF), it also had Czechs, Hungarians and Slovaks.115 (The IMBF was also on Profunc’s list of “subversive” groups to be banned.)
Profunc also targeted specific “Ethnic Organizations” for Canadian leftists of Bulgarian, Finnish, German, Jewish, Lithuanian, Macedonian, Polish and Russian heritage.116 Since the early 1900s, Ukrainian socialists had worked on many progressive campaigns with these same radical groups and their forerunners.
Leftwing Ukrainians also found their way onto Profunc lists through activism in what the RCMP labelled “Front Groups.” For example, in 1950 the AUUC helped found the Canadian Peace Congress. The AUUC describes it as having emerged in the 1950s as “one the strongest and most consistent supporters of the peace movement.”117 However, because the Peace Congress included communists, many progressives were loath to support it. For example, the NDP’s predecessor, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), had—since its creation under leader J.S. Woodsworth—opposed all co-operation with any groups linked to communists. The CCF executive told its members that they could not also belong to the Peace Congress. They also threatened disciplinary action against any CCF members who signed the Helsinki Peace Appeal. This international petition circulated by the Peace Congress in 1950, demanded a worldwide ban of all nuclear weapons and said their “first use” should be treated as a war crime.118 With AUUC help, the Peace Congress gathered 300,000 Canadian signatories. (Of the 400 million who eventually signed the Appeal, most were citizens of the USSR, China and eastern Europe.)119
Other so-called “Front Groups” that were on Profunc’s radar also benefited from the Ukrainian Left’s strong support. For example, the Congress of Canadian Women (CCW), like the Peace Congress, was created in 1950, promoted anti-war initiatives and had key AUUC activists. Thanks to the CCW’s ties to the AUUC, said historian Rhonda Hinther, “a unique brand of feminism emerged influenced by Progressive Ukrainian women’s experiences with class and gender roles.”120
Among the CCW’s feminists was Mary Kardash. She was a communist and a leading voice in ULFTA and the AUUC, like her father Myron Kostaniuk. (In 1940, Mary wed Bill Kardash, a wounded Spanish Civil War vet who was Winnipeg North’s Communist Party MPP between 1941 and 1958. Mary too was elected as a Communist Party politician. She represented Winnipeg North on the Winnipeg School Board for almost all of the years between 1960 and 1986.121)
Mary Kardash

Mary Kardash was also among the progressive Ukrainians who worked with the Canada-USSR Association, another so-called “Front Group” pegged for surveillance and internment by Profunc. She was on the National Council of the Canadian Soviet Friendship Society and a key activist in its Winnipeg branch in the early 1950s. Besides including communists, it also had members from “many... ‘progressive, ethnic’ groups” such as the AUUC, the United Jewish People’s Order, the Federation of Russian Canadians and the Finnish Organization of Canada.122 All of these groups were on Profunc’s list of “Ethnic Organizations” to be watched and interned.
Throughout the Cold War, progressive Ukrainians remained in Profunc’s crosshairs. But, by the mid-1970s, the RCMP’s Security Service (SS) had a plan to replace Profunc with the “Special Identification Program” (SIP) which it said was
     "a system of identification through which...those persons and organizations that pose a threat to Canada’s internal security...can be immediately immobilized during times of national or international emergency.”
The idea was to “immobilize” (i.e., intern) dissidents during “an attack or other hostile action against Canada by a foreign power,” or “an insurrection, apprehended insurrection or widespread public disorder in Canada.”123   Dovetailing with the War Measures Act, SIP used the fear of an emergency—whether real or imagined—as a pretext for the mass roundup of progressives seen as potential enemies of the state.
Internment is Dead,
Long Live Internment
In terms of the laws and institutions used to spy on and “immobilize” Canadian activists, the 1980s was a period of great flux, at least on paper. Profunc seems to have been replaced by SIP around 1983. A year later, the RCMP’s “countersubversion” and “national security” roles were absorbed by the newly-formed Canadian Security Intelligence Service. At that time, tens of thousands of secret RCMP files were transferred to the National Archives. These files, dealing largely with surveillance of the radical Left, now occupy more than a kilometre of the Archives’ shelf space.
In 1988, Canada’s 1914 War Measures Act was finally replaced by the Emergencies Act. Despite this, Canada’s top-secret security elites did not really change their spots. Neither is it likely that Canada’s new spy agency replaced the red spots which had long occupied the centre of the RCMP’s political, target sheets.
While Canada’s Emergencies Act specifically prohibits “detention, imprisonment or internment...on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability,”124 it does not rule out “politics” as an acceptable basis for interning Canadians.
Adding to this legal framework to allow politically-based internment is Canada’s so-called “AntiTerrorism Act,” which became law in June 2015. Like the 1914 War Measures Act, Conservatives passed Bill C-51 with the overwhelming support of Liberal Party MPs. Under this new law, “terrorism” is rendered to include “interference with the...economic or financial stability of Canada.” This equates terrorism with Aboriginal, labour, peace and/or eco-activists whose efforts “interfere” with the profitability of arms bazaars, oil/gas pipelines, the Tar Sands, or any other harmful manifestation of corporate capitalism.
Canada’s new law also specifically targets anyone who is “unduly influencing a government” by “unlawful means.”125 As such, nonviolent protests in the tradition of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., as well as native blockades and “unlawful” labour actions—could put totally peaceful activists into the crosshairs for pre-emptive arrest, as if they were terrorists.
Many Ukrainian leftists opposed Bill C-51, and the AUUC opened its Labour Temples to those organising against this latest state obsession with curbing civil liberties to protect corporate power. For example, Wilfred Szczesny, a 55-year veteran of the AUUC, who is editor-in-chief of its paper and the CEO of Ontario’s Communist Party, was instrumental in planning a Toronto protest on the National Day of Action against Bill C-51 in March 2015.
Rather than opposing Bill C-51, the UCC demanded that the government use the Anti-Terrorism Act to fight Ukraine’s proRussian separatists. The UCC website’s only mention of Canada’s new law is an “Urgent Call to Action!” to “Stop Terrorism in Ukraine!” This UCC demand, made in July 2014, stated that “Canada must immediately give military equipment and training to Ukraine” and use the Act to stop “Kremlin-backed terrorist activity.”126
In April 2015, the UCC “applauded” Canada’s promise to join the US in aiding Ukraine’s far-right, coup-installed regime with military hardware, and by deploying warships for provocative NATO exercises, and sending 200 troops to train Ukraine’s Army and National Guard.127 The latter in particular contains antiSemitic, neoNazi and white-supremacist fighters tied to two of Ukraine’s extremist parties: Svoboda (formerly the “Social-National Party”) and Right Sector.
During its 2014 Independence Day Celebration in Toronto, the UCC facilitated fundraising for Ukraine’s far-right, anticommunist paramilitary forces by allowing a Right Sector booth staffed by camouflage-clad militants. Decorated with images of OUN leader Stepan Bandera, the booth’s goal included funding the purchase of weapons for their warriors.128 This UCC event, featuring speeches by Ontario’s Liberal Premier and the Tory Minister of Immigration, was attended by then-Toronto Mayor Rob Ford and NDP mayoral candidate Olivia Chow, the widow of Jack Layton. Such multiparty support for UCC events reflects the fact that mainstream Canadian political parties are courting the vote of ultraright Ukrainian nationalists.
The UCC also works closely with Army SOS, a group that has raised more than $1 million for Ukraine’s war effort. It has admitted funded aerial drones, Humvee jeeps and “parts for sniper rifles and trip-wire detonators”129 for use by Ukrainian soldiers and volunteer militias.
In contrast, the AUUC has opposed all support for the warfighting goals of Ukraine’s “far right,” which it calls “a serious threat.” Its National Executive has called on Western governments:
     "to stop encouraging, aiding and abetting the far-right groups in Ukraine. A fascist Ukraine will pose no less a danger to the world than did Nazi Germany, also encouraged by western countries for many of the same reasons, including the expectation that it would be a weapon aimed eastward.”130
UCC president Paul Grod praised “Canada’s leadership as Ukraine’s greatest supporter” and “staunchest international champion.” But this, he said, “will not be enough.”131 The UCC has repeatedly asked Canada to also provide lethal weapons to Ukraine.132 In June 2015, the Conservatives declared their interest in selling prohibited weapons to Ukraine, such as automatic assault rifles.133 Then, during the 2015 election, the government assured the UCC that if re-elected they would allow these weapons exports.134
The Liberal government has been vague about whether it will follow through on Conservative promises to allow prohibited arms sales to Ukraine. (During the election, the Liberals and NDP both agreed to honour similar contracts with Saudi Arabia.) Responses from Canada’s four main parties to UCC election-campaign questions show more similarities than differences. In fact, they answered almost identically on more than two thirds of the questions.135 All four parties share the UCC’s bellicose antiRussian narratives and its ardent anticommunism. For example, there is all-party support for having a “Victims of Communism” monument in Ottawa. Considering this political unity, Canada’s UCC-friendly foreign policies are likely to continue apace under the Liberals.

Dictating the Narrative on Ukrainian Internment
Government support for the UCC is well-illustrated by their joint effort to frame the narrative around Canada’s WWI-era internment policies. During the 2014 centenary of WWI, 100 official plaques were unveiled to remember Canada’s internment camps. This resulted from efforts that began after the “Internment of Persons of Ukrainian Origin Recognition Act” was passed in 2005. This law named the UCC, the Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Association (UCCLA) and another nationalist Ukrainian-Canadian group as co-partners in a $10-million, state-funded “public education” program.136 With unanimous support from the Liberals and the NDP, the law excluded the Ukrainian Left from the process. This belittled the AUUC’s historic importance and sidelined its input into crafting the official rendition of events.
The media gatekeeper for this project, Prof. Lubomyr Luciuk of the Royal Military College (RMC) in Kingston Ontario, is the UCCLA’s former president, chair and research director. He has engaged in “continuous championship” of the Nazi-linked OUN(B), UPA and Waffen-SS Galician Division.137 (According to Luciuk, his father was “covertly provisioning” OUN(B) units and “providing security” for their headquarters during WWII. Luciuk’s mother was “secretary and courier for the nationalist leadership” of the OUN.138)
Luciuk’s RMC credentials have long been enlisted to shepherd the official narrative on WWI-era internment. (Canada’s Parliament created the RMC in 1874 to provide training in “military tactics, fortification, [and] engineering.”139 Appropriately, the military—for whom Luciuk works—designed, fortified, engineered and staffed Canada’s prison camps with guards and commanders, not only during WWI and WWII, but during the 1930’s forced-labour, “Relief Camps” as well.)
The Ukrainian Canadian effort to secure financing from the government to redress WWI internment, began in earnest during the late 1980s after Japanese Canadians reached a settlement with the Mulroney government for their internment in WWII. In 1988, AUUC activist Wilfred Szczesny, though agreeing that the government should apologise, said that channelling compensation payments through the UCC would be a “travesty of justice”:
     "The Ukrainian Canadian Committee, apparently, is starting with an initial request for a grant exceeding half a million dollars just to research the whole question. This is the same UCC that discriminates against a significant section of the Ukrainian Canadian community, the same UCC some of whose members think that Ukrainian Canadian history starts after their arrival following World War Two, the same UCC whose constituent organizations fell under the control of the post-WWII immigrants and set about excluding (by expulsion or derision) the very part of the community (that is, the earlier immigrants) whose cause they have now supposedly begun to champion. To charge the UCC with the administration of a compensation payment to the community would indeed be a travesty of the justice.”140
The UCC, which calls itself “the voice of Canada’s Ukrainian community,” states unequivocally that it “brings together under one umbrella all the national, provincial and local Ukrainian Canadian organizations.” The UCC also claims that it “represents the Ukrainian Canadian community,” and that it “has been leading, coordinating and representing the interests of one of Canada’s largest ethnic communities (1.2 million) for 70 years.”141 Clearly however, the UCC has never represented socialist-minded Ukrainian groups like the AUUC, but has done its utmost to work with government to deride and derail them.
The government’s 2005 “Recognition” Act, while providing public recognition and support to the UCC and other nationalist Ukrainian organizations, has also served to consolidate the official narrative on WWI internment. The Act’s stated purpose is to promote “public understanding of...the consequences of ethnic, religious or racial intolerance and discrimination.”142 While this sounds progressive, it turns our gaze away from the important role of class, economics and politics in targeting Ukrainians for internment during the WWI/Red Scare era. The Act’s narrative ignores the fact that almost all internees were unemployed, working-class east European men who had been forced into Canadian cities by the economic recession of 1913-1915.
AngloProtestant elites were extremely fearful that these men, largely Ukrainians, were ripe for radicalisation by dangerous alien agitators seeking a socialist revolution. Driven by their growing phobia that anticapitalist labour organisers, antiImperialists and anti-war activists were a dire threat to the established order, Canadian authorities used WWI as a convenient pretext to round up thousands of people whom they considered potential enemies of the state. The elite’s virulent antiRed phobia—which had been cultivated even before WWI by narrative gatekeepers in the Social-Gospel tradition—grew to a feverish pitch after Russia’s 1917 Bolshevik revolution. This Canadian psychopathy was acted out in a war to physically contain radicals, not only in forced labour camps on the homefront, but overseas with the allied military invasion to contain the spread of revolution in Soviet Russia (1919-1921). By that time, the elite’s antiRed phobia had gone viral and Canada’s polite mainstream society was taken hostage by an ideological framework that has now lingered for almost a century.
Since before WWI, the Ukrainian Canadian Left has struggled not only against state-sanctioned witch hunts by xenophobic, AngloProtestant elites, but also against ultranationalist Ukrainians who share the establishment’s rabid fear of socialism, especially in its untamed atheist and anticapitalist iterations.
Ukrainian Canadian radicals have also had to contend with the ethnocentrism of leftleaning progressives. Despite its good qualities, the Social Gospel—which dominated Canada’s early mainstream progressive culture—was preoccupied by missionary ambitions such as the Canadianisation, civilisation and Christianisation of “strangers,” including First Nations. Social Gospellers helped vilify newcomers, especially Ukrainians who had escaped the repression of imperial monarchies, and were framed as godless, socialist radicals. The Social Gospel’s righteous narratives of assimilation were key to the regressive process that enabled good, well-meaning citizens to blindly accept the injustice of internment, just as they had worked so diligently to facilitate the mass captivity and cultural genocide of Aboriginal peoples who they saw as barriers to progress.
By partnering with the Ukrainian Right to memorialise WWI internment, the government has effectively whitewashed Canada’s persecution of radical socialists. Their alliance has ensured that the official story covers up embarrassing references to the political and class phobias that helped form the Canadian state’s real reasons for repeatedly interning leftwing radicals.
To render an alternative version of this history, the Canadian Society for Ukrainian Labour Research sponsored a public symposium in June 2015, on “Civilian Internment in Canada.” Held at the AUUC’s Winnipeg Labour Temple, the event linked WWI and WWII internment with the 1970 October Crisis, the War on Terror, eco-protests and the mass arrests of activists at global summits held in Canada. By bringing together these renditions of history, the Ukrainian Canadian Left has helped to build a counternarrative about the ongoing crimes of mass captivity that have long permeated our so-called “Peaceable Kingdom.”

References/Notes
1.   Orest T.Martynowych, “Sympathy for the Devil: The Attitude of Ukrainian War Veterans in Canada to Nazi Germany and the Jews, 1933-1939,” in Rhonda Hinther and Jim Mochoruk (eds.) Re-Imagining Ukrainian Canadians: History, Politics, and Identity, 2011, p.173.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=H1Rb6Owne6gC
2.   Peter Krawchuk, Our History: The Ukrainian Labour-Farmer Movement in Canada, 1907-1991, 1996.
     http://www.socialisthistory.ca
3.   Orest T.Martynowych, Village Radicals and Peasant Immigrants: The Social Roots of Factionalism among Ukrainian Immigrants in Canada, 1896-1918, 1978. (MA thesis, Univ. of Manitoba)
     http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/MQ36804.pdf
4.   Martynowych, Op. cit., 1978, passim.
5.   Krawchuk, Op. cit.
6.   Orest T.Martynowych, Ukrainian Section of the Socialist Party of Canada/Social Democratic Party of Canada, undated, p.1.
     http://umanitoba.ca
7.   Krawchuk, Op. cit.
8.   Ukrainians in Canada, Immigration and Settlement patterns, p.3.
     http://www.ucc.ca/ukrainians-in-canada/
9.   Krawchuk, Op. cit.
10.   William Walling, The Socialism of To-Day, 1916, p.238.
     http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/The _Socialism_of_To-Day_1000226794/253
11.   Martynowych, Op. cit., undated, p.2.
12.   Don Avery, “Ethnic and Class Tensions in Canada, 1918-20: Anglo-Canadians and the Alien Worker,” J.H.Thompson and F.Swyripa (eds.), Loyalties in Conflict: Ukrainians in Canada during the Great War, 1983, p.83.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=OyuRz9ov2g0C
13.   Orest T.Martynowych and Nadia Kazymyra, “Political Activity in Western Canada, 1896-1923,” in Manoly Lupul (ed.), A Heritage in Transition, 1982, p.93.
     http://umanitoba.ca
14.   Ross McCormack, Reformers, Rebels and Revolutionaries: The Western Cdn. Radical Movement, 1899-1919, 1991, p.134.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=qixxVyYBVVAC
15.   Ivan Stefanitsky, Hromadskyi holos, September 2, 1914. In Krawchuk, Op. cit.
16.   Ukrainian Heritage Day
     http://www.ucc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Ukrainian-Heritage-Day-Program.pdf
17.   Hansard, January 27, 2014.
     http://www.parl.gc.ca
18.   Pastoral Letter, Bishop N.Budka, July 27, 1914, The Times, Documentary History of the War, Overseas-Part 1, 1918, p.231.
     http://scans.library.utoronto.ca
19.   Budka’s Second Pastoral, Ibid., p.244.
20.   Krawchuk, Op. cit.
21.   Donald Avery, “The Radical Alien and the Winnipeg General Strike of 1919,” in Laurel S.MacDowell and Ian Radforth (eds.), Canadian Working-Class History: Selected Readings, 2006, p.230.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=ihgsA_3DEgYC
22.   Ernest Chambers to Martin Burrell, Sept. 20, 1918. Cited by Don Avery, “Ethnic and Class Tensions in Canada, 1918-20: Anglo-Canadians and the Alien Worker,” in Thompson and Swyripa, Op. cit., p.91.
23.   Avery 2006, pp.216-217.
24.   Avery 1983, p.91.
25.   Orest Martynowych, “Introduction,” Pro- phets and Proletarians: Documents on the History of the Rise and Decline of Ukrainian Communism in Canada, 1990, p.xvii.
26.   Martynowych, Op. cit., undated, p.5.
27.   About AUUC
     http://www.auuc.ca/about.htm
28.   Bob Ivanochko, “Ukrainian Labour Farmer Temple Association,” Encyclopedia of Saskatchewan.
     http://esask.uregina.ca
29.   Gen.Andrew McNaughton, who became Canada’s Minister of Defence (1944-1945) and Ambassador to the UN (1948-1949), was the paternal grandfather of Lt.Gen.Andrew Leslie, who became Trudeau’s military policy advisor in 2013 and is now an MP and Liberal Party whip.
30.   Canada: A People’s History, Vol.2
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=2fcXAAAAYAAJ
31.   In Jean Barman, The West Beyond the West: A History of British Columbia, 1991.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=JbYe6fCOSTAC
32.   Finlayson to A.E.Millar, Oct. 6, 1933. Bennett Papers. In Brown, When Freedom was Lost: The Unemployed, the Agitator and the State. p.49.
33.   Ronald Liversedge, Recollections of the On to Ottawa Trek, 1973, p.43.
     http://books.google.ca/books?isbn=0773583068
34.   Irene Howard, “The Mothers Council of Vancouver: Holding the Fort for the Unemployed, 1935-1938, BC Studies, Spring-Summer 1986, p.283.
     http://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.php/bcstudies/article/viewFile/1234/1278
35.   Martynowych, Op. cit., 2011, p.174.
36.   Novyi shliakh, April 25, 1933. Cited by Martynowych, Op. cit., 2011, p.181.
37.   Watson Kirkconnell, Canada, Europe and Hitler, 1939, pp.86, 142.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=meRmAAAAMAAJ
38.   Mary Cherneskey and Vera Labach, “Nation Builders,” UCC, 1998.
     http://ucc.sk.ca/oldsite/programs/nbuilders/1998/
39.   Cherneskey and Labach, Op. cit.
40.   Watson Kirkconnell, The Ukrainian Canadians and the War, 1940, p.24.
     http://diasporiana.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/books/9284/file.pdf
41.   Watson Kirkconnell, “Communism in Canada and the USA,” Cdn. Catholic Historical Assoc., Report, 1947-1948, p.41.
     http://www.cchahistory.ca/journal/CCHA1947-48/Kirkconnell.pdf
42.   Watson Kirkconnell, Our Ukrainian Loyalists: the Ukrainian Canadian Committee, 1943, p.26.
     http://multiculturalcanada.ca/node/260966
43.   Cited by Per Anders Rudling, “Theory and Practice. Historical representation of the wartime accounts of the activities of the OUN-UPA,” East European Jewish Affairs, December 2006, p.168.
     http://www.academia.edu/380654
44.   Ibid., p.167
45.   Grzegorz Rossolinski, Stepan Bandera: Life & Afterlife of a Ukrainian Nationalist: Fascism, Genocide & Cult, 2014, p.74.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=SFH_BgAAQBAJ
46.   Ukrainian War Veterans Assoc. of Canada
     http://unfcanada.ca/uwva
47.   Anton Shekhovtsov, “By Cross and Sword: ‘Clerical Fascism’ in Interwar Western Ukraine,” in M.Feldman, Marius Turda, Tudor Georgescu (eds.), Clerical Fascism in Interwar Europe, 2008, p.64.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=KcfhAQAAQBAJ
48.   Martynowych, Op. cit., 2011, p.198.
49.   Ibid., p.191.
50.   Ibid., p.182.
51.   Ibid., pp.190-191.
52.   RCMP Report, Mar. 26, 1935, “ULFTA Mass Organizations Convention Winnipeg,” in Rhonda Hinther, “Sincerest Revolutionary Greetings”: Progressive Ukrainians in Twentieth Century Canada, 2005, p.73. (PhD thesis, MacMaster, History).
     http://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/handle/11375/14231
53.   Ibid., pp.73-74.
54.   Diaries of W.L.Mackenzie King, Sept. 27-28, 1928 (on Mussolini) and June 23-29, 1937 (on Hitler, Göring and von Neurath).
55.   Defence of Canada Regulations (DCR), Section 21(1), p.29.
     http://archive.org/stream/defenceofcanadar1939cana
56.   Reg Whitaker, “Official repression of Communism during World War II,” Labour, Spring 1986, p.156.
     http://journals.hil.unb.ca/index.php/LLT/article/view/2492/2895
57.   DCR, 1940, pp.46-47.
     http://archive.org/stream/defenceofcanadar1940cana
58.   Ibid., Section 21(1).
59.   Michelle McBride, From Indifference to internment: An examination of RCMP responses to Nazism and Fascism in Canada from 1934 to 1941, 1997, p.50. (MA, History, Memorial Univ., Newfoundland)
     http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp04/mq23157.pdf
60.   Krawchuk, Op. cit., 1985.
61.   “Narodna hazeta,” Encyclopedia of Ukraine, Vol.3, 1993.
     http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com
62.   Krawchuk, Op. cit., 1985.
63.   Ibid.
64.   Myron Kostaniuk, “Recollections from a Life of a Ukrainian Pioneer,” UC, Oct. 1990. Cited by Hinther Op. cit., p.82.
65.   Stacey Zembrzycki, Memory, Identity and the Challenge of Community Among Ukrainians in the Sudbury Region, 1901-1939, 2007, pp.233-236. (PhD, History, Carleton)
     http://pdf.library.laurentian.ca/DissTheses/Zembrzycki.pdf
66.   Kolasky, Op. cit., p.30.
67.   Reg Whitaker and Gregory Kealey, “A War on Ethnicity? The RCMP and Internment,” Enemies Within: Italian and Other Internees in Canada and Abroad, 2000.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=4NmjeHDAyjMC
68.   John Herd Thompson, Ethnic Minorities During Two World Wars, 1991.
     http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/008004/f2/E-19_en.pdf
69.   Krawchuk 1985, Op. cit.
70.   Whitaker, Op. cit, p.158.
71.   Krawchuk 1985, Op. cit.
72.   Help Canada to Do Justice! Toronto Star, May 5, 1943.
     http://historyofrights.ca/wp-content/uploads/documents/clat_petition_ukrainians.pdf
73.   Suzanne Holyck Hunchuck, A House like no other: An architectural and social history of the Ukrainian Labour Temple... Ottawa, 1923-1967, 2001, p.86. (MA thesis, Art History, Carleton University)
     http://curve.carleton.ca/da31d854-22fa-4958-9eda-f144ff8a2738
74.   Lubomyr Luciuk, Searching for Place: Ukrainian Displaced Persons, Canada, and the Migration of Memory, 2000, pp.38-39.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=6srpcaGeuvcC
75.   Hansard, 1943, Vol.5, p.4848.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=-0JOAAAAMAAJ
     Michael Martin, The Red Patch: Political Imprisonment in Hull, Quebec during World War II, 2007, p.133.
76.   About AUUC
     http://www.auuc.ca/about.htm
77.   Reg Whitaker, Op. cit., p.156.
78.   Ukrainians in Canada, Op. cit., pp.7-8.
79.   Krawchuk, Op. cit., 1985.
80.   Luciuk, Op. cit., p.34.
81.   Michael Petrowsky, “Secret RCMP Report on the United Hetman Organization of Canada,” Oct. 1941. Journal of Ukrainian Studies, Winter-Spring 2003, p.105.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=sO0VAQAAMAAJ
82.   “Call for Alertness: Ukrainian Meet Warns of Communist Menace,” Winnipeg Free Press, December 12, 1949, p.3
     http://newspaperarchive.com/ca/manitoba/winnipeg/winnipeg-free-press/1949/12-12/page-3
83.   Wasyl Veryha, The Ukrainian Cdn. Cttee.: Its Origin and War Activity, 1967, pp.97,159. (MA thesis, History, Ottawa)
     http://www.ruor.uottawa.ca/bitstream/10393/21445/1/EC55314.PDF
84.   Franca Iacovetta, Gatekeepers: Reshaping Immigrant Lives in Cold War Canada, 2006.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=2TrcBQAAQBAJ
85.   Watson Kirkconnell
     http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com
86.   Iacovetta, Op. cit., p.12.
87.   Orest Martynowych, “Vladimir J. (Kaye) Kysilewsky and the Ukrainian Bureau in London, 1931-1940,” Sept. 28, 2007, p.2.
88.   “Ukrainian Bureau,” March 9, 2011.
     http://www.ukrainiansintheuk.info
89.   Martynowych, Op. cit., 2007, p.13.
90.   Iacovetta, Op. cit., p.116.
91.   Ibid., p.80.
92.   Franca Iacovetta, “The Gatekeepers: Middle-Class Campaigns of Citizenship in Early Cold War Canada,” A.Ricardo López and Barbara Weinstein (eds.), The Making of the Middle Class, 2012, p.95.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=Y-wPB0I-5yEC
93.   Franca Iocovetta, “Making Model Citizens: Gender, Corrupted Democracy, and Immigrant and Refugee Reception Work in Cold War Canada,” in Gary Kinsman, D.Buse, M.Steedman (eds.), Whose National Security?, 2000, pp.60-61.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=2XBtBapxXrMC
94.   Franca Iocovetta, “A historian’s long view on multiculturalism: the limits of liberal pluralism in early Cold War Canada,” CanadaWatch, Fall 2009, p.15.
     http://robarts.info.yorku.ca/files/2012/03/CW_2009_Multiculturalism.pdf
95.   Rhonda Hinther, “Generation Gap: Canada’s Postwar Ukrainian Left,” in Hinther and Mochoruk, Op. cit., pp.35-36.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=H1Rb6Owne6gC
96.   John-Paul Himka, “A Central European Diaspora under the Shadow of WWII: Galician Ukrainians in North America,” Austrian History Yearbook, 37, 2006, p.20
     http://www.timeandspace.lviv.ua/files/session/Himka_Central_European_Diaspora_65.pdf
97.   “Admission to Canada, Resolution, 24 May, 1948,” Dep’t of Citizenship and Emigration, in Rossolinski, Op. cit., p.314.
98. Luciuk, Op. cit., p.251.
99. Hinther and Mochoruk, Op. cit., p.238.
100. Luciuk, Op. cit., pp.253-254.
101. National Members
     http://www.ucc.ca/members/national-members/
102. Michal Šmigel and Aleksandr Cherkasov, “The 14th Waffen-Grenadier-Div. of the SS ‘Galizien No.1’ in Slovakia (1944-1945),” Bylye Gody, No.28(2), 2013, p.70.
     http://bg.sutr.ru/journals_n/1374766084.pdf
103. Roman Krawec, “Former soldiers of the Galicia Division,” Ukrainians in the UK
     http://www.ukrainiansintheuk.info
104. Vic Satzewich, The Ukrainian Diaspora: Global Diasporas, 2002, p.103.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=SfWBAgAAQBAJ
105. Howard Margolian, Unauthorized Entry: The Truth about Nazi War Criminals in Canada, 1946-1956, 2000, p.132.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=5fdmAAAAMAAJ
106. Myroslav Yurkevich, “Galician Ukrainians in Germany Military Formations,” in Yury Boshyk (ed.), Ukraine during WWII: History and its Aftermath, 1986, p.81.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=YMk8366ZFQcC
107. Pers Ander Rudling, “‘The Honor They So Clearly Deserve’: Legitimizing the Waffen-SS Galizien,” Journal of Slavic Military Studies, 26:1, 2013, pp.136-137.
     http://www.academia.edu/2763263
108. Letter from S.T.Wood to Stuart Garson, (“Top Secret”), February 15, 1950.
     http://web.archive.org/web/www.cbc.ca/fifth/2010-2011_includes/episodes/enemiesofthestate/images/February%2015,%201950.pdf
109. “End the Policy of Mass Repression in Canada,” People’s Voice, Nov.1-15, 2010.
     http://www.peoplesvoice.ca/Pv01no10.html
110. “Re: Apprehension of Persons under the DOCR in the Event of War (Profunc System),” (“Top Secret”), July 26, 1957. In Profunc_11.pdf
     http://profunc.ca
111. “Historian uncovers secret prison camp,” Star Pheonix, November 6, 2006.
112. “Profunc Statistics,” October 11, 1978. In Profunc_11.pdf, Op.cit.
113. Former Manitoba AG on secret internment list, CBC, October 15, 2010.
     http://www.cbc.ca
114. Hinther, Op. cit., p.64.
115. Workers Benevolent Assoc. of Canada
     http://www.archivescanada.ca
116. Profunc Manual (“Top Secret”), Jan. 26, 197, p.3. In Profunc_11.pdf, Op. cit.
117. About AUUC, Op. cit.
118. Anthony Mardiros, William Irvine: The Life of a Prairie Radical, 1979, p.229.
     http://books.google.ca/books?id=8aMLs5Gbq5wC
119. Stephen Endicott, James G.Endicott: Rebel Out of China, 2004, p.267.
120. Rhonda Hinther, Op. cit., p.199.
121. “They Fought Tirelessly for Working People,” People’s Voice, Oct. 1-15, 2011.
     http://www.peoplesvoice.ca/articleprint86
122. Jennifer Anderson, Propaganda and Persuasion in the Cold War: The Cdn. Soviet Friendship Society, 1949-1960, 2008, p.241. (MA thesis, History, Carleton.)
     http://www.curve.carleton.ca/theses/28113
123. Special Identification Program (“Secret”), Jan.10, 1977. In Profunc_04.pdf
     http://profunc.ca
124. Emergencies Act, p.1.
125. Bill C-51, June 18, 2015.
126. “Urgent Call to Action! Stop Terrorism in Ukraine!” July 23, 2014.
     http://www.ucc.ca/2014/07/23/
127. UCC Applauds Government of Canada Announcement of Training for Ukrainian Soldiers, April 14, 2015.
     http://www.ucc.ca/2015/04/14
128. Roger Annis, “Ukraine Independence Day celebration in Toronto features appeals favouring war and fundraising for fascism,” August 27, 2014.
     http://newcoldwar.org
129. Mark MacKinnon, “Bypassing official channels, Canada’s Ukrainian diaspora finances and fights a war against Russia,” Globe and Mail, February 26, 2015.
     http://www.theglobeandmail.com
130. “Statement from the AUUC National Executive Committee regarding the situation in Ukraine as of March 2, 2014”
     http://www.auuc.ca
131. Paul Grod, “Canadian Values are Ukrainian Values,” June 9, 2015.
     http://www.ucc.ca/2015/06/09
132. UCC Briefing Note: The Case for Military Assistance to Ukraine, Sept. 3, 2014.
     http://www.ucc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/NATO-BRIEFING-NOTE-UCC-Sept-3-2014.pdf
     "Ottawa open to giving Kiev military aid if consensus achieved among allies,”   Globe and Mail, February 11, 2015.
133. Consultation regarding the possible addition of Ukraine to the Automatic Firearms Country Control List, June 11, 2015.
     http://www.international.gc.ca/controls-controles/fire arms_armes_a_feu/afccl-consultation-lpdaa.aspx
134. Conservative Party Response to UCC Questionnaire, September 2015.
     http://www.ucc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/1-CPC-UCC-Questionnaire-Responses_04.pdf
135. Federal Party Leaders Respond to UCC Election Questions
     http://www.ucc.ca/2015/09/29
136. S.C. 2005, c.52, November 25, 2005.
     http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/I-20.8.pdf
137. Karyn Ball and Per Anders Rudling, “The Underbelly of Canadian Multiculturalism: Holocaust Obfuscation and Envy in the Debate about the Canadian Museum for Human Rights,” Holocaust Studies, Vol.20, Issue 3, 2014.
     http://www.academia.edu/12207336
138. Lubomyr Luciuk, “Remembering Danylo,” March 3, 2014.
     http://www.thewhig.com/2014/03/03/remembering-danylo
139. About the RMC of Canada
     http://www.rmc.ca/about-apropos-eng.php
140. Wilfred Szczesny, “What Form of Redress?” Ukrainian Canadian, Dec. 1988.
     http://www.infoukes.com/history/internment/booklet 02/doc-038.html
141. Who We Are, UCC website
     http://www.ucc.ca/about-ucc/who-we-are/

Left Turn:Virage à Gauche

June 29, 2020