There are two important writers concerning the contamination of Canada by Communism. One is Allan Stang, and the other is Robert Rumilly.
In 1956, fifteen years before Allan Stang published CANADA – How The Communists Took Control, French Quebec historian, Robert Rumilly, intercepted and documented the very same ring of Communists as they were setting up shop in Quebec.
Rumilly published the results of his investigation in French under the title L’Infiltration gauchiste au Canada français (The Leftist Infiltration in French Canada).
Rumilly’s work adds new facts and names to those disclosed by Stang, such as Le Devoir newspaper editor, André Laurendeau, and the Institut canadien des affaires publiques (Canadian Institute of Public Affairs). At the same time, many of those known to Stang appear in Rumilly’s pages, such as Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Jean-Louis Gagnon.
I am giving you all that I have translated so far of Rumilly’s “Notebook No. 1“, which I am gradually putting into English in the form of a web site dedicated to Rumilly’s work on the communist infiltration of Canada. I will notify you of the launch.
The goal of that Web site (as of this short English extract of a couple of chapters, featured here) is to provide you with the opportunity to become acquainted with certain classics of Quebec history which are not well known today, but deserve to be.
Towards the end of the 1940s and during the 1950s in Quebec, a pro-Soviet Leftist movement began to be detected.
Historian, Robert Rumilly, in his L’Infiltration Gauchiste au Canada Français (The Leftist Infiltration in French Canada), documented this activity and identified the network which had installed itself in Canada, in particular in its main target, Quebec.
Rumilly shows how the partisans of that movement sought to emulate a similar Left in France which had concentrated around Emmanuel Mounier and his crypto-communist review, Esprit. Esprit’s first issue in 1932 favorably describes a voyage behind the Iron Curtain into Soviet Russia.
Wrting in 1956, Rumilly deplores the ideology of “Catholicism of the Left” which Esprit and other sources had fostered to divide the Catholic Church in France into antagonistic camps.
Rumilly above all identified the small ring of individuals at the core of the movement, and the organizations they erected, or infiltrated, to create the impression of a vast social crusade.
As well, he exposed the participation of the federal level of Canada, whose national broadcasting network, CBC-Radio Canada, promptly employed the Leftists in Quebec. It kept them salaried while providing a near-exclusive platform to broadcast their ideology without opposition.
As well, Rumilly noted that the tendency of communism to centralize threatened the very existence of the French Canadians, whose cultural survival in North America depends upon provincial autonomy in Canadian federalism.
In fact, Rumilly was right. In the April 1962 issue of Cité Libre, Pierre Elliott Trudeau — a principal architect of the pro-Soviet network, along with others such as Le Devoir editor André Laurendeau — demands a “new constitution” to create a polyethnic Canada, apparently dominated by Asians and Africans. Trudeau’s “New Treason of the Clerics” is a must-read. He begins it with an apt quotation, making “treason” the crime of fidelity to the nation.
In that article, Trudeau expressly demands the reduction of the “Britanno” Canadians to a strict minority on their own soil. He even envisages the future disappearance of the French Canadians! In other words, his plan for Canada is literally the genocide of its founding peoples, both French and English speaking.
When he published L’Infiltration in 1956, Mr. Rumilly, born in 1897, was an accomplished and respectable author of works of history and non-fiction, well connected to the clergy and active in local politics. His glimpses of the precipitous workings of the Leftist ring and their clandestine infiltration of French Canada is an invaluable contribution to the history of Canada.
In his second book on this theme, The Leftist Tactic Unmasked (which I hope to be able to translate one day) — the sequel and complement to his L’Infiltration — Mr. Rumilly shares with us the correspondence he received, and the reactions unleashed among these same individuals whose ring Rumilly had just exposed, being set up under the public’s radar.
A perspicacious man who gives a strong impression of integrity and good faith, Rumilly knows how to fight with facts and pen. He is an ardent defender of Quebec and the French Canadians. He is an historian not simply of the past, but of events happening before his eyes, events other authors simply missed, even after the fact… and perhaps by no coincidence.
I give you Mr. Robert Rumilly in my own exclusive English translation.
Book I – The Leftist Infiltration in French Canada
CHAPTERS TRANSLATED SO FAR:
Exclusive English Translation
By Kathleen Moore
All Rights Reserved © 2013, 2014 Tous droits réservés
Nota bene: I hold the copyright to my English translation of Rumilly. KM.
Page 9 E
THE “CATHOLICS OF THE LEFT” IN FRANCE
“Catholics of the left” and Communists
— The review Esprit — The result.
For a certain number of years now, there exist in France “Catholics of the Left” or “Christian progressives” who know no enemies on the Left. The large English Catholic weekly magazine, The Tablet, announced and studied this movement — with some alarm — in its issues of March 10th and March 17th, 1956.
The “Catholics of the Left” exhibit their fist to the right, the side where the vast majority of Catholics are, but shake hands with the Communists, towards whom they are all-accommodating. At their disposal is a real and powerful press trust, mainly controlled by Mrs. Ella-Blanche Sauvageot of periodicals such as Esprit* and Témoignage Chrétien**; and finally the support of the French Dominicans, who publish La Vie Intellectuelle***.
|* Esprit can be taken to mean both “Mind” and “Spirit” in French. [KM]
** Témoignage Chrétien = “Christian Testimony”. [KM]
*** La Vie Intellectuelle = “The Intellectual Life”. [KM]
Page 10 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
A leader of this group, The Dominican, Reverend Father Avril, is obliged to admit in Témoignage Chrétien on November 18th, 1955: “There is no doubt that the majority of Catholics are classified as politically on the right.” He might as well also write that men of the right are, in their very great majority, Catholics. However, the “Catholics of the Left” devote themselves exclusively to the fight against this majority of Catholics, whom they treat as enemies. Far from fighting the anti-catholic parties, they are combined with the radical party and with the socialist party — political expressions of freemasonry — and even with the Communist Party, which are systematically and violently anti-religious.
The “Catholics of the Left”, on the model of the Communists, readily treat men of the right as “fascists”. They furiously attack all French Catholics who followed marshal Pétain — all French Catholics who are not of their chapel. They thus seriously divide the Catholics –– despite calls by Pius XII for harmony among Catholics.
And they have the same adversaries — the same enemies! – as the Communists, which leads them into sympathy, even into strict alliance.
“Catholics of the Left” and Communists
The “Catholics of the Left” are all-indulgent, all-benevolent toward the Communists, who are considered as advanced little brothers,
Page 11 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
as an avant-garde which it will undoubtedly be necessary to join before long. At most, they deplore some “regrettable excesses” of Communism – and their attitude is in formal contradiction to that of Pius XI, who condemned Communism as “intrinsically perverse”. There might unfortunately be a small dose of error in Communism, but also excellent things which it is advisable to know and appropriate to adopt as a starting point.
This kind of Marxist philosophy is penetrating into certain Catholic milieux. The Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office decided, on July 1st, 1949, that it is not permitted to publish, distribute or read books, reviews, newspapers or loose leaves which support the doctrines or the action of the Communists, nor to write for these publications. Thus, Catholics have no direct means to know Communist propaganda and to absorb it. The leaders and the bodies of “Catholicism of the Left” fill this gap. They maintain an atmosphere of non-resistance. On September 14th, 1945, Témoignage Chrétien wrote: “The front of the anticommunist fight will not have us.” And non-resistance soon transforms itself into benevolence, an “understanding” which paves the way for collaboration, or worse still.
“Dialog” is advised with those they readily call “our Communist brothers”. The Reverend Father Bigo, one of the major inspirers of the movement, asks: “My Communist brother,
Page 12 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
how do we come to you?” During “Catholic Intellectuals Week” held in Paris in November 1955, Mr. Michelet evokes a time when he lived “in the Nazi hell, shoulder to shoulder with Communists, a long de facto brotherhood”. Very well. But, Jean Madiran observes: “Why does hell always go with Nazi and brotherhood with Communist, and never the opposite?” Why is dialog never recommended with the “fascists”? Why does one never ask: “My Nazi brother, how do we come to you?” Why does one recommend resistance to Nazism and non-resistance to Communism? “What Catholic reason does one have to so differently treat these two totalitarianisms condemned by the Popes?”
I would add: “Why does the sentiment of brotherhood felt towards the Communists not extend to the French, the great majority of whom are Catholics, and who venerated and followed marshal Pétain?
“Catholics of the Left”, invited by the Soviet government, went behind the iron curtain. They brought back and propagated skillfully refined impressions, suited to clear the way for Communist propaganda. I take the case of Jacques Madaule, because this eminent “Catholic of the Left” gave courses and lectures in Canada. Jacques Madaule went to Soviet Russia and into the satellite countries. He benefited from a session on Radio-Budapest (Hungarian radio under Soviet control). You
Page 13 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
would be right to think he did not disparage Communism while he was there. He described the U.S.S.R. as “an immense school” and “a vast construction site”. And also “a formidable camp”, but because the Soviet Union, deeply attached to peace, fears attack by the “capitalist powers” it must consequently be ready to “defend the school and the construction site”.
Returned to France, Jacques Madaule developed this theme. He went rather far to elicit reactions. He had to defend himself. He did so in an article, the text of which follows:
Essentially, I affirmed four things:
1 — From the economic point of view, the Soviet experiment constitutes a success, especially if one wants to take good account that over thirty-five years, the U.S.S.R. has had to support two wars: one from 1918 to 1922 and the second from 1941 to 1945.
2 — The Soviet Union exerts very great efforts to spread culture among its people, and these efforts are crowned with success. This does not imply that Soviet culture, in itself, is satisfactory.
3 — It appears that the Soviet people are behind their government and one does not see, moreover, how it could be otherwise with the system of education and propaganda which functions over there.
4 — The desire for peace of the Soviet people and of the Soviet government does not seem to be
Page 14 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
in doubt. In support of this assertion, the seriousness of which I do not disguise, I could advance numerous proofs or presumptions. This appears to me the strongest: in current circumstances, the desire for war can only exist among people who find themselves in a situation without an exit. Thus, the situation of the Soviet Union would have to be without an exit…
Proportioning is seen: one teaspoonful of reservation to three soup-spoons of praise. Certainly not a straight-out apology for the Soviet mode, but an accent adroitly and constantly placed on the achievements, the successes. Overall, a very sympathetic, very favorable impression. Marcel Clément can write (in Notre Temps*, February 14th, 1953): “This letter of Mr. Madaule, it is, in a very precise sense, the Trojan Horse in the precinct of the Church. At the time of this writing, it has begun to inject the poison it contains into thousands of minds….” And Marcel Poimbœuf, in L’Homme Nouveau**, can call Jacques Madaule “a voluntary agent of Soviet propaganda”.
Other “Catholics of the Left” take attitudes even clearer. Mrs. Ella-Blanche Sauvageot openly executes pro-Communist gestures: the signature of the Stockholm Appeal in 1950; the vice-presidency of the very communising Association pour la défense de la liberté et de la diffusion de la presse in 1951; a protestation in L’Humanité, organ of the Communist
|* Notre Temps = “Our Times” in English. [KM]
** L’Homme Nouveau = “The New Man”, with “man” in the sense of “human being”. [KM]
*** L’Humanité = “Humanity”. [KM]
**** “Association pour la défense de la liberté et de la diffusion de la presse” = “Association for the defense of press and broadcasting freedom”. The irony being, of course, that if you let the Communists use your “freedoms” of the press and broadcasting, and speech and communication, to get their regime in; once they are in, they will abolish all these “freedoms” for you. If you object, then off you go to the Gulag. Essentially, they are conducting a war, using your constitution as the tool to undermine you. Which is to say, if you are foolish enough to believe that totalitarianism is entitled to the “freedom” to destroy your freedom, then you allow your freedoms to become the instrument of a tyranny, which has no intention of giving you the same “freedom” to overthrow it. [KM]
Page 15 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
party, against the prohibition of a communist demonstration in 1952. And so on. Mrs. Sauvageot is not the only one. Along with her, Mrs. Genevieve Clairvoix (La Quinzaine), Georges Montaron (Témoignage Chrétien) and Jean-Marie Domenach (Esprit) signed the protestation, published in L’Humanité, against the prohibition of a communist demonstration. Neither Mrs. Sauvageot nor her colleagues, signatories of several proclamations inspired by the Communist party and inserted in L’Humanité, ever once affixed their signatures to the bottom of a petition rejected by the Communist party. The “Catholics of the Left” raised their voice in favor of the Rosenberg spies, condemned to death in the United States. They declared odious the wait of several weeks which was inflicted upon them (pending news of) grace or the electric chair. However, at that same time, two anti-communist militants of the Pétain regime, condemned to death on November 18th, 1949, were locked up in the cell on death row at Fort Hâ. They were also awaiting grace or execution. The militiamen were shot in Bordeaux on June 2nd, 1953, after a wait of not a few weeks, but forty months — which by no means moved the “Catholics of the Left” or the “Christian progressives”.
Cardinal Salièges was able to declare:
“All occurs as if there were an action orchestrated by a certain press, more or less periodic, in certain more or less secret meetings, tending to prepare within Catholi-
Page 16 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
cism a movement of reception to Communism.”
And Mr. Julien Brunhes, independent senator of the Seine, could deplore that in the municipal elections of 1953 “unexpected support was brought to the Communists by Catholics and even by priests who encouraged voting Communist rather than for militant Catholics, considered as reactionaries”.
The review Esprit
An organ of the “Catholics of the Left”, the review Esprit deserves specific examination because of the influence which it has exerted in French Canada, as we will see further on. This examination will moreover constitute an excellent illustration of all that precedes.
Esprit was founded by Emmanuel Mounier in October 1932. In its first issue, an account is published of a voyage in Russia, all to the advantage of the Soviets. In Soviet Russia, one breathes “much better than elsewhere”. Even the faces of the citizens do not appear to be “uninteresting, stunned, idiotic like the majority of our own”, but alive, animated by an interior fire. It emanates “a dominant feeling of freedom”.
The Catholic organ so favorable to Communism musters surprising resources from the outset. In no time, the review appears in three languages; it organizes 33 centers in France and 27 abroad. Who could facilitate, who could finance
|Translator’s note: This chapter on Esprit is extremely important because Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s pro-communist Cité Libre magazine modeled itself on Esprit. Esprit was implementing tactics to destroy the Catholic Church in France. Cité Libre calls itself the “little sister” of Esprit. Esprit is crypto-communist, claiming to be “Catholic socialist”; however, the term appears to be self-contradictory, as Catholicism is a spiritual world-view, and socialism a materialist. Esprit, as I recently found out, is favorably mentioned in a PDF file inside Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission web site. Of course, the Rockefellers through their Chase Manhattan bank were instrumental in the Bolshevik Revolution and the Sovietization of Russia. Trilateral’s Peter Sutherland refers to the founders of Esprit as “Catholic socialists”. Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission has been pushing regional union in North America. Meanwhile, Esprit has for decades been pushing regional union in Europe.
In North America, the French Canadians in Quebec were the major barrier to regional union. Their language and their Catholic faith and Quebec’s confessional school system are guaranteed in the lawful constitution of 1867, the British North America Act. However, to begin the regional harmonization, Quebec’s Catholic institutions and public education system had to be destroyed and replaced with secular institutions; otherwise, hundreds of new racial groups could not be mass immigrated onto Quebec soil, there being no public schools for them.
This may be why the merger was begun with Catholic Italians who could fit into the original confessional system. The Catholic Church in Quebec has indeed been decimated; in 1965, the educational system was handed over to secular authorities by associates of this very same ring of Leftists exposed by Rumilly. Today, one may read in the various tabloids of the rash of conversions of Catholic Church buildings to condominiums and other uses. Montreal, which had once been known as the “City of a thousand bells” in reference to its Church steeples, hears bells rarely, but the signs are bristling up everywhere of mosques and temples.
With the hijacking of the confessional public school system (Catholic and Protestant, i.e., belonging to the Founding Peoples of Canada), massive rates of foreign immigration to Canada have been underway in the name of globalism. (There are now over 135 “mother tongues” in the district where I live, Côte-des-Neiges, which 30 years ago, was a French and English neighborhood.) KM.
Page 17 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
this growth while the oldest and best established reviews have a hard time surviving? As of November 1934, Les Études, a review of the Jesuit Fathers, puts Catholics on guard against the doctrines followed and propagated by Esprit. It is moreover sufficient to thumb through the Esprit collection to see just how far its desire goes for collaboration with the most extreme Left. Let’s begin with the issues published after the war’s eclipse and the occupation.
We saw that in September 1945, Témoignage Chrétien refused to take part in a potential anticommunist front. Esprit had preceded its fellow-member by writing in June: “Let us say it plainly. In no case and under no pretext will we participate in any kind of anticommunist front: anticommunism is treason, declared or virtual.” And the pétainists and other adversaries of Communism are, effectively, treated like traitors. Esprit deplores that Charles Maurras is simply sent to the penal colony, and not shot. And it reproaches the bishops for having followed the Pétain government and regrets that the Church of France did not purify itself — in other words, that she did not seek the revocation or the condemnation of the bishops and the Pétainist priests.
And do not believe that it is enough not to fight against the Communists. The hand must be extended, to collaborate with them: “There is no question of
|Translator’s note: “anticommunism is treason” – Sounds like Pierre Elliott Trudeau in the April 1962 issue of Cité Libre. He makes it clear from the outset of his article, “The New Treason of the Clerics” that fidelity to the nation is “treason”. In other words, a total inversion of values. It also would seem to be a tactic. I have noted that when Marxist-Machiavellian Trudeau tells you to do something to preserve yourself, and you do it, you will instead destroy yourself. But he will tell you that whatever you are to do, it is essential to your survival.|
Page 18 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
doing anything in France against or without the Communists.” No doubt, in this collaboration, one will be subject to some influence of the Communists. Esprit only hopes that the Communists will want to allow themselves to be influenced as well, to arrive at “a humanistic Communism to which we all will subscribe”.
An article of August 1945 discusses the “current necessity for Communism”. In October 1946, even the director of the review writes that a Christian can adopt the majority of the political positions of Communism and conclude alliances with it. It is enough to be vigilant “on threatened points”. The article reproaches a clergyman for his anticommunist judgments, which derive from “the most contestable philosophy of history and undoubtedly the most clearly outdated by the dominant perspectives of the post-war world.” It is the Communist theory, according to which the world moves fatally — and happily — towards the Soviet regime, so that while placing oneself on the Left one acts “in the direction of history”.
In October 1947, another collaborator studies the crisis of the French Communist party, which seems in regression. He asks the Catholics to help the Communist party to solve this crisis, in order to “revalorize freedom”! Another article in the same issue, signed Jean-Louis Levy, represents Communism as an “harmonious and constructive” system. And always, also, as the party of the future:
Page 19 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
Capitalism is condemned to death and well knows it… Triumphant American capitalism has a guilty conscience, the bourgeoisie throughout the whole world has a guilty conscience and is afraid. Communism does not need war to develop, because time works for it.
… The struggle of capitalism, a system now chaotic and which is devouring itself — and of Communism, an harmonious and constructive system, is not an even match, and non-Communists of good faith should carefully reflect that they cannot oppose growing Communism with declining capitalism, the poor deprived wretches of paternalism or bourgeois legality…
While the Communists merit such fraternal attention, Catholics of the right continue to be mistreated, even hunted down. Esprit unceasingly warns against any alliance with the right. To the extent that affinities exist between Esprit and Communism, to that extent incompatibility exists between that review and the right. An article of December 1947 again criticizes the French episcopate, which rallied to marshal Pétain. You might object that the government of marshal Pétain had restored the crucifix* to the schoolrooms, and purposed to teach the catechism in the schools. But Esprit precisely indicates this plan as a fault (the March-April issue of 1949, page 352). The other government leaders supposedly of “the
|*For my post on a similar “debate” here in Quebec, see “Crucifix in the Quebec Legislature is Constitutionally Protected“.|
Page 20 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
right”, including and above all the most Catholic, are ensconced in the same aversion, not to mention the same hatred. An article of March 1948 ridicules the Alphonsienne book store of Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré, which published a brochure favorable to Franco. And Salazar is in no way spared. The following month, Esprit denounces reports in the anticommunist press and “to console ourselves” it points to the “courageous campaign” of the communist paper, Franc-Tireur.
The reader must not be mistaken. It is not only that Communists are eminently sympathetic “brothers”. It is not only that certain Soviet achievements merit admiration. It is Marxist doctrine, itself, which it is advisable to assimilate…
If you think I exaggerate, get the May-June 1948 issue of Esprit out of the library. A Dominican, the Reverend Father Henri-Charles Desroches, has published an article entitled “Marxism and Religion”, containing this phrase, which summarizes the thesis:
“It is possible for believers to benefit from Marxism.” Another writer demands that Christians “assimilate what there is of truth in Marxist views”. The whole issue develops this theme. It reproduces texts of the Communist dogmatists, Engels and Marx, on dialectical materialism and historical materialism, under color of giving to the public “an accurate vision of the contents of Marxist thought”, with the pretext of setting aside anticommunist prejudices. Finally, this issue contains
IN FRENCH CANADA
interviews with mostly Communists, one of whom, Claude Roy, terminates his statement with these sentences: “Marxism is also a discipline of clarity. It must prepare singing tomorrows with todays which speak clearly, straight and true. It is a program on which I think that we can also find ourselves, my dear Emmanuel Mounier, with you, with friends.”
The February 1949 issue protests against city councillors in Paris who are considering de-baptising the “Stalingrad” subway station. (This was before the de-stalinization undertaken in Moscow!)
In July of 1949, a decree of the Holy See forbids adhering to Communism and collaborating with Communists. To do so could contribute to bringing about the advent of a “materialistic and atheistic” Communist regime. Esprit felt itself implicated. Emmanuel Mounier published an explanation — to tell the truth, a daring reaffirmation of its insubordinate tactic. We do not adhere to Communism, he said, “and we have always refused all forms of collaboration with the Communists which were not fully above-board and free from exploitation. However, let us play the game frankly. We are not politically opposed and we will unceasingly oppose this policy of anticommunism which shores up social self-righteousness and ripens war, both civil and international. We have said, and we say again, that Communism, aside from that
|Translator’s note: “singing tomorrows” – That’s the phrase used by one of the Canadian Reds fingered by American author Allan Stang in CANADA — How The Communists Took Control…|
Page 22 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
which we reject in it, contains a number of political, economic, social and human truths, and that our duty as Christians, at the same time as our political duty, is to recognize the truth wherever it be found…”
Mounier recalls that his friends and the Communists collaborated in the Resistance. And he quibbles:
“Nothing is more radically false than to represent a decree such as that of the Holy See, in Catholic theology, as an imperial edict inviting passive obedience…”
“Communism, for the moment, in the scheme of forces, represents the only serious threat to the capitalist disorder…”
All in all, according to Mounier, the Church only condemns the exaggerations, the deformations of Communism — of Communism which, as he lets it be known contrary to Pius XI, is intrinsically good.
We could continue. Let us continue. Albert Béguin succeeded to Emmanuel Mounier, and Jean-Marie Domenach was later the assistant to Albert Béguin, director of the review Esprit. Béguin was as far to the left as was Mounier; and Domenach even further, if that is possible.
The present work, intended to analyze a Canadian situation, aims at no more of an incursion into the political and intellectual life of France than necessary, by way of prologue. I would protract it to excess by peeling through all the issues of Esprit. It will suffice for me to send those readers espe-
Page 23 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
cially interested to the collection of this review, and to say to the others that Esprit has not ceased to invite “Catholics of the Left” to hatred, but a svelte, refined, polished hatred against the Pétainists, the traditionalists and other men of the right, and to a sympathy, even to collaboration with respect to Communism, which contains, does it not, “numerous political, economic, social and human truths”. Let’s take a recent issue. In March, 1956, an editor of Esprit writes that we must “far better come to terms with the discoveries of Marxism than condemn them”. Must not “the truth be recognized everywhere it is found” — provided it is found to the Left !
Over and above the texts, moreover, it is the spirit which counts. And the spirit of Esprit is such that France Réelle was able to write, on November 5th, 1954:
“Jean-Marie Domenach, Director of the Review Esprit, has become the inspiration for all the crypto-Communist stances.”
The Osservatore Romano, official mouthpiece of the Vatican, wrote on March 5th, 1949:
“Christian-progressives risk involvement with a doctrine condemned by the Church and contributing to the success of a party which is systematically anti-Christian and aggressive.”
And that is just what has happened. The French government — a government of radicals and socialists, however far to the Left ! — had to disallow
Page 24 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
Témoignage Chrétien in the barracks in October 1955, so much had it undermined the morale of recruits. An eminent Dominican, Father Vincent Ducatillon, who himself had played with fire but had regained his hold on himself, came to acknowledge in La Croix (May 29th, 1956) that there exists a crisis of patriotism within French Catholicism, that this crisis is one of the most acute and the most serious of the present time, and that it is due to the influence of trends such as Marxism, working on those “who like to consider themselves the activist/militant wing of the Church”.
The crisis has not only changed patriotism. One does not flirt for years without risk, with a doctrine and a party that are essentially materialist. One has not imbibed Marxism with impunity all these years. Gustave Thibon puts it this way in the Itinéraires of July-August 1956: “It will be said that all progressives are not atheists. That is certain. But even those who believe in God think and act in the manner of atheism.”
Monsignor Charles Lemaire, General superior of the Foreign missions, issues the same warning:
“In France, you cannot be unaware of it, that clear-sighted men are anxious. The modern heresy of Communism wishes to penetrate into Catholic hearts, and it succeeds, and many are already the victims of a propaganda whose immoral methods and remarkable skill are truly diabolical. What is
Page 25 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
more serious still is that these victims become, in the very heart of the Church, the accomplices of the Adversary. A part of the press is visibly tainted by the poison. Were we not devastated to see with what alacrity, with what contempt for the truth, certain papers or reviews which purport to be Catholic spoke about the persecution in China? The Church is always wrong; only the “Marxist truth” on events behind the Iron Curtain is worthy of credit.
“Can we remain indifferent or content ourselves with sterile moanings? No. We will not be “dumb dogs”.
Let us go on to precise examples. In the student movement studied, in France, the members of the J.O.C. (Catholic Student Youth), openly treat Catholics of the right as enemies and the Communists as allies. They systematically adopt all the positions of the Communist party. So much so that one can regard the Catholic Student Youth as the auxiliary, almost the appendage, of the Communist Student Youth. The leaders of the J.E.C refused to join the protests against persecutions of priests prevailing behind the Iron Curtain. The result is that no Communist student converts to Catholicism, whereas Catholic students slide into Communism.
The first article of faith in the Marxist breviary is class struggle. That is the law which sums up the whole
Page 26 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
history of human society, according to the communist Manifesto of Marx and Engels. Catholics of the left adopt it. Marcel Clément indicates in Nos Cours, organ of the Pius XI Institute (January 8th, 1955), that the Marxist philosophy of history penetrates into certain Catholic milieux. He shows how the acceptance of this philosophy leads to the rejection of all morals (in the sense of a code of conduct in accordance with a higher authority). And Jean Madiran can begin a chapter of his book, They do not know what they do, with these considerations:
“The review Esprit has done much in recent years to credit a fairly Marxist concept of class struggle… If there exists disorder in hearts today, Esprit has a considerable share of responsibility for it…”
All of that clarifies the unhappy affair of the worker-priests.
I summarize. Young priests became workers, hired themselves out in factories, in the hope of impressing the workmen by this example of solidarity — and of converting them. The idea, debatable, might have begun in a spirit of generosity. Unhappily, these young priests, whose doctrine was not yet quite solid, were infected with the leftist virus, which prepared them to accept what the founder of Esprit calls “the multiple truths” contained in Marxism. The same phenomenon occurred in this environment as among the students. The worker priests did not convert the Communists to Catholicism, then
Page 27 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
an inordinate number of them slipped into Communism. Some defrocked. The episcopate, then the Holy See, intervened to stop an experiment which had turned to disaster.
However, the Roman decisions were not at all well received by the “left” Catholic press. As of the first warning statement from the Holy See, which resembled a judgment, a Dominican, Father Yves Cougar, published in Témoignage Chrétien an apology by the organization of worker-priests which resembled a protest — oh, so eruditely shrouded — against the Roman decisions.
Take note of this passage: The worker-priests showed that they were with the working class (which implies that the Holy See, halting their experiment, is against the working class; the Communists did not fail to draw this conclusion). “From there, the commitment of numerous worker-priests, called upon by the circumstances to take a more or less active role in the struggle of the proletariat for its liberation, and who had thought to betray the working class and with it to betray the human demands of the apostolic mission itself had they not gone so far as to espouse certain ideas and assume certain actions; these very ones against whom grievance is made…”
It is known that 73 worker-priests went as far as open revolt against the decisions of the Holy See. Who would dare to claim that the encouragement of the “left Catholic” press did not call forth, did not provoke this rebellion?
The Dominicans of Paris are great gal-
Page 28 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
vanizers of the leftist movement, as we have said. There are, in the Order of Saint-Dominique in France, what would be called in the United States, “fellow travelers” of Communism. One finds the communist vocabulary in their texts. (See above: “the struggle of the proletariat for its liberation”.) Father Chenu, for example, collaborated in bodies with communist sympathies, adhered to communist organizations, signed proclamations and took part in communist demonstrations. In one case, communists who had provoked bloody brawls in the nationalized factories of Renault were laid off. The Party organized a protest in their behalf. Father Chenu went and spoke: “I come with joy to bear witness before you of my active sympathy…” (L’Humanité, 14 March 1952). One may say of him, as of Madame Sauvageot, as of all the leaders of “Catholicism of the left”, that he never signed a text or took part in a protest disagreeable to the communists.
The Holy See had to prevail. Dominican Fathers, among them Father Chenu, were (struck) (hit) with a measure of distancing (eloignement), at the beginning of 1954. More exceptional precautions and sanctions followed. In the eyes of Albert Béguin, director of Esprit, the decisions of the Holy See in the Dominican affair, as in the matter of the worker-priests, constitute “a scandal to the mind and heart of Christians”. The article in Témoignage Chrétien during the suppression of the
Page 29 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
worker-priests tends, also, to give the impression that Rome is always wrong.
The “Catholics of the left” thus became the habitual allies of all that is anticlerical, of everything materialistic, of all that is Masonic or Freemasonic in France. They joined with the worst of the anticlericals to fight the Barangé bill, which endeavoured to grant a minimum of educational justice to the Catholics. A special issue of Esprit served as an effective weapon for the adversaries of this Bill.
La Vie Intellectuelle, mouthpiece of the French Dominicans, published an issue in 1954 under a cover title which sums up the general tendency of the articles: “Watch out for clericalism!”
It is a fashion in these milieux to strike an attitude of anticlericalism. The Reverend Dominican Fathers, on the whole, on their own account, take up the old war cry of the Freemasons: “Clericalism, here is the enemy.” Isn’t that clever of the monks?
La Vie Intellectuelle has never cried, “Watch out for communism!”
This next selected chapter is fundamental. Here is where the communist ring setting up is exposed:
Page 75 E
THE LEFTIST NETWORK
Cité Libre – The Complete Network – Radio-Canada.
At the death of a great Benedictine, Dom Flicoteaux, Léopold Richer wrote:
“I often met Dom Flicoteaux, either at the Benedictine abbey of Sainte-Marie, or again at my office. This man of prayer and meditation followed with pained astonishment the doctrinal evolution of certain French-Canadian groups. He saw here the direct and deleterious influence of France’s leftists and progressives. He constantly warned me against French schools well-known for their advanced ideas and their socialist and communist sympathies.
“I profited from his advice. He guided me in the difficult enterprise of discovering the hidden enemies of our best religious and national traditions.”
Page 76 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
The influence of the “Catholics of the left” has indeed radiated in French Canada. Canadian students in Europe are flanked by the group from Esprit, and if they do not have a strong foundation, they are indoctrinated and denationalized. A mentality of contempt and hatred is inculcated, along with revolutionary ambitions and confused ideas in which class struggle plays a great part.
In Canada, “Catholicism of the left” took Le Devoir as its springboard. Le Devoir quotes Esprit, and ceaselessly propagandizes for it. Collaborators and friends of Le Devoir go further. They found, in Canada, under the name of Cité Libre (Free City), a review modeled on Esprit. Cité Libre readily calls itself “the little sister” of Esprit. She tends toward full-scale leftism, and, naturally enough, to anticlericalism. For Pierre Elliott Trudeau, the Moscow pilgrim who is one of the organizers of Cité Libre, it is essential to subvert authority. Everywhere, prefects of discipline in the colleges, and policemen in the city, must “resume their places as domestics”. The highest authorities are in no way spared, in no measure respected: “There is no divine right of Prime Ministers nor either of bishops. They have authority over us only if we wish it. The day when we understand these truths, we will have ceased being a young people, and more can be expected of us than puerile babblings and teenage revolts.”
|Translator’s note: “Cité Libre” — Our controlled press up here rarely refer to it; when they do, they call it a “federal-ist” magazine, in order to seem to link its co-founder (prime minister) TRUDEAU with a PRO-CANADA stance. In fact, Cité Libre’s federal-ism is globalism, regionalism, multiculturalism, polyethnic pluralism, anything which erases national boundaries and existing national peoples. It is a regionalizing federal-ism for which TRUDEAU stands and for which Cité Libre stands. And the trickery of the press, other authors and media, when they do mention it, is deliberate. They can’t fail to know that Cité Libre is pushing denationalization and regional federal-ism, NOT CANADIAN CONFEDERATION.|
Page 77 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
Abbot J.- B. Desrosiers observes: “This short passage in substance contains Communism, because it unsettles the social order.” (Nos Cours, January 10th, 1953).
Emancipation with respect to the two authorities, political and religious, is the sub-theme of the initial issues of Cité Libre. Maurice Blain particularly takes issue with what he calls “clerical oppression”, which he says has blocked the development of true culture in French Canada. “It is striking”, he writes, “that our education presents to us, in religion, politics or art, virtually none of the major problems raised by the great currents of thought.”
The “great currents of thought” that our education is wrong not to offer for the study and admiration of students are, apparently, Communism and existentialism.
Le Devoir grants high marks to Cité Libre as it does to Esprit, copiously quotes from it and lavishes praise upon it. However, in spite of these “shock doctrines” and these encouragements, Cité Libre had achieved only a limited readership when Esprit gave the group a leg-up in the form of a special issue devoted to French Canada (August-September 1952).
The foreword to the issue is by Henri-Irénée Marrou, a professor of history at the Sorbonne and a “Catholic of the left” of the most militant variety.
|Translator’s note: “true culture” – this is a trick of the Leftists. If you think we don’t have “true culture”, show me an example of “true culture” and tell me how you know it’s “true” in comparison to all else. In effect, is there even such a thing as “true” culture? Trudeau, in Cité Libre, plays the same game with “true federal-ISM”, pretending that there is an ideal platonic model of “federal-ISM” to which everyone must aspire, and therefore absolutely must destroy their own country to achieve it. Show me “true” federal-ISM. Is there such a thing as “true federal-ISM”? I think not. But the statement is effective at misleading. As in Alice in Wonderland, it sounds like proper English, but it doesn’t MEAN anything. However, the trick, if you fall for it, will have you skipping and hopping merrily behind the Marxist Pied Piper to your doom.|
Page 78 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
H.-I. Marrou resigned from UNESCO, where he had been one of France’s representatives, to protest against the admission of Spain. This “Catholic of the left” is thus quite typical: the presence of Marxist Russia seems to him entirely natural, but that of Catholic Spain prevents him from sleeping.
Other than the foreword, the issue is written entirely by French Canadians, with the exception — symptomatic, as we shall see later — of Frank R. Scott.
Gérard Pelletier declares — as we have already said while quoting the account of his friend Gilles Marcotte of Le Devoir — the Canadian Church “unsuited to the new needs of the French-Canadian people, but essentially reformable from within”. Does the bunch from Cité Libre propose to undertake this “reform from within”? Maurice Blain writes on “clerical oppression”, his favorite topic. He denounces “the invasion of the intellectual life by religious dogmatism and of the temporal field by hierarchical power”. The invasion of the intellectual life by religious dogmatism “directly threatens the independence of the mind”. Maurice Blain tacitly resumes, he as well, the old war cry: “Clericalism, here is the enemy.” Jean-Guy Blain, his brother if I am not mistaken, divides the Catholics of Canada into three groups: the nonbelievers, the Catholics of the right, and the Catholics of the left — the latter being the good ones. Other collaborators
|Translator’s note: “Frank R. Scott” — Frank Scott, was not only a constitutional scholar known as a strict constitutionalist, but unfortunately a Rhodes Scholar. It turns out Scott is working for socialism and world government. He recruited people such as Pierre Elliott Trudeau to the cause. The principal draftsman of Canada’s coup constitution of 1982 (Barry Lee Strayer) was also Scott’s recruit. One of Scott’s best friends, Bora Laskin, was made the first Jewish Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada by Trudeau, over the head of the man entitled to the post. By 2011, Canada had a staggering four Jews on the Supreme Court; one has dropped off, we now have three. How does this benefit the cultural interests of the Founding Peoples of Canada to have a third to a quarter of our final judgments on constitutional issues determined by a tiny minority race that had nothing to do with founding the country? Give me a head count, please. How many English, Irish, Scottish, French-Canadians are there on the Supreme Court of Israel, an ethnic nation of and for Jews? What, none? I rest my case.
Canada is an ethnic state of its own founding peoples; there are no Jewish legislatures here. Yet Laskin was pushed to the top to preside at the “patriation reference” of 1980-81, part of a front contrived to impose Trudeau’s coup constitution, which harmonized Canada with the Charter of the UN (future world government), while suppressing our lawful Parliament and Legislatures.
As for Barry Lee Strayer, who apparently had dual citizenship, as a young lawyer, he worked in the Roosevelt “New Deal” administration defending what he calls “innovative legislation” against the United States Supreme Court, which struck it down. Apparently Jewish Strayer failed in America; he then came to Canada and overthrew our lawful Constitution in conspiracy with Trudeau, Scott and others. Part of Strayer’s education (at Oxford) was funded by a Mackenzie-King traveling scholarship, which is none other than a J.D. Rockefeller endowment. That’s the fellow who called in the U.S. National Guard to shoot his own striking employees who were paid subsistence and treated like slaves.
Page 79 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
depict the considerable role — read: ‘the excessive role’ — of the clergy in the province of Quebec. The advertizing banner which wraps the review sums up the general tendency extremely well: “from theocracy to freedom”. French Canada is a theocracy whose evolution towards freedom the French review Esprit proposes to hasten — why is it meddling?
Here is how Abbot Desrosiers evaluates the special issue of Esprit in Nos Cours (May 2nd, 1953):
Last year, a French review, Esprit, bore a massive criticism against the religious hierarchy and national institutions of our province. It contained a series of articles written mainly by this team of young French Canadians who tend towards the left, often exceed the limits of the truth, are sometimes given to rationalism and, in the last few years have busied themselves with launching gibes against the Church, under the pretext of reforming it.
In light of this, we have been profoundly injured. We wondered how it could be that a French review could permit the French-Canadian people to be so wrongfully attacked in its pages, from the religious and national points of view…
The Council of French Life in America, which assembles leaders — patriots — without
Page 80 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
regard for political allegiance, replies indirectly to Esprit, with a firm declaration of principles.
With its reek of scandal, the special issue of Esprit contributed nonetheless to the launching of a certain Cité Libre*. Le Devoir put its shoulder to the wheel. Rationalism and Marxism are the basic tendencies which orient — unconsciously, perhaps, in certain cases? — the writers of Cité Libre. As to the form, these young people readily assume the anticlerical vocabulary, which though passé in France, at one time flourished in the columns of L’Autorité, Jour and Haut-Parleur**. All of which captivates the most francophobe and the most anticatholic of the Anglo-Saxon element — milieux which always scorned, vilified and fought the French Canadians. The American magazine, Time, of January 19th, 1953, devotes a column to the writers of Cité Libre “who have not hesitated to call into question the powerful influence of the clergy upon the life of the province of Quebec”. A Cité Libre writer, Gérard Pelletier, speaking of the professors’ strike in Montreal, declares without hesitation to the Time correspondent: “Make no mistake about it, the Archbishop made an error.” No better way was known to fill a review like Time. The old readers of Le Devoir know how prompt and valiant was their newspaper, in former times, to respond to articles, announcements and insinuations of Time and others (such as) Life, unpleasant for the province of Quebec. They can no longer expect
**We can see here that whoever was behind the crypto-communist Esprit, and the massive financing used to launch it, Esprit in turn was behind Trudeau and Pelletier’s Cité Libre.
**Haut-Parleur – “Loud Speaker” or “Speak Up”
Page 81 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
so much. The vocabulary borrowed by Cité Libre from Le Jour has in part become that of Le Devoir!
But, authoritative voices expressed keen concern. Relations of November 1952 devoted an article, moderated in tone and all the stronger for that, to the “problem of anticlericalism in French Canada”. Father Richard Ares names Le Devoir, Esprit and Cité Libre. He quotes a pastoral letter of the episcopate of our province (February 1950) warning against an attitude “which would serve Communism and not the Church”. And he asks: “Would it be rash to apply the present text even to the young people whose claims have been heard in Cité Libre and Esprit?”
Abbot J.- B. Desrosiers, a Sulpician, is very formal in the Nos Cours of February 14th, 1953:
Currently, in our province, certain extremely queer things are being written in certain reviews and in certain newspapers and are being said on the airwaves. Civil and religious authority is presented as dictatorial and the enemy of true culture. Since the whole of the population has not yet revolted, it is accused of worshipping idols for authority and a dreadful evil is exposed, called conformism.
For the most advanced among them — because there are some that are pretty advanced — it is the Catholic religion, too generalized in our province, which obstructs true culture. This idea
Page 82 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
is manifest in one passage, among others, of Cité Libre…
Those who make such remarks are anticlericals, that’s obvious, even if they still hold truck with certain clerics. It is no less obvious that they wage a fierce battle against the Church; but they make a point of remaining inside the Christian city, and proclaim that they are working to reform* it…
His Eminence Cardinal Léger, himself, warns in a speech delivered in the Basilica at Quebec on February 10th:
While the Pope calls us to heroism and in twenty countries of the world the children of God suffer and undergo martyrdom simply for affirming their faith, here, Catholics attack the Church and its clergy. According to them, we are the cause of the ignorance of our people and our pastoral and sacerdotal action is a tyranny. We require our faithful to venerate our decisions, while the poor find the doors of our presbyteries barricaded by a gutless administration. These remarks which we can without fear of error qualify as pure calumnies are developing in our milieux an unhealthy anticlericalism, which detaches souls from the Church in an hour when all energies should be united and placed into the hands of the head of the Church.
|Translator’s note: “working to reform” — that’s the famous word used in Canada to hide the fact they are overthrowing the Constitution — they pretend they are “reforming” it, when in fact, they are “destroying” it. In constitutional law of Canada — the real law, not the fictitious substitute imposed since the REDS went to work — there is no such thing as constitutional “reform”. The lawful Constitution of 1867 is a permanent, infinite entity that once emancipated from its colonial parent (1931) cannot be removed or replaced. There is no room for the word “reform” in our constitutional law and literature. It has been introduced by REDS and Rhodes Scholars to hide the fact they are perpetrating high treason. A similar word they also like to use is “renew”, i.e., “constitutional renewal”. However, they really mean “coup d’état”, “overthrow”.|
Page 83 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
Le Devoir continues unabated its intensive propaganda for Esprit and Cité Libre. Every issue of Cité Libre is announced, hailed and acclaimed in the columns of Le Devoir. I said above that Le Foyer, the family supplement of Le Devoir, took note of three reviews, including Esprit and Cité Libre, in its issue of June 4th, 1955. Esprit, “is the hammer blow which awakens us”. And Cité Libre “says things of importance at a time when they must be known, raises questions today which any well thinking French Canadian will be obliged to take into account again, one day or another”. The literary page of Le Devoir of November 19th current, presents in a very obvious frame, a free advertisement for the new issue of Cité Libre. And so on. Le Devoir of June 9th, 1956, for example, contains a long commentary on an issue of Cité Libre and an article on Emmanuel Mounier, founder of Esprit. Neither Esprit nor Cité Libre has changed in the meantime. The December 1955 issue of Cité Libre primarily attacks “clerico-nationalist ideology”.
The complete network
Le Devoir, Esprit and Cité Libre — the daily newspaper, the French review and the Canadian review — form a trio. This alliance was transformed into a quartet when Jacques Hébert founded a weekly magazine entitled Vrai, by antiphrasis. Vrai seems to be staunchly supported by Pierre Desmarais,
Page 84 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
President of the Executive Committee of Montreal City Council. He systematically combats the provincial administration and systematically supports the municipal administration. He wages a guerilla war against all those who resist the leftist slant. A weekly, adopting the format of the “sensationalist” tabloids, may attain a passion and even take risks hardly accessible to a daily which is still followed by a traditionalist clientèle. Vrai will do a job which the people of Le Devoir dare not carry out themselves. The collaborators of Vrai, like those of Cité Libre, are or were the collaborators of Le Devoir. We mean Gilles Marcotte and Gérard Pelletier. Vrai is printed by the printer of Le Devoir. The leftist movement in French Canada thus possesses a full range of publications: a daily, a weekly, a magazine, all quite tightly intertwined.
Now, pedagogical bodies are needed, susceptible of influencing public opinion via conferences, points of view, radio broadcasts, etc. Leon Lortie is tasked with so equipping the leftist movement.
Leon Lortie is viewed as “the eye” of the Liberal party at the University of Montreal. “The Liberal party is on the left”, wrote Edmond Turcotte in Le Canada, the party newspaper, on June 10th, 1935. There remains a multitude of good people whom family tradition or discomfiture with the conservative party retain in the Liberal party, without their taking the trouble to scan the
Page 85 E
AU CANADA FRANÇAIS
deep tendencies. A close examination makes it impossible to share their illusion. Edmond Turcotte has formally warned us: “The Liberal party is on the left.”
Leon Lortie founded the Institut canadien des Affaires publiques (Canadian Institute of Public Affairs) in May, 1953.
“Institut Canadien”: this commencement of the organization’s name will tell something to those who know the history of the Province well*. The Institut canadien des Affaires publiques assembles intellectuals of the left. One meets there the personnel we already know: André Laurendeau, Gérard Filion, Gérard Pelletier, Pierre-Elliott Trudeau, Jean-Louis Gagnon, etc. The Institut canadien des Affaires publiques organizes a few days of annual conferences and discussion. It invites a French personality of the left — Hubert Beuve-Méry, director of Monde, to the first meeting, Irénée Marrou, the liaison officer between Esprit and Cité Libre, to the meeting of 1956 — and, to create the illusion of impartiality, a very small number of more or less neutral Canadians, deemed to be unoffending, submerged in a mass of leftists. Le Devoir comments on the palaver of the Institut canadien des Affaires publiques as if it were a capital affair. It adds “notes” to the reports.
However, here is how a witness whom partisan passion does not blind — Paul-Emile Gingras — described the “climate” of the sittings of the Institut canadien des Affaires publiques held at Saint-Adèle at the end of September 1956: “An abusive aggressiveness
|* Translator’s note: Luckily, I have read the Debates on Confederation of 1865, where it is duly noted by Attorney-General George Etienne Cartier, speaking in the Legislative Assembly of the old Province of Canada on Tuesday, February 7, 1865 (at p. 56) that “the papers lately contained a report of a meeting at the Institut Canadien of Montreal, where it was resolved that it was for the interests of Lower Canada — in the interests of French Canadians, were the province to become a part of the American Union.” And then, a sentence or two later:
“HON. MR. DORION said that was not the case. The honorable gentleman had misquoted what had passed there.
HON. MR. CARTIER said he was right. If resolutions were not passed, sentiments were expressed to that effect. Then the organ of the Institute — L’Ordre, he thought — had set forth that the interests of Lower Canada would be better served by annexation to the United States than entering into a Confederation with the British American Provinces. It was no wonder, then, that the French Canadian annexationists betrayed their purpose in opposition to British North American Confederation, and that their English-speaking colleagues pretended a fear of the rights of their class being jeopardized under Confederation. We knew their object in this — that they were aware that as soon as this project was adopted [Confederation], there would be no avail in any cry of separation to form a part of the American Union. (Hear, hear,)”
As we have just seen, Leftist Léon Lortie’s “Institut canadien” is named for the meeting place of the old annexationists, pre-Confederation. Is Rumilly guessing, or does he know that these Communists and pro-Soviets whose infiltration he is exposing, will attempt to merge Canada into the USA and Mexico in the decades to come? And they will do it by seizing control of Quebec to demand that all of Canada adopt the regional system, or Quebec will “leave”.
Rumilly’s Leftists have taken the old name of that meeting place for their new organization, aimed not at annexing Quebec to the Republic, but undoubtedly at forming a Communist regional union in North America, modeled on that being pushed in Europe by the crypto-communist magazine, Esprit. Rumilly in this pair of books does not write about the regionalizing activities or “federalizing” activities of Esprit in Europe, but that is what Esprit is doing in Europe. It is pushing federalization of the ancient nations: in other words, it is eliminating them. Over fifty years after the Coal and Steel treaties, and the Treaty of Rome, a Soviet-style politburo will almost be in place; and academics such as John Fonte will begin to call Marxist, federal Europe “post-democratic”.
However, good reader, the aims of the “Institut” were thwarted in 1867 by Confederation; as they will be again!
Page 86 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
permeated a good number of interventions. The feeling more than the idea often reigned over the turbulence…” And, more grave:
More serious however, in this general climate, a certain oneness of spirit in the attack upon established order, traditional values, a unity “against”. Against nationalism, since, in modern democracy, man is a citizen of the world*. Against the clergy, its inefficient representatives in education: bishops of the Committee of public education. Brothers and Sisters with clear ideas that they continue to impose on the children, priests deformed by a dogmatic theology!** Against parents inapt to judge the aptitudes of their children or incompetent to choose for them the institutions appropriate for them***. Against the inefficient, inert, corrupted political authority…
Paul-Émile Gingras notes that the Institut canadien des Affaires publiques, including a good number of professors and discussing the problems of education, exhibits a “negativist spirit, clearly trumping the competence to discuss problems of education”. We will add: it sows one of those storms which harvests the whirlwind.
Finally the “Rassemblement” [“Gathering”] is formed, which Le Devoir announces as “a new political movement” and which Vrai acclaims as “a political bomb”, although by Autumn of 1956, the organizers deny they are creating a political party.
|* Translator’s notes:
* Pierre-Elliott Trudeau’s future biography will be entitled “Citizen of the World”. (By John English, a Trudeau fellow traveller in the “Royal Institute of International Affairs” in Canada.
** In 1965, the Marxists in power will take back Quebec’s constitutional power over Education, which has been left with the Catholic Church since 1875. Sherbrooke University at its web site notes that in the mid 1960s in Quebec, a popularized form of Marxism began to be taught in the schools. Teachers from France were imported for the purpose. In addition, I would observe that the communist goal of “multiculturalism” — the merging of the world’s populations to remove national boundaries, could not have been done in French Catholic Quebec, where the only alternative public educational system was the Protestant School Board. The confessional school system, and in particular the Catholic educational system designed to preserve traditional French-Canadian culture, was thus a total barrier to mass immigration of 200+ foreign peoples onto Quebec soil to create de facto multiculturalism. That barrier went when the Marxists took Quebec, and using tactics perfected by Esprit in France, invaded the Catholic Church and government, and took down both from within.
*** Jacques Parizeau’s first wife, a Pole, will write for Cité Libre. One of her articles recommends routine State inspections of family homes to verify parents’ child-rearing capabilities.
Page 87 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
The Rassemblement, presided over by Pierre Dansereau, comprises the usual team: André Laurendeau, Jacques Hébert, Gérard Pelletier, Pierre-Elliott Trudeau and so on. At first sight, the Rassemblement and the Institut canadien des Affaires publiques are doing double duty. In fact, they are complementary, they help one another. Pierre Dansereau, president of the Rassemblement, becomes vice-president of the Institut canadien.
At the opera, to produce a crowd scene, the director has the same cast parade by the audience several times. Is that the aim of the members of the Institut Canadien when they also form the Rassemblement? If the Institut canadien des Affaires publiques and the Rassemblement protest, as if by chance, at the same time, to the same end, in a given situation, a bigger effect will be produced than if the team of Lortie-Laurendeau-Filion-Hébert-Pelletier-Trudeau had just one group.
The fact remains that here is our network, almost complete: Le Devoir, Cité Libre, Vrai, l’Institut canadien des Affaires publiques and the Rassemblement.
Apart from Le Devoir, which owes what remains of its prestige to a tradition it disavows, all seems grey and flat; after all, financial means are limited. The intervention of a powerful organization — powerful because it lays out taxpayers’ cash — will provide substantial aid to the ring.
Page 88 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
Opinion is manufactured, today, like automobile parts, in series. Every press agent, and even more, every propaganda agent, knows the influence of skillfully biased programming. The leftists know it.
Itinéraires, the review which is fighting the leftist movement in France, writes in its issue of July-August 1956:
The cinema and especially radio are among the fields where penetration and colonization by Communists is most advanced, and where they have the greatest consequences upon morals and policies.
In Canada, the Liberal party, on the left, as acknowledged by Edmond Turcotte, always had an advanced wing, a radical wing enjoying a dominating influence within the party. The Liberals’ press was entrusted successively to Honoré Beaugrand, Godefroy Langlois, Jean-Charles Harvey, Edmond Turcotte and today, to Jean-Louis Gagnon*. Radio and film having become equally powerful instruments of action, in fact more powerful than the press, the Liberal party, with its grip on the federal State, has stuffed the Film Board and Radio-Canada with leftists.
When the federal government created the National Film Board, in Ottawa, it entrusted it to John Grierson, English from England, whose radical sympathies, to say the least, were quite advanced. So advanced that, in the business
|*Translator’s note: Jean-Louis Gagnon is exposed by American author Allan Stang in CANADA – How The Communists Took Control (April 1971). Gagnon was a Soviet spy who my further reading shows, fled Canada to Brazil with the help of (future) Trudeau advisor Mitchell Sharp, to avoid the trials taking place after the Gouzenko spy-ring revelations of September 1945.|
Page 89 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
of espionage, a number of John Grierson’s friends, commencing with his own secretary, Freda Linton, whose real name was Freda Lipschitz (a Polish Jew), were charged. Even John Grierson’s name is mentioned at page 486 of the commission of inquiry’s report.
As I am writing this, a federally appointed Commission of inquiry is underway on radio broadcasting. The French-Canadian commissioner is none other than Edmond Turcotte, friend of the Reds in Spain — and everywhere. Edmond Turcotte has no particular expertise on the subject of radio, but his Redness is guaranteed. Jean-Louis Gagnon, who must recognize himself herein, asked him in an open letter in 1936: “Why do you continue to write for a bourgeois rag when you are frankly communist?” (La Nation, May 7th, 1936). I beg my readers to weigh this fact: the Liberal party has always given its press, and then its film and radio, which is to say the instruments capable of forming opinion, to radicals, to the most advanced Reds one could find in the country.
The leftists of Radio-Canada form a “family compact” monopolizing the butter dish and leaving not a crumb to others. At any hour of the day, the listener or the viewer hears or sees the same participants, emcees and commentators, and the same guests, members of a very closed brotherhood. Nonetheless, the brotherhood has opened its ranks to our leftists from the team of Le Devoir–Cité
Page 90 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
Libre–Vrai–Institut canadien des Affaires publiques–Rassemblement.
And to begin, the pilgrims of Communist Poland, China or Russia were welcomed, exhibited, celebrated, adopted by Radio-Canada — by television in particular. It is sufficient to have been the guest of a Communist government to be invited and re-invited to the microphones of Radio-Canada.
On Communist accomplishments in Poland, Jacques Hébert gave a televised interview which caused a scandal (12 December 1955). Catholic newspapers protested. Polish Catholic refugees in Canada — including journalists, professors, former ministers, former ambassadors — demanded equal time from Radio-Canada for their side of the story. They were endorsed by a vigorous wave of opinion. Léopold Richer asked, in Notre Temps — at that time published by a corporation controled by the Fathers of the Holy Cross : “When are we going to hear Polish Catholics on the television?” Radio-Canada had no choice but to organize a press conference for Mr. André Ruskowski, Secretary General of the International Catholic Office of Cinema to be heard.
However, one cannot raise a wave of protest after every broadcast. Furthermore, Jacques Hébert has remained one of the favorite guests of Radio-Canada. It was the same with Gérard Filion as soon as he was back from his trip to China. The director of Le Devoir became an overnight star
Page 91 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
at Radio-Canada. And Jean Vincent had the same favour in the same way.
I will insert an anecdote. My readers understand that I do not attack people, but their actions, their harmful ideas. Among the journalists, the intellectuals and the radio presenters named here are men whom I know, others I have never met. There are those with whom I have had courteous dealings. Some of them may be as sincere as I am. It is their ideas, once again, which must be denounced and combatted. But it is quite necessary to name the people who propagate these ideas. I do so without hatred, without animosity even, and in several cases with real sorrow at the thought of the talents that a disastrous current is drawing into the service of evil. One will not find here the counterpart of words employed by Gérard Filion in connection to me and with regard to the other defenders of French-Canadian traditions. Certain behaviours have no currency among us.
So, we were mentioning Jean Vincent, the young senior editor of L’Autorité, a radical sheet. Jean Vincent returns from a trip to China and to Moscow. (At whose expense? L’Autorité is a paper with no circulation.) Radio-Canada immediately invites him to give a televised press conference (February 25th, 1955). Jean-Louis Gagnon, as if by chance, directs the show; and Jean Vincent exhibits a very clear general inclination in favor of the communist countries. That is enough to launch Jean Vincent onto Radio-Canada’s circuit.
Page 92 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
Television is, by way of certain of its programs — Carrefour, Conférence de presse, Les idées en marche [Ideas on the move], amongst others — a veritable public university. At certain hours, it reaches nearly half a million French-Canadian viewers. However, draw up a list of the most tenacious participants. You will record Gérard Pelletier, André Laurendeau, Gérard Filion, Jean-Louis Gagnon, Jean-Marc Léger, Pierre-Elliott Trudeau, etc.
Men of the right are the majority among the French Canadians, as among the French Catholics. However, count the appearances of men of the right and those of men of the left on Radio-Canada, and compare! One of the principal leftists at Le Devoir, Gilles Marcotte, feels obliged to resign at the time of the strike (or the lockout). Radio-Canada fishes him out at once, and makes him director of cultural programming. Gérard Pelletier directs the show “Les idées en marche”. The appointed commentators are leftists — and some of them are quite advanced — practically, the lot.
Radio-Canada sends Laurendeau on a journey into Ontario and the West in the Fall of 1955, and the Film Board sends Gérard Pelletier on a mission to Europe in the summer of 1956. The teams of Le Devoir, Vrai, Cité Libre and Travail — organ of the Confederation of Catholic Workers upon which Gérard Pelletier stamps a leftist imprint — are taken aboard, to a man or nearly to a man, the tills of Radio-Canada. And so it goes, at the expense of
Page 93 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
taxpayers: cash-cows, prestige and the means of propaganda.
Question: Would Radio-Canada offer so much encouragement and so much cash to Laurendeau and Filion had Le Devoir remained the nationalist newspaper of Henri Bourassa and Georges Pelletier?
More cynical still. The annual meetings of the Institut canadien des Affaires publiques are organized with the assistance, both moral and financial, of Radio-Canada. It is with the money of Radio-Canada, i.e. with the money of all the taxpayers, that Léon Lortie, Gérard Pelletier, André Laurendeau, Jean-Louis Gagnon, Pierre-Elliott Trudeau and their friends can indoctrinate the public!
Finally, the Rassemblement has barely been created when Radio-Canada invites its president onto the television — and gives this leftist movement brilliant publicity. My friends and I, eager to set up a dam, to the extent we can, have created the Centre d’Information Nationale (the National Information Center), and have requested the same favour from Radio-Canada. Our strict right as citizens, as taxpayers. It was very difficult not to grant our request: and it was granted. A grouping on the right may obtain the small allotment sufficient and necessary to make it possible for Radio-Canada to pretend impartiality: “But, you as well, we invited you, too.” Noone imagines Radio-Canada financing the study days of the Centre d’Information Nationale.
The same mischief is evident in the interviews offered
Page 94 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
to foreign visitors. Albert Béguin, director of Esprit***, is not able to come to Canada unless Radio-Canada runs after him. Its latest press conference, managed by René Lévesque*, brings together Gérard Pelletier and Jean-Marc Léger at his side. At the same time, a rather eminent French Catholic, since he is the private chamberlain of His Holiness, and even vice-president of the French chamberlains, was also in the province of Quebec. Radio-Canada could not fail to know it, as Mr. de La Franquerie had given conferences, and reports had been published in the press. The friend who had organized the trip of de la Franquerie had moreover, some time in advance, solicited the director of programming of Radio-Canada. Radio-Canada had no time available for him. Radio-Canada had time for Mr. Béguin, a Catholic of the left, but not for Mr. de La Franquerie, a Catholic of the right.
It does occur that a man of the right is invited onto the television, but he is carefully flanked by two men of the left. And as the show host himself is a leftist, the man of the right runs every risk of being neglected, isolated, cut off, outclassed. Not to mention that the leftists thus acquire a facility, a real proficiency in television, the occasion for which is denied to others.
Practically every discussion, practically every conclusion, is thus directed to the left.
|*Translator’s note: René Lévesque is a communist; his father raised him as a communist.|
|Translator’s note: Allan Stang in 1971 would call it “The Ring in Operation”, and frankly, so would I. But I’m trying to adopt Mr. Rumilly’s language and his style at the time.|
Page 97 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
Generally, our young leftists conceived the idea of taking over from the inside a collection of groups or organizations nationalist in tendency. With Le Devoir, they already possessed a newspaper, nationalist in tradition. Jean-Marc Léger seemed to be the lynchpin of the “Action Nationale” operation. André Laurendeau largely facilitated his job for him. Initially, it was thought to await the death of Canon Groulx, whose influence remained dominating. Then they would storm in and take over. A significant number of directors of L’Action Nationale rarely if ever attended the meetings. I could name one director capable of blocking the leftist takeover, to whom meeting notices — through oversight, no doubt! — were not always sent. Lastly, meetings were often held at André Laurendeau’s house, which added weight to this director, the host of his colleagues. In short, they would bring in young directors from the Cité Libre group, a number of whom had no claim to be there — no claim but their leftism. In the end, the leftists would be the most persevering and active at meetings, if not the most numerous in theoretical strength. L’Action Nationale was for all intents hijacked.
André Laurendeau managed the monthly review which was the group’s mouthpiece. He welcomed to its pages the prose of his leftist colleagues, who shamelessly expressed their theories and attacked the adversaries of leftism in a review founded for an entirely
|Translator’s note: André Laurendeau‘s is an extremely important name, which Rumilly in 1956 has allowed us to add to the list provided by Allan Stang in 1971. André Laurendeau is so far Left that during the so-called “Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism” on which he sits (a sham commission stuffed with Reds hidden in plain view behind one Catholic priest chosen for that effect), Laurendeau is hosting in his home basement none other than two “former” men of Cité Libre, Pierre Vallières and Charles Gagnon, who will imminently become the well known leaders of the F.L.Q. terrorists who started their bombing campaign in early 1963 in Montreal. The two are launching an ultra-radical Marxist sheet in Laurendeau’s basement, to which Laurendeau’s son and a couple of La Presse newspaper journalists under pseudonyms will contribute articles. Laurendeau is an Editor of Le Devoir, a formerly French-Canadian nationalist publication, taken over by a leftist ownership; thus, we have two contaminated major Quebec daily newspapers at the time the Marxist FLQ terror is going on! Vallières and Gagnon both worked at Trudeau’s Cité Libre; in fact, they met there. Both men leave Cité Libre to lead the FLQ; my suspicion is that their mission was to re-orient the FLQ towards acceptance of René Lévesque’s plan for Canada, “Sovereignty Association”, which is not Quebec “sovereignty”, but is actually the intended basis of regional union, the North American Union. In any event, the far-left Laurendeau is fraternizing with “future” terrorist leaders while sitting on a sham “royal commission” appointed by none other than soviet spy, (de facto) Prime Minister Lester Bowles Pearson. There is thus a direct channel open between Pearson and the “future” terrorist leaders, through the royal commission. Which is not to say it’s the only channel; but merely to illustrate the level of Communist contamination at Canada’s federal level while “terrorism” was loose in Quebec, seeking “secession” which was really a front for “negotiating” the top-half of the continental North American Union with the “rest of Canada”. These tight links do suggest that Lester Pearson and the leftists were in a position to orchestrate “designer” terrorism to suit their own political objectives.|
Page 98 E
THE LEFTIST INFILTRATION
different purpose — to defend the rights of the French Canadians. When Father Braun denounced Pierre-Elliott Trudeau, after his voyages behind the iron curtain, André Laurendeau precipitated the Action Nationale to the rescue of Trudeau. Two articles were devoted to this task. Two articles impassioned in tone. But, let’s not discuss the respective texts of Trudeau and Father Braun. Let us only note that Trudeau did not publish his articles in the Action Nationale and is not a member of the National Action League. Where is the very pressing need for the Action Nationale to rush to his defense? The reader will pardon me for taking myself as an example, but I believe this is valid: if I were at odds, or if any other Canadian who shared my opinions was at odds with Father Braun or with any other adversary, would André Laurendeau mobilize the Action Nationale for our defense, even if we were right, ten times over? Even though we, my friends and I, are, in contrast, faithful to the nationalist tradition that the Action Nationale has for so long defended, in fact personified!
Trudeau had just published in the last issue of Cité Libre an article whose Marxist inspiration and anti-French-Canadian tendency were apparent to the naked eye. Has not the Action Nationale launched itself out of its traditional path — on a very divergent route from its traditional path? Let us say it: the directors of the review committed a breach of trust with respect to the other
Page 99 E
IN FRENCH CANADA
members of the National Action League, which name appears — like a guarantor — on the cover of the review and who, though given no notice, appeared to endorse their gesture. The situation is even more grave when one touches on principles, as if Jean-Marc Léger has none. Jean-Marc Léger in the Action Nationale expresses the hope to see emerging “a socialist State of Quebec”*, even if, to attain it, it is necessary to run up “against the combined forces of cowardice, political incorrectness, clericalism and treason, with the forces of darkness acting under the banner of prudence and realism”. Fernand Dansereau justifies class consciousness, in short, he recommends class struggle. He glorifies a march on Quebec organized by the trade union federations, as “a net appeal to class consciousness”. “For the first time,” he says, elated, “in the history of the province, a crowd composed only of workers took to the street contrary to the liking of police”.
Athanase Fréchette and Anatole Vanier, members of the Action Nationale, protest in vain to their colleagues (at the end of May, 1954). The leftist clan shoves Jean-Marc Léger into the League secretariat. With Jean-Marc Léger in the secretariat and Laurendeau in the review, the clan is the master of the Action Nationale, even if they do not account for the majority of its members. And they use it. By the indelicacy of this team, directors continue to seem to be united behind articles and campaigns of which they do not approve. Léopold Richer, director of
|* In fact, the Parti Québécois, led by René Lévesque, but in fact set up at the instigation of Trudeau, Pelletier and other leftists of the Pearson federal government, in a secret committee of Power Corporation of Canada in Montreal in 1967, published its “manifesto” in 1972. The document, produced in French only, with not even an English draft in official archives, proposed a totalitarian government to run the economy, centralized production, the virtual obliteration of private business, and a self-managed work-force, all on the model of what Charles Perrault, then of the Conseil du patronat identified as the kind found in “socialist countries” such as Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and Poland. I have a 13-minute radio show in which Perrault makes that statement; I’m translating the show. I will eventually make a copy of that translation and the Parti Québécois’s “communist manifesto” available. It was with this form of government in mind that Lévesque planned to link up to Canada in common supranational institutions, on the model of the European Economic Community, and then the European Union. The merger of the “rest of Canada” and communist Quebec through common institutions on the EEC-EU model, would have created the top half of a continental, regional union. We’re seeing that union emerge today after 9/11, as the North American Union. Pauline Marois is the current leader of the Parti Québécois, who is now a billionaire, was in René Lévesque’s cabinet in 1976, intending to implement this “communist manifesto” after a Yes in a referendum. Since at least 2007, Marois keeps saying in French that Quebec is going to become an “état social”. I would suspect this is her deceptive way of saying an “état socialiste”.|
/ translation ends here. Sorry!
Stay tuned. I will let you know when the whole book is ready. Meanwhile, you may enjoy a few words about Robert Rumilly, his views on socialism, and his personal background.
Robert Rumilly, 1897-1983
Born in Martinique, educated in Indo-China and in France, Robert Rumilly was the first to traverse many distances in the history of Canada. A particularly active and energetic historian, he left a major body of work, including his voluminous Histoire de la province de Québec. Robert Rumilly also published biographies of Louis-Joseph Papineau, Maurice Duplessis and Honore Mercier. His biography of Henri Bourassa remains unequalled to date.
— Based on the French biographical note on the back cover of Robert Rumilly’s book, Henri Bourassa
Rumilly speaks on the subject of his book :
I knew the harm these concepts and these divisions created in France. I wanted to spare French Canada, my adoptive homeland of 30 years, which I love passionately, from this harm. I wrote and published “The Leftist Infiltration of French Canada” (L’Infiltration gauchiste au Canada français) expressly to denounce the introduction to French Canada of the French concepts of right and left and the atmosphere of civil war which they created. I invite all the skeptics to read this little book. They will note that from one end to another I do nothing but deplore and combat the importation, by the leftists, of an execrable French influence.
Rumilly on Nationalism versus Communism:
Nationalism is a nuance, or if you wish, a complement of patriotism. The virtue of patriotism is the attachment to one’s native soil, to the land of the ancestors. Nationalism embraces rather the moral and spiritual heritage; it is sooner the attachment to men, our brothers, with whom we share this heritage. It is the family spirit extended to the nation. It is superfluous to show that nationalism does not imply any hostility towards the other human groups — any more than family spirit leads to hatred of the neighbouring families. It implies only a distinct, preferred love.
However, the Left seeks to substitute class consciousness for national spirit.
– Robert Rumilly, writing in his L’infiltration Gauchiste Au Canada Français, 1956, p. 114-115 (The Leftist Infiltration of French Canada).
But it was necessary that, from the core of abstraction to which it had led human elites, intelligence drew the conclusion of its own limit. There is its perfect triumph. There is the lesson of Marx and of Lenin:
By systematically giving power to the workers and peasants, one eliminates little by little the middle-class intellectual, that king of the artificial and abstract world in the midst of which we live – we, the civilized. In reserving to them, in preference over all others, the rights to education, social welfare, and then management of the community, one yields to them, little by little, science and civilization.
That inevitably from this, a period of stoppage, of backwardness and regression follows, is in our view of no importance.
The goal is achieved; the heritage of humanity passes into other hands.
– Jean Sylveire, writing in “Communism devant l’Occident — Contre ?” (Communism confronting the West — Against?) in the the first issue of the French cryptocommunist review Esprit, published in France in October 1932.
Table of Contents
Mr. Rumilly’s volume, The Leftist Infiltration in French Canada contains no Table of Contents. I have therefore compiled one for convenience.
Nota bene: As of 5 January 2014, I have translated two chapters. I’ve done Chapter I, «The Catholics of the Left in France”, which gives you the background to Esprit, a pro-Soviet, crypto-communist, “left Catholic” magazine in France which Pierre Trudeau and his colleague Gérard Pelletier and others decided to emulate in Canada by founding Cité Libre in 1950.
And I have done chapter III, “The Leftist Network“, in which Rumilly lines up the key groups, newspapers, and organizations founded or co-opted by the pro-Communist ring, which includes André Laurendeau, and a cast of others.
I – The”Catholics of the Left” in France (p. 9)
(i) “Catholics of the Left” and Communists (p. 10)
(ii) The Review Esprit (p. 16)
(iii) The Result (p. 23)
II – Where is “Le Devoir” Heading? (p. 30)
(i) The Anti-Duplessis Phobia (p. 31)
(ii) Toward Class Struggle (p. 43)
(iii) An Exception (p. 52)
(iv) Pilgrims of Moscow (p. 54)
(v) Le Devoir and the Review Esprit (p. 62)
III – The Leftist Network (p. 75)
(i) Cité Libre (p. 76)
(ii) The Network is Completed (p. 83)
(iii) Radio-Canada (p. 88)
IV – The Network in Operation (p. 96)
(i) The Action Nationale Besieged (p. 96)
(ii) Bagging the A.C.J.C. (p. 102)
(iii) A University Within the University (p. 106)
(iv) The Confederation of Political Workers of Canada (p. 108)
V – Where is the Leftist Movement Heading? (p. 114)
(i) Nationalists of the Left? (p. 114)
(ii) Antinationalists (p. 122)
(iii) Toward the Social-Democratic Party (p. 125)
(iv) A Popular Front in Quebec? (p. 130)
VI – Conclusion ( p. 133)
(i) Leftism Pays (p. 134)
(ii) Where is the Fear? (p. 136)
(iii) The Role of the Professors (p. 138)
(iv) The Question of Federal Aid (p. 139)
(v) A Lost Generation? (p. 143)