Anti-Fascist Canadians Were Criminalized

From: The Marxist-Leninist Daily

- Dougal MacDonald -

July 18, 2011, marked the 75th anniversary of the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War, fought between the people's forces or Republicans who had been elected to govern, and the fascist "Nationalist" forces, led militarily by General Francisco Franco (see TML, July 16, 2011). Franco was openly assisted militarily and financially by Nazi Germany and fascist Italy. The people's forces were aided by anti-fascist volunteers from all over the world, including Canadians of the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion of the XVth International Brigade of the Spanish Republican Army. Battalion members came from all parts of Canada and were almost wholly working class. About one-third were of Ukrainian origin. 1,546 people volunteered to go, including Dr. Norman Bethune, a communist medical doctor from Montreal who invented the mobile blood unit on the Spanish battlefield, and died helping the wounded in 1939 near the end of the Anti-Japanese Anti-Fascist War led by the Communist Party of China. The Mac-Pap volunteers felt that they had to defy their government's unjust law in order to stand up against fascism in Spain and defend the rights of the peoples of the world.

While the Canadian people supported the anti-fascist forces in Spain in both words and deeds, the Canadian ruling circles supported the fascist forces by declaring Canada's "neutrality". In April 1937, the Mackenzie King Liberal government passed the Foreign Enlistment Act, based on the British Imperial Foreign Enlist Act [1870] which extended to all Dominions. The 1937 Act stipulates that it is an "Offence to enlist with a foreign state at war with a friendly state" and that "any person who, being a Canadian national, within or outside Canada, voluntarily accepts or agrees to accept any commission or engagement in the armed forces of any foreign state at war with any friendly foreign state or, whether a Canadian national or not, within Canada, induces any other person to accept or agree to accept any commission or engagement in any such armed forces is guilty of an offence." In practice, the declaration of "neutrality" by Canada, the United Kingdom, France, the United States, and other countries gave the Franco forces free rein to more viciously attack the Spanish people and set the stage for the Nazi invasion of Europe.

The two main internal forces for "neutrality" in Canada were the Canadian industrialists who had financial interests in Spain, such as the Barcelona Traction electrical utility (later taken over by Franco's multimillionaire backer, Juan March), and the reactionary hierarchy of the Catholic Church which was a major landowner in Spain. In passing the Foreign Enlistment Act in 1937, the King government was also kowtowing to their old masters in Britain and their new masters in the United States,[1] both of whom had also pushed through "neutrality" legislation. Both the UK and U.S. had big investments in Spain and profited directly from supporting Franco.[2] Mackenzie King was also a rabid anti-communist, a fascist sympathizer who praised Mussolini, and an admirer of Hitler. He visited Germany in June 1937 and stated in a memorandum that he was "very favorably impressed" by Hitler's assurances that Germany would not go to war in Europe, even as Nazi Germany had thousands of men and tons of war material already engaged in Spain on behalf of General Franco.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines neutrality as "the state of not supporting or helping either side in a conflict, disagreement, etc.; impartiality." In practice, however, those capitalist governments who declare neutrality in words do not act neutrally and do not enforce neutrality in deeds. Instead they do whatever is profitable. Switzerland declared "neutrality" during the Second World War, but the Swiss banks were a haven for Nazi plunder. Sweden also declared neutrality during the Second World War, but SKF, a monopoly owned by Sweden's leading finance capitalist, Marcus Wallenberg, provided the Nazis with a reliable supply of ball bearings crucial to waging aggressive war. As a result, the financial oligarchies in both Switzerland and Sweden emerged from the war with huge increases in their wealth. Similarly, during the Spanish Civil War, the declaration of "neutrality" by the King government was totally phony because in practice everything was done to try to protect the profits of the monopolies, while nothing was done to oppose Franco's forces.

Canada's Foreign Enlistment Act made the anti-fascist workers' volunteering to fight against fascism in Spain into a criminal act, to be punished immediately with jail terms and to be punished for generations after by denial of any claim of pensionable military service. The passports of the 1,300 Canadian volunteers were confiscated and the RCMP opposed their re-entry into Canada. Only 646 ever returned. Far from acclaiming these true working class heroes for resisting fascism, the Canadian government and media of the day demonized their political motivations and beliefs. The ruling circles supported the fascists, just as they do today, while criminalizing the anti-fascists, just as they do today. Julio Alvarez del Vayo, who was Spanish Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republican government during most of the civil war, summed up "... the whole saga of non-intervention" as follows: "It was the finest example of the art of handing victims over to the aggressor States, while preserving the perfect manners of a gentleman and at the same time giving the impression that peace is the one objective and consideration."[3]

Subsequent Canadian governments have followed Mackenzie King's policy of phony neutrality in order to support the most reactionary forces. Although the "neutrality" of the Foreign Enlistment Act made it illegal for Canadians to enlist in conflicts where the Canadian government was not a participant, and still applies to this day, Canada announced on March 1, 1940, that citizens were free to enlist in the Finnish armed forces, which were collaborating with the Nazis against the Soviet Union. On May 18, 1948, the Canadian cabinet decided that the question of application of the Foreign Enlistment Act to Palestine should be deferred so as to facilitate the military recruiting of Canadian nationals to suppress the Palestinians. In the 1960s and 70s, over 100 Canadians "illegally" enlisted with U.S. forces in the aggression against Vietnam. Finally, the recent Liberal governments of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin did not charge Zionist groups with violating this law when they set up recruitment tables for the Israeli Armed Forces at Concordia University and some other campuses. TML Daily pointed out at the time, "This shows that the Canadian ruling circles persist in their highly selective and self-serving definitions of what political aim Canadians shall be permitted to volunteer to serve..."[4]

Today, the Harper government continues the blatant use of high sounding, self-serving definitions such as "neutrality" to support interventions on behalf of the fascist and imperialist forces and to oppose anyone who stands against them. The Harper government has attacked those Canadians who support the Palestinians as being "provocative", while allowing Israel to recruit Canadians into the Israeli Army to commit crimes against the Palestinian people. Resistance movements that fight for the interests of the people have been falsely labeled as "terrorist" and support for them has been criminalized, while a blind eye is turned to countries that carry out state terrorism against their own and other peoples. The Canadian military is sent to sovereign countries such as Haiti, Afghanistan and Libya to oppress, kill and bomb people under ever new disguises such as "responsibility to protect," "fighting terrorism", and "humanitarian intervention," while those who dissent against such ventures are spied on and repressed. Just as his predecessor Mackenzie King did during the Spanish Civil War by claiming "neutrality," Harper shamelessly uses the Canadian people's strong sentiment for peace and non-intervention to try to establish Canada as a supporter of the world's most reactionary forces.

Canadians defied this in 1936 by valiantly participating in the Republican Army's 15th Brigade and they continue to stand against all crimes against peace today.
Notes

1. Mackenzie King worked for the Rockefeller Foundation from 1914-18 to help whitewash John D. Rockefeller's role in the 1913 massacre of the striking Ludlow miners and to help Rockefeller draft a set of policies and principles to undermine the militancy of labour and to facilitate its collaboration with capital. David Rockefeller stated at one time that Mackenzie King was his father's "best friend."

2. Examples include British-owned Rio Tinto's mining interests, U.S.-owned ITT's Telefonika utility, sales of gasoline to Franco by the Texas Oil Company, and the sales of 12,000 military trucks to Franco by Ford, Studebaker, and General Motors. José Maria Doussinague, who was undersecretary at the Spanish Foreign Ministry, said, "without American petroleum and American trucks, and American credit, we could never have won the Civil War."

3. Del Vayo, Freedom's Battle, p. 252.

4. The Media's "Working-Class Heroes" in Afghanistan, TML Daily, May 4, 2006, No. 73.

Lessons of Wisconsin: Only Class Struggle Works

By Fred Goldstein
Published Jun 23, 2011 10:17 PM

The cutting-edge struggle in Wisconsin against the capitalist anti-labor, pro-austerity offensive suffered a severe legal setback on June 14. The state Supreme Court overturned a permanent injunction against the union-busting bill signed into law March 11 by the reactionary, racist governor, Scott Walker.

The Dane County court, after mass pressure, had issued an injunction against the bill on May 26. But Walker, architect of the so-called “budget repair” bill, had the capitalist class behind him and prevailed in the higher court.

The problem is not just the legal ruling. The basic question to be asked by rank-and-file unionists, leaders in the oppressed communities and militant students and youth, all of whom pushed this great struggle forward, is the following:

How could the organized labor movement and its allies allow a decision by a tiny group of judges in a capitalist court to override the actions and demands of hundreds of thousands of Wisconsin workers — organized and unorganized, employed and unemployed, immigrants, farmers, youth and students, community organizations — who have been in a high state of mobilization since the Feb. 14 occupation of the Capitol?

This draconian law wipes out collective bargaining by public workers. It establishes the same provisions that prevail in the so-called “right to work” states in the U.S. South. Under associated budget provisions, $800 million or more will be taken from services for the people — including education, health care, food and housing assistance. Hundreds of millions of dollars will be given to the rich in tax breaks and contracts.

The mobilization of Wisconsin workers for four months was one of the greatest sustained shows of strength and organization by the unions in decades. It inspired solidarity, national and international, and a rise in public support for unions.

The 18 days of occupying the Capitol and mass rallies peaked on March 12, when an estimated 185,000 surrounded the Capitol in Madison.

How can such an unpopular set of laws be imposed on millions in the face of this?

It’s not over

It is not too late to ask these questions. One chapter in the Wisconsin struggle may be over, but the attacks are not. The opportunity to reopen the battle may soon reappear.

The short answer is that the struggle had to move from purely political pressure of mass demonstrations to the direct class struggle, where the government, the bosses and the bankers would either be stopped cold or made to pay a high price.

Great excitement and hope was raised when the Wisconsin South Central Federation of Labor, representing 45,000 workers, voted to support any measures taken by its member unions to prepare for a general strike if the law passed. This vote came after a demonstration of 100,000 at the Capitol two days earlier.

The buzz about a general strike in Wisconsin affected the labor movement around the country. Often radical groups demand the labor movement call a general strike without regard to the conditions. But, for the first time in many years, the actual conditions seemed to be taking shape and a major labor federation actually brought it up.

The next week, on Feb. 26, the demonstrations in Madison increased in size and scope to 150,000. Solidarity demonstrations were held in all 50 states. Delegations came to Madison from far and wide, including a planeload of unionists from Los Angeles.

Using an illegal parliamentary maneuver, the Republicans passed the union-busting law and on March 11 Gov. Walker signed it into law. The next day the largest demonstration yet took place, estimated by the AFL-CIO at 185,000, including a large delegation of Wisconsin farmers on their tractors.

By this time it was crystal clear that no amount of political pressure was going to move Walker, the Republicans or the ruling class behind them.

The demonstrations had reached maximum strength. The law was passed. The ranks and lower-level union officials waited to see, now that the bill had passed, what would be the next step.

One option was to reoccupy the Capitol with massive numbers. The occupation had been ended earlier by a combination of lying and trickery by state and labor officials, who helped coax the student and worker occupiers out of the building.

Would there be encouragement or motion for a general strike? The bill had not been stopped. Now it had to be overturned. The struggle needed to be escalated.

The Wisconsin South Central Federation of Labor website published a detailed explanation of how the labor movement in Ontario, Canada, had from 1995 to 1998 carried out 11 Days of Action. These general strikes had defeated union busting and a harsh austerity program. (scfl.org)

Leaders of the Ontario struggle described in detail such things as how to overcome divisions among the unions and how to build alliances with community organizations and social movements. It showed how to set up strike committees with co-chairs from the unions and the community. This is most important in Wisconsin because, while the center of struggle was in Madison, the Black, Latino/a community and immigrant communities, documented and undocumented, would be central to the success of any statewide struggle against the government.

Educating white workers on solidarity with the oppressed communities would be key. The Ontario labor leadership showed how to carry out a protracted campaign to educate union members in meeting halls, homes, bars and donut shops. It went over how to bridge the different organizing styles of community groups and unions, how to deal with the government, the cops, the bosses, the media and so on.

It described how to set up transportation, emergency and medical services; train pickets; map out the cities; create short- and long-term plans; set up a general staff to organize and run the strike.

Most important were the examples of how the Canadian movement refused to recognize that violating workers’ rights was “legal” and instead declared the struggle legal.

Thus, while the union leadership in this country had basically no experience in calling a general strike, a wealth of information was available on how to go about it.

However, on the Wisconsin website, right next to the document on the general strike, was a memorandum on legal rights virtually declaring that any move toward a general strike or any other strike against the state was illegal and put the union and its members in jeopardy of fines and arrests.

The labor leadership in Wisconsin, in the crunch, was silent on the general strike. Instead it turned its attention to the movement to recall Republican legislators and to the prospect of having the law overturned in the courts.

The entire weight of the decision to call a general strike cannot be left on the shoulders of state leaders alone. In such a momentous decision, the state and local leadership must know they are challenging the entire ruling class. It was incumbent on the national labor leadership to declare openly that it would wholeheartedly support such a crucial struggle, where the fate of public employees is at stake. While AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka appeared at support rallies, he never once pointed in the direction of the class struggle, hewing to the line of support for the Democratic Party.

The workers were not defeated in some great class battle with the capitalist state. The setback came about because the labor leaders would not use the strength, energy and determination exhibited by the workers to overcome false claims of capitalist “legality” handed down by the legislature and the courts. Instead, the leaders bowed to capitalist rulings.

There is nothing wrong in principle with using the recall method to get rid of reactionary legislators, nor to use the courts on occasion to enforce the rights of the working class.

What is wrong, however, is to rely on these methods. Parliamentary and judicial methods can at best be secondary when the struggle is with the capitalist class and its state. Only the class struggle, which challenges the class power of the bosses and their state, can bring any significant, lasting victory in the struggle.

The only way to get there is for the rank and file of the labor movement to organize from the ground up, build caucuses to promote the class struggle against the bosses and their state and either force the union leaders to fight or push them aside and take the unions over from below.