A Portrait of Father Pierre Gravel drawn from a work by Alexandre Dumas

L'Abbe Pierre Gravel (Septentrion)

Father Pierre Gravel by Alexandre Dumas, published by Septentrion

FOREWORD

The following extracts are taken from a Master’s thesis in Quebec studies by Alexandre Dumas, which has now become a book, L’Abbé Pierre Gravel.  The English is mine.

Dumas’s 2012 thesis at the Université du Québec à Trois Rivières is titled:  “L’Abbé Pierre Gravel : Comment Concilier le Syndicalisme avec le Nationalisme d’Extrême Droite (1924-1949)” (Father Pierre Gravel:  How to Reconcile Syndicalism with Far-Right Nationalism (1924-1949)).

Additional paragraphing has been somewhat arbitrarily added by me to enhance readability as a blog post.

Why am I looking at Father Pierre Gravel?

I am looking at him because I’m working on another post about a public talk given by Arcand in February, 1963 at Boischatel, where father Gravel was the local parish priest.  (Gravel was the pastor of Pat Walsh when Walsh defected from the Communists a decade earlier in 1953.)  Father Gravel appears in a photo with Arcand in a report on Arcand’s talk by La Presse.

So, let me get Father Gravel online, and we’ll link him up another day with events at Boischatel and with Adrien Arcand, though I will weave in a few observations in between these extracts.

PORTRAIT :

FATHER PIERRE GRAVEL

L’abbé Pierre Gravel

Vicaire de la paroisse Saint-Alphonse de Thetford Mines de 1924 à 1935, l’abbé Pierre Gravel se fait d’abord connaître en fondant le Syndicat national catholique de l’Amiante.

Vicar of the Saint-Alphonse parish at Thetford Mines from 1924 to 1935, Father Pierre Gravel first became known by founding the National Catholic Asbestos Union.

Détesté autant par les patrons des mines que par le Parti libéral du Québec, ce prêtre turbulent est finalement contraint par le cardinal Villeneuve de quitter ses ouvriers.

Hated as much by the bosses of the mines as by the Liberal Party of Quebec, this turbulent priest is finally forced by Cardinal Villeneuve to leave his workers.

Ensuite vicaire de la paroisse Saint-Roch de Québec de 1935 à 1946, il se taille une réputation à travers tout le Québec avec ses conférences à saveur nationaliste.  Il y exprime ses convictions séparatistes, ses sympathies profondes pour les dictateurs européens et sa haine de la «franc-maçonnerie juive».  On l’a surnommé «le père Coughlin de Québec», le «matamore en soutane» et «le curé fasciste en liberté».

Thereafter, vicar of the Saint-Roch parish of Quebec from 1935 to 1946, he gained a reputation throughout Quebec with his conferences that were nationalist in flavor.  In these talks, he expressed his separatist convictions, his deep sympathies for European dictators and his hatred of “Jewish Freemasonry”.  He was nicknamed the “Father Coughlin of Quebec”, the “matamore in a cassock” and the “Fascist parish priest on the loose”.

Au cours de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, il inquiète autant le cardinal Villeneuve que le gouvernement fédéral par ses sympathies vichystes et ses discours contre la conscription.

During the Second World War, he worried Cardinal Villeneuve as much as the federal government with his Vichy sympathies and his speeches against conscription.

Finalement curé de Boischatel de 1946 à 1974, l’abbé Gravel fait encore parler de lui par son combat sans relâche contre l’infiltration communiste au Québec, son appui inconditionnel à l’Union nationale et sa contestation bruyante de la Révolution tranquille.

Finally the parish priest of Boischatel from 1946 to 1974, Father Gravel continued to be a topic for his tireless fight against communist infiltration in Quebec, his unconditional support for the Union National (party of Maurice Duplessis) and his noisy contestation of the Quiet Revolution.

Pierre Gravel a malgré tout basculé dans l’oubli depuis son décès.  Les historiens québécois ont fait bien peu de place à ce personnage haut en couleurs.

Pierre Gravel has nevertheless been forgotten since his death.  Quebec historians have given little space to this colorful character.

Sans aller jusqu’à le comparer à Lionel Groulx, nous pouvons affirmer que l’abbé Gravel a eu une influence considérable auprès de ses contemporains.  Il a joui d’une popularité notable auprès de groupes de jeunes nationalistes tels que les journalistes de La Nation ou encore les Jeunes Laurentiens.  Nombreux sont les députés, maires et échevins à avoir assisté ou même participé à ses conférences.  Maurice Duplessis, pour ne nommer que celui-ci, figure parmi les intimes de l’abbé Gravel.

Without going so far as to compare him to Lionel Groulx, we can say that Father Gravel had considerable influence with his contemporaries.  He enjoyed notable popularity with groups of young nationalists such as the La Nation journalists and the Jeunes Laurentiens.  Many deputies, mayors and aldermen attended or even participated in his conferences.  Maurice Duplessis, to name just this one, was one of Father Gravel’s close friends.

Ce polémiste n’avait évidemment pas que des amis et des disciples.  Louis-Alexandre Taschereau, Ernest Lapointe, Jean-Charles Harvey et Fred Rose sont au nombre de ceux qui auraient aimé faire taire ce populaire agitateur.

This polemicist obviously had not only friends and disciples.  Louis-Alexandre Taschereau, Ernest Lapointe, Jean-Charles Harvey and Fred Rose are among those who would have liked to silence this popular agitator.

Note:  A matamore is a blusterer, according to the Collins dictionary and its origin is Spanish, according to Wordsense.
Dumas notes that Patrick Walsh attended Father Gravel’s funeral in 1977.  He calls Walsh an Ontarian; when did Walsh leave Quebec?  Had he left by 1963?  If so, perhaps he was not in the audience the night of 24 February (as I had conjectured) when Arcand spoke at Boischatel.

Dumas says nothing more of Walsh and Father Gravel, though at the time of Walsh’s defection from the communists, Gravel received a threat to bomb the church and rectory at Boischatel, noted in the North American press.

More from Dumas:

Pierre Gravel décède le 29 août 1977 à Québec.  À ses funérailles, on retrouve parmi d’autres le cardinal Maurice Roy, le député péquiste Jean-François Bertrand (fils de l’ ancien premier ministre Jean-Jacques Bertrand), l’évêque Lacroix d’Edmonton, le chef du Parti national populaire Fabien Roy et l’animateur ontarien anti-communiste Pat Walsh.”

Pierre Gravel died on August 29, 1977 in Quebec.  At his funeral, we find among others Cardinal Maurice Roy, PQ deputy Jean-François Bertrand (son of former Premier Jean-Jacques Bertrand), Bishop Lacroix of Edmonton, leader of the National People’s Party Fabien Roy and Ontario anti-communist activist, Pat Walsh.

Dumas critiques the assertion of one author that Adrien Arcand and Father Gravel were “companions in arms”:

Alors que [Yves] Lefrançois qualifie Adrien Arcand de « compagnon d’arme » de l’abbé Gravel, il nous semble douteux que les deux hommes aient réellement collaboré.

While (Yves) Lefrançois calls Adrien Arcand Abbé Gravel’s “companion in arms”, it seems doubtful that the two men really collaborated.

Dumas also revises the infamous Jean-Francois Nadeau:

Mentionnons également le lien que Jean-François Nadeau établit entre l’abbé Gravel et le Parti de l’Unité nationale du Canada, parti ouvertement fasciste fondé et dirigé par Adrien Arcand.  Citant une entrevue avec Jacques Lanctôt.  Nadeau affirme que Gravel était «un proche sympathisant du PUNC»

We should also mention the link that Jean-François Nadeau establishes between Father Gravel and the National Unity Party of Canada, an openly fascist party founded and led by Adrien Arcand.  Quoting an interview with Jacques Lanctôt, Nadeau says Gravel was “close to” and “sympathized with the NUPC”.

Bien que Gravel ait pu retrouver certaines de ses idées dans le parti d’Adrien Arcand, nous doutons qu’il ait pu en être aussi près.  Comment un séparatiste recommandant une révolution nationaliste aurait-il pu s’associer avec un parti fédéraliste dont le chef considère l’indépendantisme comme «un non-sens qui bafoue les principes mêmes de respect de l’ autorité»?

Although Gravel may have found some of his ideas in Adrien Arcand’s party, we doubt that he could have been so close.  How could a separatist recommending a nationalist revolution link himself with a federalist party whose leader sees independence as “nonsense that flouts the very principles of respect for authority”?

“[A] nationalist revolution … as ‘nonsense that flouts the very principles of respect for authority’”.

That’s interesting.  Because Arcand himself was accused by Mackenzie King’s federal government of intending to pull off a “nationalist revolution” (a federal one, Canada-wide), meaning a coup d’état, in 1940.

Dumas says Arcand was unlikely to have been too “close” a friend of a revolutionary priest (a priest who believed in Quebec independence by revolution, i.e, through a coup d’état), because revolution flouts the very authority that Arcand worshiped.

Yet, our corrupt federal government would have us believe that Adrien Arcand planned to ignore his most profound beliefs to become a lawless revolutionary.

And, by the way, you can tell I really like Nadeau.  Several years ago, I kicked his pants in YouTube and elsewhere over comments he made disparaging Robert Rumilly as uneducated and failing to footnote works he published.

What a surprise for Mr. Nadeau to find that someone was actually reading Rumilly and could disprove Nadeau’s allegations.  I pointed to Rumilly’s excellent formal education, including his higher education, and the fact that Rumilly gave his sources not in footnotes but within his paragraphs in books of his that I had read.  I could confirm the sources good, because I had verified some of them for my own work; Rumilly provided references that were easily traceable.

So, when Nadeau finished his hack-job on Rumilly (2009), he went to work on Arcand (2010).

What are you waiting for?  Subscribe!
Much more is on the way.
Qu’attendez-vous?  Abonnez-vous!
Beaucoup plus est en route.


Fascism or Socialism?  Third Instalment of a Talk by Adrien Arcand at Montreal in 1933, published by “Le Patriote”

A (now-antique) letterpress printing press, circa 1885

A (now-antique) letterpress printing press, circa 1885, used here to print “anti-semitic propaganda”. / Une presse typographique (désormais antique), vers 1885, utilisée ici pour imprimer la «propagande antisémite».

 
Contrary to what some illusionists claim, there is not nor can there be Christian socialism.  This myth was confounded by the highest Christian authority, that of the Vatican, when Pius X condemned the errors of “Sillon”.  Moreover, the great doctrinarians of socialism, among others Proudhon, Millerand, Jaurès, have affirmed that any claim to Christian socialism is as illusory as it is idiotic.  Popes, bishops, rabbis, masonic and socialist leaders all admit that there is an absolute incompatibility between socialism and Christianity.  There is a Christian sociology, a Christian social doctrine, but not Christian socialism, in the sense that all authors give to socialism.

— From Adrien Arcand’s Fascism or Socialism? (1933)

 

Foreword

Thank the pandemic, I have ten more pages for you!

Part 1 is here.
Part 2 is here.
And I give you part 3:
 


FASCISM OR SOCIALISM?

Preview of a Talk by Adrien Arcand

GIVEN AT MONTREAL IN 1933

For the first time in English


Adrien Arcand

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

Deux consciences
différentes

Two different
consciences

La démocratie libérale a provoqué la plus grande catastrophe de tous les temps.  Pourquoi ?  Parce que l’esprit de révolte qui forme son essence réelle a imposé aux sociétés occidentales un genre de vie publique contraire et opposé à la vie privée et aux croyances personnelles des individus.

Liberal democracy has provoked the greatest catastrophe of all times.  Why?  Because the spirit of revolt that forms its real essence has imposed on western societies a kind of public life contrary and opposed to private life and to the personal beliefs of individuals.

Dans sa vie privée, le chrétien croit à l’existence et l’immortalité de l’âme ; le libéralisme a passé des lois qui ne répondent pas à cette croyance fondamentale.  Dans sa vie privée, le chrétien accepte un code bien défini de justice sociale et d’équité ; le libéralisme a fabriqué une foule de lois, telles que nos lois des compagnies anonymes et des faillites, qui forcent l’individu à accepter publiquement une malhonnêteté que sa conscience réprouve.  Dans sa vie privée, le chrétien croit au principe d’une autorité de droit divin, personnelle, responsable ; avec son suffrage universel, le libéralisme lui impose une autorité anonyme, impersonnelle, irresponsable :  l’autorité de la majorité du nombre.  Dans sa vie privée, le chrétien croit à l’obligation de la pratique des vertus, et pardessus toutes, celle de la charité, base de tout christianisme ; le libéralisme inspire des lois qui tendent à faire disparaître complètement la charité individuelle, en en faisant retomber la responsabilité sur l’Etat.  Dans sa vie privée, le chrétien se soumet à la discipline d’un certain code de lecture, d’amusements, de récréations ; le libéralisme, au nom de la liberté, fabrique des lois qui invitent l’individu à outrepasser impunément les bornes morales fixées par sa conscience.  Dans sa vie privée, le chrétien croit à l’autorité patriarchale dans la famille, au droit de propriété ; le libéralisme, dans ses législations, attaque et comprime l’autorité paternelle, crée des monopoles et des cartels qui tendent à annihiler, en l’absorbant, toute propriété privée.  Et il en est de même de tout.  Est-il étonnant que la démocratie libérale ait conduit au désastre et au déséquilibre quand on réalise qu’elle force l’individu à se comporter de façon contraire à ses convictions et ses principes ; à avoir deux consciences différentes, l’une spiritualiste pour sa vie privée, l’autre matérialiste pour sa vie publique ?  Non, car ce n’est que la conséquence de la définition que le libéralisme fait de l’être humain :  un être purement matériel et sans âme, c’est-à-dire le goy défini par le Talmud.  Sur la définition de l’homme, comme sur tout le reste, Talmud et libéralisme s’entendent parfaitement.  C’est naturel, l’un et l’autre sont juifs !

In his private life, the Christian believes in the existence and the immortality of the soul; liberalism passes laws which do not respond to this fundamental belief.  In his private life, the Christian accepts a well defined code of social justice and equity; liberalism has manufactured a host of laws, such as our anonymous company and bankruptcy laws, which force the individual to accept publicly a dishonesty that his conscience rejects. In his private life, the Christian believes in the principle of personal and accountable authority by divine right; with its universal suffrage, liberalism imposes upon him an anonymous, impersonal and unaccountable authority:  the authority of the numerical majority.  In his private life, the Christian believes in the duty to practice the virtues, and above all, Charity, the very basis of Christianity. Liberalism inspires laws which tend to the complete disappearance of individual Charity, by causing responsibility to fall upon the State. In his private life, the Christian submits to the discipline of a certain code of reading, amusement, recreation; liberalism, in the name of liberty, produces laws which invite the individual to exceed with impunity the limits of good morals set by his conscience. In his private life, the Christian believes in patriarchal authority in the family, in the right to property; liberalism, in its legislation, attacks and compromises paternal authority, creates monopolies and cartels which tend to annihilate all private property by absorbing it. And the same goes for everything.  Is it surprising that liberal democracy has led to disaster and disequilibrium when one realizes that it forces the individual to behave in a fashion contrary to his convictions and his principles; to have two different consciences, one spiritual for his private life, the other materialist for his public life?  No, because this is just the consequence of how liberalism defines the human being: as a purely material being without a soul, which is how the Talmud defines the non-Jew.  As to the definition of man, as with all the rest, the Talmud and liberalism perfectly agree.  Naturally; both are Jewish!

Quand nous parlons de la démocratie libérale, nous parlons de tous les partis politiques, sans exception, qui ont accepté le systèrne démocratique.  Ces partis se rangent sous les deux appellations générales de libéralisme et de conservatisme.

When we speak of liberal democracy, we are talking about all the political parties, without exception, which have accepted the democratic system. These parties are grouped under the two general labels of liberalism and conservatism.

[36]
[36]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

Le “libéralisme économique”

“Economic
liberalism”

Des chefs libéraux sincères ont commencé, depuis quelque temps, de réaliser l’erreur libérale.  Soit qu’ils ne voient qu’un partie du danger, soit qu’ils en voient la totalité mais ne veulent en admettre qu’une partie, ils dénoncent présentement ce qu’ils appellent le libéralisme économique.  C’est futile en primaire !  Le libéralisme économique n’est qu’une conséquence de l’application du libéralisme philosophique.  Le liberalisme pur, le libéralisme intégral, le libéralisme philosophique, en un mot, est le véritable et le seul mal ; c’est le même libéralisme qui, suivant ses applications, devient le libéralisme religieux, le libéralisme politique, le libéralisme social, le libéralisme économique, le libéralisme internationaliste ; partout, c’est toujours la philosophie libérale, la cause première, la puissance agissante, l’idée inspiratrice, le principe dirigeant, dont toute les formes libérales ne sont que les conséquences.  Quand les chefs de la chrétienté ont condamné le libéralisme, quand Sa Sainteté Pie XI a promulgué :  “Le socialisme a le libéralism pour père et le bolchevisme pour héritier”, ils n’avaient pas en vue la combinaison idiote que l’on dénomme depuis quelque temps “libéralisme économique”, mais la philosophie libérale, le libéralisme in se.

Sincere liberal leaders have begun to realize the liberal error.  Either they see only a part of the danger, or they see the whole of it, unwilling to admit more than a part.  They currently denounce what they call economic liberalism.  This is plainly futile!  Economic liberalism is nothing but the consequence of putting philosophical liberalism into practice.  Pure liberalism, complete liberalism, philosophical liberalism, in one word, is the true and only error; it’s the same liberalism which, when applied, becomes religious liberalism, political liberalism, social liberalism, economic liberalism, internationalist liberalism.  In all of it, liberal philosophy is the root cause, the acting power, the inspiring idea, the directing principle, of which all liberal forms are only the consequences.  When the leaders of Christianity condemned liberalism, when His Holiness Pope Pius XI proclaimed:  “Socialism has liberalism for its father and Bolchevism for its heir”, they did not have in mind the idiotic combination that for some time has been called “economic liberalism”, but liberal philosophy, liberalism itself.

Le conservatisme n’a pas
répondu à sa mission

Conservatism has not
fulfilled its mission

Quant au conservatisme tel que le représentent aujourd’hui nos partis conservateurs, il ne vaut guère mieux que le libéralisme.  Le conservatisme, en se soumettant au mode démocratique et à toutes ses combinaisons, a absorbé et fait sienne l’idée libérale.  La politique conservatrice est exactement la même que la politique libérale, au point de vue des principes philosophiques, et elles ne se distinguent que par des différences administratives.  Les lois passées en ce pays par nos deux partis font l’affaire de l’un et de l’autre, et l’on n’a pas encore vu le parti conservateur ni le parti libéral altérer les lois de grande portée sociale qu’ils ont tous deux alambiquées dans le sens des principes de 1789.  Notre grand parti conservateur assez franc pour arborer ses vraies couleurs, se nomme le “Parti Libéral-Conservateur du Canada” et, s’il présente des dangers moins immédiats et moins extrêmes que le parti libéral et le parti socialiste, il est tout de même libéral avant d’être conservateur, il partage la même doctrine que les deux autres sur les rapports qui doivent exister entre l’individu et l’Etat.  C’est pourquoi le parti conservateur, qui subit complaisamment les vieilles lois libérales du passé, ne saurait être le parti de l’avenir.  Il partage dans les responsabilités du chaos actuel

As for conservatism, as represented today in our conservative parties, it’s hardly better than liberalism. Conservatism, by submitting to the democratic regime and all its combinations, has absorbed and embraced the liberal idea.  Conservative politics is exactly the same as liberal politics from the point of view of philosophical principles, and only stands apart on administrative differences.  Laws passed in this country by our two parties are the business of both, and we have not yet seen the conservative party or the liberal party alter laws of broad social scope which they both have forged according to the principles of 1789.  Our great conservative party, candid enough to show its true colors, calls itself the “Liberal-Conservative Party of Canada” and, if it presents less immediate and less extreme dangers than the liberal party and the socialist party, it is all the same liberal before it is conservative.  It espouses the same doctrine as the other two on the relationship that must exist between the individual and the State.  This is why the conservative party, which obligingly tolerates the old liberal laws of the past, can hardly be the party of the future.  It shares responsibility with the liberal party for the current chaos

[37]
[37]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

avec le parti libéral, puisqu’il n’a pas su dans le passé répondre à sa mission véritable, qui était de détruire la philosophie libérale, et non de s’en nourrir.

since it has not in the past known how to fulfill its true mission, which was to destroy liberal philosophy, and not to sustain it.

Besoin de formules neuves

Need for new formulas

Ce dont chaque pays a besoin, et le nôtre en particulier, ce sont des formules jeunes et vigoureuses, qui pourront opérer un redressement et provoquer une renaissance.  Les vieilles idées démocratiques sont des couleurs déteintes, un sel affadi ; la vieille structure démocratique tombe de décrépitude, rien ne peut la relever; la démocratie libérale a fait ses preuves, elle n’a apporté que des misères et des malheurs.  Le monde a fait fausse route, il faut changer de voie, les circonstances matérielles et l’état des esprits l’exigent.  Aux foules qui cherchent et attendent une solution ne s’offrent, répétons-le, que deux alternatives :  le fascisme ou le socialisme.  La question a déjà été soumise sous d’autres formes :  chrétien ou juif, Rome ou Moscou.

What every country needs, and ours in particular, is young and vigorous formulas, able to work a remedy and provoke a rebirth.  The old democratic ideas are faded colors, a weakened salt; the old democratic structure is falling from decrepitude, nothing can raise it up again; liberal democracy has been tested, it has only brought misery and misfortune. The world has gone astray, it must change its path, material circumstances and the state of mind require it.  To the masses who are looking and waiting for a solution that is not presenting itself, we repeat, there are only two alternatives: fascism or socialism.  The question has already been submitted in other forms: Christian or Jew, Rome or Moscow.

Le socialisme

Socialism

Le socialisme, prêché depuis plus d’un demi-siècle, est plus connu que le fascisme, il a été plus étudié, plus commenté, il a fait ses preuves dans un plus grand nombre de pays.  Il ne sera donc pas nécessaire de nous y attarder plus que de raison.

Socialism, preached for over half a century, is better known than fascism, it has been studied more, more commented on, it has been tested in many countries. It will therefore not be necessary to linger over it beyond reason.

Le socialisme est la conclusion logique du libéralisme démocratique.  Il en partage les méfaits, en les aggravant.  Aucun auteur n’a plus laconiquement et plus clairement exposé les rapports de l’un et l’autre que S. S. Pie XI, dans la phrase citée tout à l’heure :  “Le socialisme a le libéralisme pour père et le bolchevisme pour héritier”.  Le socialisme, c’est la question sociale injectée dans le libéralisme, qui en a préparé la discussion obligatoire en préparant et suscitant les luttes de classes.  Un coup d’oeil rapide sur les accomplissements du libéralisme démocratique permettra de mieux comprendre comment est devenue nécessaire la conscience de la question sociale.

Socialism is the logical conclusion of democratic liberalism.  It shares its misdeeds by worsening them.  No author has more dryly and more clearly exposed the relationship between the two than His Holiness Pope Pius XI, in the phrase cited above:  “Socialism has liberalism for its father and bolshevism for its heir”.  Socialism is the social question injected into liberalism, which has prepared its obligatory discussion by preparing and causing the class struggles.  A quick glance at the accomplishments of democratic liberalism will make it possible to better understand how awareness of the social question became necessary.

Faux principes qui servent
de base

False principles used
as a basis

La démocratie, consacrée par la Révolution Française, a elle-même consacré les faux principes d’égalité pour tous et de liberté pour tout.  Ces principes se sont imposés graduellement dans toutes les nations occidentales, avec des conséquences qui peuvent se résumer par ces mots :  la perte réelle de la liberté.  Les races nationales, sous la démocratie, ont perdu la suprématie terrienne de leur pays, par la liberté accordée aux étrangers de s’en emparer.  Les religions nationales ont

Democracy, established by the French Revolution, has enshrined the false principles of equality and liberty for all.  These principles have been gradually imposed in all western nations with consequences that can be summed up in these words:  real loss of liberty.  The national races, under democracy, have lost territorial supremacy over their countries, through the liberty accorded to foreigners to come and help themselves to a piece of it.  The national religions

[38]
[38]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

perdu leur suprématie, par la liberté accordée à toutes les religions étrangères de devenir leurs égales.  Les races nationales ont perdu leur suprématie nationale, par la liberté accordée à toutes les races étrangères de devenir leurs égales chez elles, avec la liberté de partager leurs droits, leurs privilèges, leur patrimoine.  Les races nationales ont perdu leur suprématie financière, industrielle et commerciale chez elles, par la liberté accordée à tous les éléments étrangers de venir leur livrer compétition.  En accordant une reconnaissance officielle aux étrangers, à leurs caractéristiques raciales et religieuses, la démocratie a nécessairement dû faire disparaître les protections dont jouissaient les races nationales, pour elles seules, sur leur territoire.  Cette démocratie, et c’est là son seul caractère d’unité et de permanence, a eu partout pour résultat identique d’émanciper et relever le Juif, qui était en état d’infériorité civile, et de faire perdre aux races nationales ce qui constituait leur droit d’aînesse.

have lost their supremacy through the freedom granted to all foreign religions to become their equals.  The national races have lost their national supremacy through the freedom accorded to all foreign races to become their equals on their soil, with the liberty to share in their rights, their privileges, and their heritage.  The national races have lost financial, industrial and commercial supremacy on their soil through the liberty granted to all foreign elements to come and compete.  By granting official recognition to foreigners, to their racial and religious characteristics, democracy has necessarily caused the protections enjoyed by national races to disappear, for them alone, on their own territory.  This democracy – and in this alone is found its character of oneness and permanency – has everywhere had the identical result of emancipating and raising up the Jew, who was in a state of civil inferiority, and of causing the national races to lose their birthrights.

Corruption, principe
d’autorité

Corruption, principle
of authority

Cette démocratie libérale a substitué à l’autorité réelle, personnelle et responsable des gouvernants, l’irresponsabilité des masses aveugles.  En effet, dans la démocratie, la seule autorité est celle de la majorité du nombre, exprimée par le mode électoral.  Cette majorité est une masse incohérente, anonyme, impersonnelle, ignorante et, à cause de ses vices mêmes, elle est plus tyrannique et plus despotique que n’importe quelle autre.  Comme cette majorité est presque toujours le fruit de la corruption électorale, comme la masse est corruptible, comme l’élu responsable seulement à un groupe anonyme est placé dans des conditions qui le rendent plus corruptible encore, il s’ensuit que la démocratie ne vit que de corruption.  Les conditions mêmes du mode électoral démocratique forment un inexpurgeable foyer de corruption.

This liberal democracy has substituted for the real, personal and accountable authority of governments, the irresponsibility of the blind masses.  In effect, in democracy, the only authority is that of the numerical majority, expressed through the electoral regime.  This majority is an incoherent, anonymous, impersonal and ignorant mass, and because of its own vices, it is more tyrannical and more despotic than any other.  Since this majority is almost always the product of electoral corruption, for the masses are corruptible; since the elected official, accountable only to an anonymous group, is placed in conditions which make him even more corruptible, it follows that democracy can only live on corruption.  The very conditions of the democratic electoral regime form an inexpurgatable hotbed of corruption.

Déséquilibre général
et complet

General and Total
disequilibrium

Cette démocratie libérale, au lieu de guérir les maux dont les peuples souffraient, n’a fait que les aviver.  Les classes riches sont devenues plus riches, et les classes pauvres sont devenues plus pauvres, à cause de la corruptibilité législative démocratique.  Les classes rurales ont été violemment déracinées de leurs domaines, les classes ouvrières ont été plus durement enchaînées.  A cause de son caractère, la démocratie n’a su former que des politiciens professionnels, au lieu de former des hommes d’Etat.  Comme elle est elle-même un déséquilibre, la démocratie a complètement déséquilibré les parties constituantes de la nation, lançant les classes contre les classes,

This liberal democracy, instead of healing the ills suffered by the people, has only intensified them.  The rich classes have become more rich, the poor classes have become more poor, because of corruptible legislative democracy.  The rural classes have been violently uprooted from their fields, the working classes have been more firmly enchained.  Because of its character, democracy has only been able to produce professional politicians, rather than training statesmen.  As it is itself an imbalance, democracy has completely unbalanced the constituent parts of the nation, hurling class against class,

[39]
[39]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

antagonisant les forces différentes, avilissant la justice, ne faisant des lois et des dépenses profitables que pour les puissants du matérialisme.

antagonizing the various powers, degrading justice, making only those laws and expenditures profitable to the powers of materialism.

Une révolte plus accentuée

A more emphatic revolt

Le socialisme, sous un aspect différent, continue le même état de choses.  C’est une révolte plus accentuée, plus violente que la révolte démocratique.  Au lieu de rétablir l’harmonie entre les classes désaxées, le socialisme veut l’abolition de toutes celles qui ne font pas son affaire.  Parce que la religion est une soupape contre les abus, une protection pour toutes les classes, le socialisme veut l’abolition de la religion.  Parce que le nationalisme est une protection pour les nationaux du pays contre l’invasion économique et sociale des étrangers, le socialisme veut l’abolition définitive du nationalisme, et son remplacement par un internationalisme opposé à tout intérêt national.  Parce que le capitalisme a fait souffrir les masses pauvres, le socialisme vent l’abolition du capital.  Parce que le libéralisme a encouragé de graves abus dans l’exercice du droit de propriété, le socialisme veut l’abolition de ce droit.  Parce que la cellule familiale est la plus sûre protection pour les individus et pour les classes, même celles que le socialisme veut voir disparaître, le socialisme vise à la diminution, à la dissolution puis à la disparition de la famille, dont le libéralisme a déjà anéanti de nombreux droits.  Parce que l’inégalité naturelle est la cause même de la multiplicité des classes, le socialisme, qui ne veut qu’une seule classe “standardisée”, proclame l’égalité de tous, non seulement dans leur importance sociale, mais aussi dans le partage des biens (ou plutôt leur privation) et des responsabilités.  Le socialisme ne veut qu’une seule classe :  une classe d’esclaves sans âmes exploités par quelques tyrans prolétariens ; c’est pourquoi il doit éliminer à tout prix, par le massacre ou autrement, tous ceux qui ne sont pas aptes au nivellement.  On conçoit que l’aboutissement final de pareilles doctrines soit le bolchevisme, tel qu’il existe aujourd’hui en Russie soviétique.  Et, comme des gens de formation chrétienne ne peuvent pas être les animateurs de pareilles erreurs politiques, sociales et religieuses, on comprend que, partout, ce soient des Juifs qui dominent le socialisme et le bolchevisme, comme ils dominent les hautes sphères du libéralisme mondial.

Socialism, under a different aspect, continues the same state of things.  It is a more emphatic, more violent revolt than the democratic revolt.  Instead of reestablishing harmony among the dislocated classes, socialism wants to abolish all those it doesn’t want to deal with.  Since religion is a valve against abuse, a protection for all the classes, socialism wants to abolish religion.  Since nationalism is a protection for the nationals of a country, against economic and social invasion by foreigners, socialism wants to permanently abolish nationalism, to be replaced by internationalism opposed to all national interests.  Since capitalism has caused the poor masses to suffer, socialism wants to abolish capital.  Since liberalism has encouraged grave abuses in the exercise of property rights, socialism want to abolish these rights.  Since the family unit is the surest protection for individuals and for classes, even those that socialism wants to see disappear, socialism aims to deplete, dissolve and eliminate the family, numerous of whose rights have already been annihilated by liberalism.  Since natural inequality is the very cause of the multiplicity of classes, socialism, which only wants one “standardized” class, proclaims the equality of all, not only in their social importance, but also in their sharing of goods (or rather their privation) and responsibilities.  Socialism wants only one class:  a class of slaves without souls exploited by a few proletarian tyrants; this is why it must at all costs, by massacre or otherwise, eliminate all those who are not apt to be leveled down.  It is understandable that the final outcome of such doctrines is Bolshevism, as it exists today in Soviet Russia.  And, since people trained as Christians cannot be the animators of such political, social and religious errors, we understand that everywhere, it is Jews who dominate socialism and Bolshevism, as they dominate the upper spheres of world liberalism.

On se demande, parfois, comment il se fait que, mêmes socialistes, des Russes de Russie se laissent conduire par des Juifs ; que des Espagnols d’Espagne, des Français de France, de Mexicains du Mexique, abandonnent leur sort entre des mains juives.  Quand on examine le travail préliminaire ac-

We sometimes ask ourselves, how does it happen that, although socialists, the Russians of Russia allow themselves to be led by Jews; that the Spaniards of Spain, the French of France, and the Mexicans of Mexico, abandon themselves into Jewish hands.  When we examine the preliminary work ac-

[40]
[40]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

compli par la démocratie libérale, on comprend plus clairement cet état de soumission des races nationales et chrétiennes aux chefs internationalistes et anti-chrétiens.

complished through liberal democracy, we understand more clearly this state of submission of the national and Christian races to internationalist and anti-Christian leaders.

La séduction des
paradoxes et
des cris habiles

Seduction of
the paradoxes and
guileful cries

Le Juif, en tant que Juif, n’a aucun droit dans aucun pays ; en tant que judaïsant, il n’a aucun droit au sein du christianisme.  Pour franchir ces barrières autrefois insurmontables, le Juif a dû, par sa démocratie libérale, lancer des cris habiles, des paradoxes séduisants, des négations apparemment inoffensives que tous les partis démocratiques ont exploités contre les intérêts mêmes de tous les pays.  Ces cris habiles furent ceux de “Pas de distinction de race et de religion”.  “Tolérance !”, “Conciliation !”.  Ne nous distinguons plus comme nationaux du pays et adeptes de la religion nationale ; ne nous affirmons plus comme Canadiens et chrétiens.  Ayons la “tolérance” d’entretenir les mêmes sentiments à l’égard de ceux qui ne sont ni Canadiens ni chrétiens, afin de ne pas voir le danger qu’ils peuvent comporter ; cherchons à nous les concilier, cédons à une poignée d’étrangers, pour la bonne entente !  Descendons du trône de nos droits religieux et nationaux, puisque l’étranger n’y peut monter à nos côtés !  Soyons tous en bas, mêlés les uns aux autres !  Car, si nous restons en-haut, forts de nos droits d’aînesse et de notre héritage, comment l’ennemi qui nous envahit pourrait-il nous subjuguer ?  Il faut être avec lui, à son niveau, pour qu’il nous combatte et nous réduise.  Voilà ce que nous a enseigné et demandé la démocratie libérale depuis un siècle ; et nous avons été assez etupides pour écouter cet enseignement, pour nous y soumettre !  On le comprend mieux quand on sait que cette terrible doctrine, qui a livré notre or, notre commerce, nos droits aux Juifs, a été prêchée par les deux grands partis qui avaient charge de nous défendre, mais qui n’ont jamais négligé une occasion de nous trahir chaque fois qu’il s’agissait des étrangers.  Ces partis de liberté nous ont fait déchoir et nous ont enchaînés, au lieu de nous donner la liberté.  Ils ne l’ont donnée qu’aux étrangers, aux non-Canadiens et aux non-chrétiens, qui auparavant n’avaient pas de droits en ce pays.  Et nous avons été subjugués à un tel point, en Canada, par nos politiciens professionnels, nos faux grands hommes, que nous n’avons plus le droit de lever les yeux sur les anti-nationaux et les antichrétiens, ni le droit de nous plaindre de leurs déprédations, au nom de la tolérance, au nom de la “non-distinction de race et de religion”.  L’accueil fait aux deux motions Auger à l’hôtel de ville, les deux tentatives de faire voter le Bill Bercovitch, l’insulte prodiguée par un député juif à notre archevêque lorsqu’il émit son opinion sur le défunt Bill David, les remarques et les suggestions du juge Desaulniers lors de la demande

The Jew, as a Jew, has no rights in any country; as a judaizer, he has no rights in Christendom.  To clear these formerly insurmountable barriers, the Jew, through his liberal democracy, has had to hurl guileful cries, seductive paradoxes, seemingly inoffensive negations that all the democratic parties have exploited against the very interests of all countries.  These cunning cries were:  “No distinction of race and religion”, “Tolerance!”, “Accommodation!”.  We no longer see ourselves as nationals of the country, practitioners of our national religion; we no longer affirm ourselves as Canadians and Christians.  Let us have the “tolerance” to harbor the same sentiments towards those who are neither Canadians nor Christians, so as not to see the danger they may present; let us seek conciliation, let us yield to a handful of foreigners for good relations!  Let us step down from the throne of our religious and national rights, because the foreigner cannot step up to sit at our side!  Let us all be below, all mixed together!  Because if we remain above, strengthened by our rights of seniority and our heritage, how can the enemy that is invading us subjugate us?  We must be with him, at his level, for him to fight us and reduce us.  That is what liberal democracy has taught and demanded of us for a century; and we have been stupid enough to listen to this teaching, and to submit to it!  We understand It better when we know that this terrible doctrine, which has delivered our gold, our trade, our rights to the Jews, was preached by the two great parties responsible for defending us, but which have never neglected an opportunity to betray us to foreigners.  These parties of liberty have thrown us down and chained us, instead of giving us liberty.  They have only given it to foreigners, to non-Canadians and to non-Christians, who previously had no rights in this country.  And we have been subjugated to such a point, in Canada, by our professional politicians, our counterfeit great men, that we no longer have the right to lay eyes on the anti-nationals and the anti-Christians, nor the right, in the name of tolerance, in the name of “no distinction of race and religion”, to complain of their depredations.  The reception given to the two Auger motions at city hall, the two attempts to vote the Bercovitch bill, the insult lavished upon our Archbishop by a Jewish member of the legislature when he issued his opinion on the defunct Bill David, the remarks and suggestions of Judge Desaulniers during the motion

[41]
[41]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

d’injonction contre le “Miroir” et le “Goglu”, les commentaires du premier ministre Taschereau à la suite de ces suggestions, la déclaration traîtresse de Camillien Houde sur les “droits” de la “minorité” juive, voilà autant d’avis, depuis trois ans, de ne pas faire en ce pays de distinctions de races et de religions, et d’avoir à renoncer à nos caractéristiques nationales et religieuses.

for an injunction against the “Miroir” and the “Goglu”, the remarks of premier Taschereau after these suggestions, the traitorous statement of Camillien Houde on the “rights” of the Jewish “minority”, are so many notices, over three years, to make no distinction of race and religion in this country, and to be obliged to renounce our national and religious characteristics.

Le Juif, toujours seul à en
profiter

The Jew, always the only one
to benefit

La meilleure preuve que ces cris d’abdication ont été inventés seulement par les Juifs et pour les Juifs c’est que les autres races ne les font pas entendre, c’est que nos lois font des distinctions contre les Chinoises, contre les Hindous (pourtant sujets britanniques) ; c’est que les lois américaines font des distinctions contre les Asiatiques, entre autres les Japonais si civilisés, mais nulle part on n’en fait contre les Juifs qui sont les plus dangereux, les plus corrupteurs et les plus nuisibles de tous les Asiatiques.

The best proof that these cries of abdication were invented solely by the Jews and for the Jews is that the other races never listen to them, is that our laws make distinctions against the Chinese, against the Hindus (who however are British subjects); is that American laws make distinctions against Asiatics, among others the civilized Japanese, but nowhere are distinctions made against the Jews who are the most dangerous, the most corrupting and harmful of all the Asiatics.

Il est une chose qui devrait facilement ouvrir les yeux des sceptiques.  C’est que partout où il y a des régimes socialistes, ce sont des Juifs qui ont le pouvoir et le contrôle.  Ce n’est pas un effet du hasard.  Et, quand un régime socialiste tombe du pouvoir, c’est en même temps la chute de la puissance juive.  Durant les douze années que dura le régime socialiste-travailliste, en Angleterre, les Juifs avaient le contrôle du cabinet anglais.  Depuis que le socialisme y a été renversé, il n’y a plus un seul Juif dans le cabinet anglais pour connaître les secrets du gouvernement britannique.  Lorsque, par tactique, des Juifs pur-sang ne figurent pas à la tête d’un groupe socialiste, les chefs sont alors des demi-juifs ou des irreligieux anti-nationaux et internationalistes qui ne jurent que par les auteurs juifs, que par leurs maîtres juifs, et qui défendent la juiverie avec plus d’ardeur que les Israélites eux-mêmes.  La permanence de cet état de choses défend de croire que ce sont là de simples coïncidences.

There is one thing that should easily open the eyes of skeptics.  That is that wherever there are socialist regimes, it is the Jews who have the power and control.  This is not by chance.  And, when a socialist regime falls from power, it is at the same time the fall of Jewish power.  For the dozen years that the socialist-labor regime lasted in England, the Jews controlled the English cabinet.  Since socialism was overthrown there, there has not been a single Jew in the English cabinet to know the secrets of the British government. When, by way of tactics, pure-blooded Jews do not appear at the head of a socialist group, the leaders are always half-Jews or irreligious anti-nationals and internationalists who swear by the Jewish authors, by their Jewish masters, and who defend Jewry more fiercely than the Israelites themselves.  The permanence of this state of things precludes believing that these are simple coincidences.

Doctrine de négation

Doctrine of negation

Comme le libéralisme, le socialisme est l’adversaire du nationalisme et du christianisme, l’ennemi du droit de propriété et de l’autorité de la famille, l’ennemi de la loi naturelle en laquelle il refuse de reconnaître l’inégalité des hommes.  C’est le libéralisme plus avancé, plus prononcé, plus rapproché de ses conséquences finales.  Le libéralisme, en favorisant un capitalisme corrompu et qui dévorait tout, a fait disparaître une forte proportion de la propriété individuelle ; le socialisme

Like liberalism, socialism is the adversary of nationalism and of Christianity, the enemy of property rights and of the authority of the family, the enemy of natural law in that it refuses to recognize the inequality of men.  It is liberalism, more advanced, more pronounced, drawn nearer to its final consequences.  Liberalism, in favoring a corrupted capitalism that devours all, has caused a significant proportion of individual private property to vanish; socialism

[42]
[42]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

veut faire disparaître toute propriété.  C’est la doctrine de gauche, la doctrine de négation, qui nie tout ce qui découle des lois naturelles, divines et religieuses.

seeks to eliminate all private property.  This is the doctrine of the left, the doctrine of negation, which denies everything that flows from natural, divine and religious laws.

Il n’y a pas de “socialisme chrétien”

There is no “Christian socialism”

Contrairement à ce que certains illusionnés prétendent, il n’y a ni ne peut y avoir de socialisme chrétien.  Ce mythe a été confondu par la plus haute autorité chrétienne, celle du Vatican, lorsque Pie X a condamné les erreurs du “Sillon”.  D’ailleurs, les grands doctrinaires du socialisme, entre autres Proudhon, Millerand, Jaurès, ont affirmé que toute prétention à un socialisme chrétien est aussi illusoire qu’idiote.  Papes, évêques, rabbins, chefs maçonniques et socialistes admetteni tous qu’il y a une incompatibilité absolue entre le socialisme et le christianisme.  Il y a une sociologie chrétienne, une doctrine sociale chrétienne, mais pas de socialisme chrétien, dam le sens que tous les auteurs donnent au socialisme.  La différence entre le socialisme et la doctrine sociale chrétienne est celle-ci :  le socialisme prône exclusivement l’individualisme et repousse toutes les règles qui s’y opposent ; la doctrine sociale chrétienne combat l’individualisme, force l’individu à appliquer la règle d’aimer son prochain comme soi-même et soutient fermement toutes les lois naturelles, divines et religieuses, parce qu’elles éliminent l’égoïsme par l’enseignement de la solidarité sociale, parce qu’elles condamnent l’individualisme par les ordonnances concernant le prochain.  Pour pouvoir prôner l’individualisme comme le font le libéralisme et le socialisme, depuis 1789, il faut partir du principe que l’âme humaine n’existe pas.  Aussi comprend-on que la doctrine sociale chrétienne ne puisse pas se concilier, en aucune façon, avec ces conceptions purement matérialistes.

Contrary to what some illusionists claim, there is not nor can there be Christian socialism.  This myth was confounded by the highest Christian authority, that of the Vatican, when Pius X condemned the errors of “Sillon”.  Moreover, the great doctrinarians of socialism, among others Proudhon, Millerand, Jaurès, have affirmed that any claim to Christian socialism is as illusory as it is idiotic.  Popes, bishops, rabbis, masonic and socialist leaders all admit that there is an absolute incompatibility between socialism and Christianity.  There is a Christian sociology, a Christian social doctrine, but not Christian socialism, in the sense that all authors give to socialism.  The difference between socialism and Christian social doctrine is this:  socialism exclusively advocates individualism and repels all rules opposed to it; Christian social doctrine fights individualism, forces the individual to apply the rule “love thy neighbor as thyself” and firmly supports all natural, divine and religious laws, because they eliminate egoism by teaching social solidarity, because these condemn individualism through the ordinances concerning the neighbor.  To be able to advocate individualism as the fount of liberalism and socialism since 1789, we must begin from the principle that the human soul does not exist.  We must also understand that Christian social doctrine cannot be reconciled, in any way, with purely materialist conceptions.

Ces considérations nous feront mieux comprendre ce qu’est le fascisme, le but qu’il se propose et la procédure qu’il suit pour y parvenir.

These considerations make us better understand what fascism is, the goal it proposes and the procedure to follow to get there.

Le Fascisme

Attaques contre la charité

Fascism

Attacks against charity

Pourquoi les chefs, de la chrétienté combattent-ils avec tant d’ardeur tout ce que 1e socialisme (héritier du libéralisme) proclame et revendique :  abolition de la famille et des droits patriarchaux, abolition du droit de propriété, internationalisme, assurances sociales, égalitarisme et nivellement des individus, isolement et antagonisme des classes, abolition du capital, séparation de l’Eglise et de l’Etat, élimination de l’au-

Why do the leaders of Christianity so fervently combat all that socialism (liberalism’s heir) proclaims and stands for:  abolition of the family and patriarchal rights, abolition of the right to property, internationalism, social insurance, egalitarianism and leveling of individuals, isolation and antagonism of classes, abolition of capital, separation of Church and State, elimination of

[43]
[43]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

torité religieuse dans la régie de la morale publique ?  Non seulement parce que ces revendications portent atteinte à toute l’économie de droit divin et aux lois naturelles, mais encore parce qu’elles visent directement à la DESTRUCTION DE LA CHARITE, principe et base de tout christianisme.  Faisons disparaître la charité, et le christianisme n’a plus sa raison d’être.

religious authority in the regulation of public morals?  Not only because these assertions offend the whole economy of divine and natural law, but again because they aim directly at the DESTRUCTION OF CHARITY, the basic principle of Christianity.  Let Charity disappear and Christianity no longer has its purpose.

Quand un homme ne se devra plus à sa famille, à son épouse et à ses enfants ; quand il ne pourra plus rien posséder et par conséquent sera dans l’impossibilité d’aider son semblable ; quand les assurances sociales (inspirées par la franc-maçonnerie juive) auront enlevé aux hommes l’obligation individuelle de secourir les pauvres, les miséreux, les malades, les orphelins et les vieillards ; quand l’internationalisme aura fait disparaître toute discipline nationale et toute obligation de dévouement envers ïa grande famille qu’est la patrie ou la race ; quand la haine aveugle des autres classes sera suffisamment inculquée chez les individus pour ne leur permettre aucun bon mouvement envers les membres de ces classes ; quand l’égalité naturelle sera suffisamment admise pour croire qu’il n’y a plus ni supérieurs ni inférieurs auxquels l’homme doit quelque chose ; quand l’autorité religieuse, la seule qui régit la conscience individuelle, ne sera plus là pour garder la conscience vivante et éveillée, eh ! bien, je vous le demande, quelle nécessité, quel besoin y aura-t-il de parler devantage de charité ?  Ce serait alors, si les races chrétiennes refusaient de réagir, le judaïsme talmudique universel que les rabbins nous prédisent tous les jours, puisque le Talmud ne reconnaît que le circoncis judaïsant comme “prochain” du Juif conquérant et, pour obtenir un sort raisonnable du Juif vainqueur, il faudra être devenu son prochain, c’est-à-dire Talmudiste, adepte comme lui de la religion de “son père, qui est Satan”.

When a man no longer owes anything to his family, to his wife and children; when he can no longer own anything and in consequence cannot come to the aid of his neighbor; when social insurance (inspired by Jewish Free-Masonry) has removed from men the individual duty to aid the poor, the miserable, the sick, orphans and the elderly; when internationalism has made all national discipline and all duty of devotion to the larger family which is the fatherland or the race disappear; when the indiscriminate hatred of other classes is sufficiently instilled in individuals to prohibit their good relations with members of these classes; when natural equality is sufficiently admitted so as to believe there is neither superior nor inferior to whom a man owes something; when religious authority, which alone rules the individual conscience, is no longer there to keep conscience alive and awake, oh! well, I ask you, what necessity, what need will there be to speak of Charity?  It would then be, if the Christian races refused to react, universal Talmudic Judaism as the rabbis predict to us every day, since the Talmud recognizes only the circumcised Jew as the “neighbor” of the conquering Jew, and, to obtain a reasonable outcome from the conqueror Jew, one must be his neighbor, meaning a Talmudist, adept, like him, in the religion of “his father, who is Satan”.

La cause véritable de
la montée fasciste

The real cause of
the fascist rise

Le Fascisme, devant le péril imminent, se lève en im­placable ennemi du socialisme et de toutes ses conséquences.  Cependant, il ne faut pas croire que c’est le péril du socialisme qui a causé et occasionné le fascisme.  Il ne faut pas croire, non plus, que c’est l’exaspération de la guerre, comme on l’a dit pour l’Allemagne, qui a provoqué le fascisme, car l’Italie, qui était au nombre des pays vainqueurs, embrassa le fascisme dès le lendemain de la guerre.  Comme le socialisme, le fascisme est né du désastre de la démocratie libérale, de son incapacité de régler les problèmes nationaux et sociaux, du mécontente­ment des foules dont la démocratie a délibérément méconnu les traditions et faussé les aspirations.  Comme le socialisme, le fascisme est une révolte ; mais, alors que le socialisme est

Fascism, in the face of imminent peril, rises the implacable enemy of socialism and of all its consequences.  But, don’t believe the peril of socialism has caused and occasioned fascism.  Don’t believe, either, that it was provoked by the war, as was said for Germany, because Italy, among the victorious countries, embraced fascism the day after the war.  Like socialism, fascism was born of the disaster of liberal democracy, its inability to solve national and social problems, of the discontent of the masses whose traditions democracy deliberately ignored and whose aspirations it falsified.  Like socialism, fascism is a revolt; but, while socialism is

[44]
[44]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

une révolte contre ce qui peut rester d’ordre moral et spirituel, contre les lois naturelles et divines qui n’ont pas encore été répudiées, le fascisme est une révolte contre le désordre social et économique répandu par le libéralisme.  Comme le socialisme, le fascisme exige une autorité ferme et stable, avec cette différence qu’il la veut représentative de toutes les classes au lieu d’une seule, qu’il la veut réelle, personnelle et responsable.  Si le socialisme, doctrine de gauche, est essentiellement négatif, le fascisme, doctrine de droite, est essentiellement positif.  Si le socialisme est destructif et veut faire disparaître les derniers vestiges de la spiritualité, avant de construire son athéisme et son matérialisme, le fascisme comporte aussi un travail de destruction, destruction de tout le désordre accumulé par la démocratie moribonde, avant de construire son régime spiritualiste, qui doit imposer le respect de la charité dans toutes les manifestations sociales de l’individu.

a revolt against what may still remain of the moral and spiritual order, against natural and divine laws that have not yet been repudiated, fascism is a revolt against the social and economic disorder spread by liberalism.  Like socialism, fascism demands firm and stable authority, with the difference that it wants it representative of all classes instead of just one; it wants it real, personal and responsible.  If socialism, the doctrine of the left, is essentially negative, fascism, the doctrine of the right, is essentially positive.  If socialism is destructive and wants to make the last vestiges of spirituality disappear before building its atheism and its materialism, fascism also involves a work of destruction, destruction of all the disorder accumulated by the moribund democracy before building its spiritualist regime, which must impose respect for charity in every social manifestation of the individual.

Idée ni italienne
ni allemande

Idea not Italian
nor German

Fascisme vient du mot italien fascio, faisceau.  A l’origine du fascisme italien, la nouvelle formule était symbolisée par l’ancien faisceau romain, dans lequel on interprétait la hache comme le pouvoir souverain de l’Etat, et les faisceaux liés autour d’elle comme les différentes parties composantes de la nation :  tous ces éléments étant solidaires, responsables et en étroite coopération avec l’autorité suprême de l’Etat.  Le fascisme n’est pas plus une idée italienne ou allemande ou autrichienne ou roumaine que le socialisme n’est une idée française, russe, espagnole ou tchécoslovaque.  Tous deux sont des idées mondiales, des théories politiques adaptables en n’importe quel pays.  Le socialisme est une formule politique, sociale et économique qui rejette tout nationalisme et tout christianisme ; le fascisme est une formule politique, sociale et économique qui s’appuie sur les deux bases du nationalisme et du christianisme.  Le fascisme porte un nom d’origine italienne et, faute d’autre appellation, c’est le nom générique qui semble devoir lui rester, malgré les dénominations particulières qu’il porte suivant les pays.  Quelles que soient les différences secondaires qu’il ait dans ses diverses manifestations, le fascisme est fondamentalement le même partout, comme l’est d’ailleurs le socialisme, avec ses multiples variantes suivant le pays ou la race qui l’adopte.  Quelles sont les doctrines et les applications pratiques du fascisme dans les différentes champs de l’activité humaine ?  C’est la partie la plus intéressante de l’étude que nous faisons ensemble ce soir.

Fascism comes from the Italian word fascio, bundle.  At the origin of Italian fascism, the new formula was symbolized by the ancient Roman bundle, in which the ax was interpreted as the sovereign power of the State, and the rods linked around it as the different parts of the nation:  all these elements being in solidarity, responsible and in close cooperation with the supreme authority of the State.  Fascism is no more an Italian or German or Austrian or Romanian idea than socialism is a French, Russian, Spanish or Czechoslovakian idea.  Both are global ideas, political theories adaptable in any country.  Socialism is a political, social and economic formula that rejects all nationalism and all Christianity.  Fascism is a political, social and economic formula based on the two foundations of nationalism and Christianity.  Fascism has a name Italian in origin and, for lack of any other name, it is the generic name which seems to have stuck, in spite of the particular designations that it carries according to country.  Whatever may be the minor differences in its various manifestations, fascism is fundamentally the same everywhere, as is socialism, with its many variations depending on the country or race that adopts it.  What are the doctrines and practical applications of fascism in the different fields of human activity?  This is the most interesting part of the study we are conducting together tonight.

[45]
[45]

I know you’re on the edge of your seat.
Sign up!  Subscribe!
Je sais que tu es au bord de ton siège.
S’inscrire!  Souscrire!


Adrien Arcand “Avers The Family Is Fascism’s Ideal” (11 February 1937)

Adrien Arcand with the family of his friend, Gérard Lemieux

Adrien Arcand with Gérard Lemieux, his faithful lieutenant and Lemieux’s young wife, Réjeanne.  After the war, after the camps, arms filled with hope and joy, a new life.  Source:  Adrien Arcand, Une grande figure de notre temps, Jean Côté, 1994, p. 29


Since the family unit is the surest protection for individuals and for classes, even those that socialism wants to see disappear, socialism aims to deplete, dissolve and eliminate the family, numerous of whose rights have already been annihilated by liberalism.
 
— Adrien Arcand, Fascism or Socialism? (1933), p. 40*

 

Avers The Family Is
Fascism’s Ideal

Adrien Arcand Expounds
His Political Beliefs to McGill Club

THE MONTREAL GAZETTE, THURSDAY, 11 FEBRUARY 1937


Taking as its ideal the family — created by God and therefore perfect — Fascism in Quebec seeks to set up a new order based on God, King, country, property, family and personal initiative, Adrien Arcand, leader of the “Parti Social National Chrétien,” told the Social Problems Club of McGill University yesterday.

Of course, Fascism was dictatorship, he said, but this was a principle that went throughout nature.  Even in the beehive there was a dictator; heads of businesses and families were dictators.  Why had Bennett and Taschereau failed in government when they were so successful in their own businesses?  Because in Parliament and the Legislature they had been hampered by opposition.  Carrying on his analogy of the family, Mr. Arcand said that the state had to be rigid, just as a good father had to be who loved his children and wanted them to grow up healthy and sane.

Christianity, he emphasized, was the basis of Fascism, and in answer to a question he defined it as “a belief in the testament of love rather than in the testament of terror.”  Under democracy, exploiters stood between God and His children.  This Fascism would not tolerate.  Nor would it tolerate immorality.  “Whatever the yells,” he said, “pornography will be burned in public places.”

It was not because of Communism, “our direct enemy,” that Fascism came into being, said the leader.  It was because of the failure of democracy, which was based on liberty, an illusion.  “We hear only liberty — liberty to rebel against God, against our country, against law and order.  We never hear of duty,” Fascism sounded the call to duty.

Mr. Arcand blamed democracy for rebellions, strikes and wars, and even ugly architecture.  (The grandest achievements of men — Versailles, for instance — were in the days before democracy.)  It was to blame for the disruption of national unity and vision and for the new and damaging spirit of internationalism.  Liberalism he described as the ante-chamber of socialism, which could lead only to Communism, anarchy, the state of the beast.

__________
*  «Parce que la cellule familiale est la plus sûre protection pour les individus et pour les classes, même celles que le socialisme veut voir disparaître, le socialisme vise à la diminution, à la dissolution puis à la disparition de la famille, dont le libéralisme a déjà anéanti de nombreux droits.»

— Adrien Arcand, Fascisme ou Socialisme? (1933), p 40

– 30 –

Fascism or Socialism?  Second Instalment of a Talk by Adrien Arcand at Montreal in 1933, published by “Le Patriote

ADRIEN ARCAND (circa 1933)

ADRIEN ARCAND (circa 1933)

 
The Middle Ages were, in the West, the peak of Christian civilization.  The authority of divine right, recognized and accepted by the peoples, was stable and effective; class struggles were unknown; the workers, organized in corporations and guilds, enjoyed justice and happiness that we no longer know; national life was mainly rural, more in accordance with the true instincts of man and with natural laws.

— From Adrien Arcand’s Fascism or Socialism? (1933)

 

Foreword

Let me pick up where I left off on December 11th, 2018.  I gave you:  “Preview:  Introduction of Joseph Ménard to a Talk by Adrien Arcand on ‘Fascism or Socialism?” delivered at Montreal in 1933 and published by “Le Patriote”.

Today, I am giving you twelve more pages from “Fascism or Socialism” (pages 23-35), and all are from Arcand’s talk.  Pagination matches the French original, with this segment starting at page 23.

The talk ends at page 63 (with just one paragraph).  You already have the appendix, “La Croix Gammée, ce qu’elle représente”, (three pages from 65 to 67), delivered online December 22nd, 2018 as “New free eBook:  The Swastika, What it Represents, Adrien Arcand (1933)”.

The first 12 pages of Arcand’s talk being done, The Swastika being done, and Menard’s Introduction being done, that leaves a little under 30 pages of work still ahead of me to finish “Fascism or Socialism?”.

I put up a couple of new Arcand Quotation cards today, while translating these twelve pages.

The two quotes focus on the purpose of a devout Roman Catholic fascist (a young lay preacher with disciples) at the time he created his Catholic Corporatist movement and launched his National Social Christian Party.

In “Fascism or Socialism?”, Arcand asserts:

“The Middle Ages were, in the West, the peak of Christian civilization.  The authority of divine right, recognized and accepted by the peoples, was stable and effective; class struggles were unknown; the workers, organized in corporations and guilds, enjoyed justice and happiness that we no longer know; … The Middle Ages were the era of great philosophy and the purest humanism; they culminated in apotheosis with the classical era, which experienced the finest century of sculpture, painting, music, literature, all of which were addressed to the highest faculties of the mind.”

Arcand believed the “peak” of western civilization had been achieved in the Middle Ages; and that Jews, emancipated out of the ghettos, had been its downfall.

In Down With Hate! (1965) (page 121), Arcand quotes Father Joseph Léman, a pious Talmudic Jew who converted and became a Catholic priest:

“The emancipation of the Jews and their entry into society, with both feet, marked the beginning of the decay of the Christian States and the march of Israel toward world domination”.

In “Fascism or Socialism?”, Arcand explains:

“It was because the Jews were contained in their ghettos and put out of harm’s way during the Middle Ages, that this epoc was so brilliant, so polished, socially so peaceful, so positively Christian”.

And:

“Since liberalism threw down the walls of the ghetto” said Arcand, “and put the anti-Christians of Israel on the same footing as the Christians, in Christian countries, we note the rapid decline of spirituality, and at the same time the rapid rise of materialism.”

In essence, Arcand is showing us the cause of the West’s decline:  the fact that matter and anti-matter (Christianity and anti-Christianity) were combined.  One had to destroy the other.  Arcand’s beloved Christianity was being destroyed, and he notes the French Revolution as the high water mark.

But Arcand is not trying to re-establish the ghetto.  He is attempting to invent a new system that in and of itself naturally prevents exploitation by anyone, including by the “anti-Christian” Jews.

Thus, in 1933, inspired by the Popes, by the social doctrine of the Church, and by Christian civilization in the Middle Ages with its trade guilds and corporations, Adrien Arcand wanted to restore the greatness of the Christian West.

Seeking the best interests of the workers and of all the social classes, Arcand sought a revival of the Medieval “justice and happiness that we no longer know”.

At the same time, his new political system, under a new form of unitary authority (reminiscent no doubt of the centralized authority of “divine right”; {and see my notes about Aquinas and no “assistant Pope}) would prevent the anti-Christians and their Communism from harming the body politic reconstituted in Catholic Corporatism.

Arcand necessarily is also trying to resolve the religious war that has prevailed for 2,000 years by implementing a western Christian political system the Jews can’t overthrow.

“I am against harming any man.  I believe in faith, hope and charity”, said Arcand as reported by Kenneth G. Wright in ‘Jews Trying to Soften Us For Russian Drive’ —Arcand (Montreal Gazette, 25 February 1947)

“I am against no race in the world.  I am against the Jews not as Jews but because of what they are trying to do.  Anti-semitism, you must remember, is not an offensive status, it is a defensive one” he says in “Solution to Palestine problem:  ‘Send Jews to Madagascar’, Says Fascist Adrien Arcand” (24 February 1947)

But, in “Fascism or Socialism?” in 1933, despite the hyperbole he will flirt with in 1947 after five years’ internment without trial, at the pleasure of the Jews, Arcand makes clear that his political aim is to place the Jews in such a state or condition that they cannot cause harm:

“The antisemites have no personal grudges against the Jews, taken on their own.  What they want to destroy is the liberal philosophy of the Jews, because this philosophy is the antithesis and enemy of Christian philosophy, and the secret international organization of the Jews is the political system of this destructive philosophy.  And as the Jews, in spite of all the best qualities that the best among them may have, are the propagandists of this philosophy and the instruments of this system, they must, in Christian countries, be placed in such a state that they cannot consciously or unconsciously pursue their work of Satanism.”

Arcand’s Corporatism would be that state or condition.

In ‘Stronger Than Ever Here’ is Arcand’s Fascist Boast, Montreal Gazette (22 February 1947), Wright also reports:

Today, he (Arcand) believes newspapermen should be a group in the corporate state, electing one or more of their fellows to a parliament at Ottawa, setting, with the publishers (who should be another corporate group) their wages and the prices at which newspapers and advertising should be sold.

The doctors, the lawyers and similar professional men have corporate groups in this province — why not everybody?” he asks.

The purpose of Arcand’s National Social Christian Party, and then of his National Unity Party of Canada, was to establish a great new era that would save the West and Christianity.

I leave it to readers, researchers and students to develop these observations.  And now, here is Arcand.
 


FASCISM OR SOCIALISM?

Preview of a Talk by Adrien Arcand

GIVEN AT MONTREAL IN 1933

For the first time in English


Conference

Adrien Arcand

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

Conférence

ADRIEN ARCAND

Conference

ADRIEN ARCAND

 
Mesdames, Messieurs,

 
Ladies, Gentlemen,

 
La cause dont je me suis fait, avec mes amis, le propagateur, me rend agréable le devoir de vous remercier pour l’empressement avec lequel vous avez répondu à notre invitation.  Je sais qu’il y en a, parmi vous, qui ont non seulement souscrit leur obole à l’organisation de cette soirée, mais qui se sont déplacés de régions éloignées pour être avec nous ce soir.  C’est pour moi, en même temps qu’un motif de gratitude, une consolante attestation que la cause qui nous intéresse est bien vivante et suscite dans toute la province une attention significative.  Cette cause, vous savez dans quelles circonstances nous l’avons entreprise, il y a plus de quatre ans ; comment elle s’est inaltérablement poursuivie ; comment, avec les circonstances, nous avons dû en changer la forme, sans jamais en rien modifier de l’esprit et des principes ; comment elle est encore aujourd’hui ce qu’elle était hier, avec cette différence qu’elle est plus avancée, parce que le travail préliminaire a fait son oeuvre, qu’elle est mieux comprise parce que les esprits sont enfin en éveil, qu’elle est plus claire et plus compréhensible parce que la marche des événements a en tous points donné raison à tout ce que nous avions annoncé plusieurs années à l’avance.  Ce qui nous a permis, dans le passé, de distinguer nettement le cours des événements en préparation, nous permettra encore, croyons-nous, de discerner pareillement dans l’avenir, afin que la cause que nous avons embrassée, plus grande que les personnes et plus forte que les chefs, atteigne à sa réalisation malgré tous les obstacles qui continueront, avec plus de furie, de lui être suscités.

 
The cause I have adopted, together with my friends, the disseminators, makes it my pleasant duty to thank you for the willingness with which you have responded to our invitation.  I know that there are some among you who have not only contributed an offering to support organizing this evening’s event, but who have traveled from remote areas to be with us tonight.  At the same time as being a reason for gratitude, it is also, for me, comforting evidence that our cause is very much alive and is attracting significant attention throughout the province.  You know the circumstances in which we undertook this cause more than four years ago; how it has continued, undaunted; how, in keeping with the circumstances, we had to change its form, never in any way altering its spirit and principles; how today it still is what it was yesterday, with the difference that it is more advanced because the preliminary effort has done its work, so it is better understood because minds are finally awake; it is clearer and more understandable because the course of events has in every way proven all we had foretold several years in advance.  What allowed us in the past to clearly distinguish the course of events will allow us again, we believe, to foresee the future in like manner so that the cause we have embraced, greater than individuals and stronger than the leaders, will be achieved in spite of all the ever more vehement obstacles mounted against it.

Vous me permettrez de redire publiquement l’estime que j’entretiens à l’endroit de celui qui m’a précédé sur cette tribune, mon grand ami Joseph Menard.  Si jamais un homme fut à la peine, matériellement et moralement, pour une cause, c’est lui.  Je ne connais pas d’abnégation, de renoncement et de sacrifices plus grands que les siens dans le travail que nous avons poursuivi, ni de vaillance et de force de caractère mieux trempées.  Dans la cause qui nous est chère, il est grand par

You will allow me to publicly state again the esteem in which I hold him who preceded me on this platform, my great friend Joseph Ménard.  If ever a man extended himself, materially and morally, for a cause, it is he.  I know of no self-abnegation, renunciation and sacrifice greater than his in the work we have pursued, nor valor nor better tempered strength of character.  In the cause that is dear to us, he is great

[23]
[23]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

sa foi et grand par ses oeuvres.  Je ne crois pas que le même idéal puisse produire un plus précieux et plus loyal soldat.

in faith, and great in works.  I doubt the same ideal could produce a more valuable or loyal soldier.

Je regrette d’avoir à corriger une impression que certains se sont faite sur le but de notre soirée.  Il n’est pas de présenter un programme de politique appliquée, car ce serait devancer la maturité du temps, anticiper sur des événements pour lesquels l’heure n’a pas encore sonné, à l’horloge du destin.  Nous voulons simplement, ce soir, exposer les bases fondamentales et les doctrines d’un système politique qui commande l’attention mondiale :  le Fascisme.  Avant que ne s’élaborent des programmes politiques fascistes, il est bon de définir et comprendre exactement ce qu’est ce système, d’où il vient et où il va, afin de pouvoir plus tard discerner quels sont les vrais des faux programmes fascistes, les bons des mauvais, les sérieux des puérils.  Cette étude, on le comprend, doit être nécessairement abstraite et, à cause de l’ampleur du sujet, très condensée.  Vous en tiendrez compte, je l’espère, pour m’accorder votre indulgence.

I regret having to correct an impression that some people have had about the purpose of our evening.  It is not to present a program of applied politics; it would be premature to anticipate events for which the hour has not yet come on the clock of destiny.  We simply want, tonight, to lay out the fundamental bases and doctrines of a political system that commands world attention:  Fascism.  Before fascist political programs are developed, it is good to define and to understand exactly what this system is, where it comes from and where it is going, to be able later to distinguish between true and false fascist programs, between the good and the bad, and the seriousness of the insubstantial.  This study, understandably, must be necessarily abstract and, because of the size of the subject, very condensed.  You will take this into account, I hope, in granting me your indulgence.

Fin d’une civilisation

The end of a civilization

Nous assistons en ce moment à l’effondrement d’une civilisation qui a dominé le monde depuis la Révolution Française.  Cette civilisation est celle de la démocratie libérale.  Elle sombre dans un chaos indescriptible, dans un tumulte de souffrances, de misères, de perturbations sociales, de bouleversements politiques, de maux économiques, de divisions internationales et de dissensions religieuses comme jamais l’humanité n’en a été témoin.  Sur les ruines de cette démocratie libérale, dont la structure vermoulue cède graduellement dans tous les pays, commence de surgir, dans un gigantesque enfantement douloureux et lent, la naissance d’un monde nouveau.  Et, comme le monde moderne qui agonise, le monde nouveau ne pourra revêtir que deux aspects, mais plus précisés et plus avancés :  celui de gauche et celui de droite, jusqu’au jour où, dans un colossal combat mondial, l’un des aspects essaiera d’absorber et annihiler l’autre.  Ce sera alors la dernière bataille, avant-coureuse de la fin des temps.  Acteurs obligatoires dans le drame solennel et émouvant que nous réserve notre époque, nous n’avons pas le droit de nous contenter du rôle de témoins et de chercher dans l’inaction un refuge pour notre indifférence, notre tiédeur ou notre frayeur.  Si peu que nous ayons de convictions, il va falloir les défendre, car l’ennemi qui les attaque est sans repos et sans pardon.  Et le danger devant lequel nous sommes lancés pour un combat décisif, avec toutes les autres races chrétiennes, est d’un caractère et d’une gravité tels qu’il nous va falloir combattre non seulement pour triompher, mais pour que l’ennemi soit définitivement mis hors

We are witnessing the collapse of a civilization that has dominated the world since the French Revolution.  The civilization of liberal democracy.  It is sinking into indescribable chaos, into a tumult of suffering, misery, social disruption, political upheaval, economic evils, international divisions and religious dissensions as never before witnessed by humanity.  On the ruins of this liberal democracy, whose worm-eaten structure is gradually subsiding in all countries, the birth of a new world is beginning to emerge in a gigantic, slow and painful delivery.  And, like the dying modern world, the new world can only have two aspects, but clearer and more advanced:  the left and the right; until the day when, in a colossal world combat, one of these aspects will try to absorb and annihilate the other.  That will be the final battle, the forerunner of the end times.  As obligatory actors in the solemn and moving drama of our time, we have no right to be satisfied with the role of observers, and to seek through inaction a refuge for our indifference, our timidness or our fright.  However few our firm beliefs, we will have to defend them, for the enemy attacking them is tireless and merciless.  And the danger facing us on the road to this decisive battle, together with all the other Christian races, is of such a character and gravity that we will have to fight not only to triumph, but to render the enemy permanently

[24]
[24]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

d’état de nuire dans l’avenir, et pour que nous puissions cheminer sans contrainte vers la fin ultime qui nous est dévolue, comme collectivité et comme individus.

harmless in future, so that we can move forward without constraint toward the ultimate end devolved upon us, as a collective and as individuals.

La véritable crise

The real crisis

La crise économique qui atteint si cruellement le monde entier n’est que l’aspect extérieur et superficielle de la crise plus profonde qui secoue le monde et menace les fondements mêmes de la civilisation chrétienne.  A un moment donné, nous nous sommes engagés dans la voie, séduisante mais fausse, du matérialisme, parce qu’elle brisait l’armature spirituelle de notre société occidentale, et cette voie nous a conduits au désastre.

The economic crisis that so cruelly affects the whole world is only the external and superficial aspect of the deeper crisis that is rocking the world and threatening the very foundations of Christian civilization.  At a given moment, the seductive but false path of materialism was embarked upon.  This route shattered the spiritual framework of our Western society, and has led us to disaster.

Un simple coup d’oeil sur les quatre derniers siècles nous permet de comprendre l’effroyable revirement qui s’est opéré dans l’esprit humain, et le renversement des valeurs réelles dans l’appréciation humaine.

A glance at the past four centuries allows us to understand the appalling turnaround that has taken place in the human mind, and the reversal of real values ​​in human appreciation.

Les stages de la déchéance

Stages of the collapse

Le moyen-âge fut, en Occident, l’apogée de la civilisation chrétienne.  L’autorité, reconnue et acceptée comme de droit divin par les peuples, était stable et efficace ; les luttes de classes étaient inconnues ; les travailleurs, organisés en corporations et en guildes, jouissaient d’une justice et d’un bonheur qu’on ne connaît plus ; la vie nationale était surtout rurale, c’est-à-dire plus conforme aux véritables instincts de l’homme et aux lois naturelles.  Le moyen-âge fut l’ère de la grande philosophie et du plus pur humanisme ; il se termina en apothéose avec l’époque classique, qui connut le plus beau siècle de la sculpture, de la peinture, de la musique, de la littérature qui, toutes, s’adressaient aux plus belles facultés de l’esprit.

The Middle Ages were, in the West, the peak of Christian civilization.  The authority of divine right, recognized and accepted by the peoples, was stable and effective; class struggles were unknown; the workers, organized in corporations and guilds, enjoyed justice and happiness that we no longer know; national life was mainly rural, more in accordance with the true instincts of man and with natural laws.  The Middle Ages were the era of great philosophy and the purest humanism; they culminated in apotheosis with the classical era, which experienced the finest century of sculpture, painting, music, literature, all of which were addressed to the highest faculties of the mind.

Immédiatement après, on ne s’adresse plus aux fortes facultés ni à l’esprit pur, mais aux faiblesses de la raison et au sentiment.  L’école des Encyclopédistes masque d’un voile de scepticisme les valeurs spirituelles, et le monde descend l’échelle vers le romantisme.  Le sentiment, faculté secondaire, domine les arts.  Les premières valeurs spirituelles étant écartées, les troubles matériels surgissent :  révolutions, négation de l’autorité de droit divin, anticléricalisme, proclamation de l’égalité des hommes qui amène les luttes de classes.  Le culte de la matière, dans lequel on verse à mesure que se développent les sciences et que se multiplient les inventions, tend graduellement à supplanter le culte de l’Immatériel.

Immediately afterward, the potent faculties, pure mind, are no longer appealed to, but instead the weaknesses of reason and sentiment.  The school of the Encyclopedists masks spiritual values with a veil of skepticism, and the world descends the ladder toward romanticism.  Sentiment, a secondary faculty, dominates the arts.  Primary spiritual values being dismissed, material disturbances arise:  revolutions, denial of the authority of divine right, anticlericalism, proclamation of the equality of men that brings about class struggles.  The cult of matter, which expands as the sciences develop and inventions multiply, tends gradually to supplant the cult of the nonmaterial.

Puis, de l’époque romantique à nos jours, l’humanité descend l’échelle avec une rapidité effarante, et l’on en arrive à la destruction ouverte des religions, aux luttes de classes les plus passionnées, à la croyance en la seule puissance de l’or

Then, from the romantic period to our present day, humanity descends the ladder with frightening rapidity, and we arrive at the open destruction of religions, the most passionate class struggles, belief solely in the power of gold

[25]
[25]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

et de la matière ; la création défie le Créateur.  Les arts, nés dans le rythme, l’équilibre, le respect de la mesure, de la ligne et de l’harmonie, deviennent un épouvantable désordre de cacophonie, de dissonance, de déséquilibre et de sauvagerie véritable qui ne s’adressent plus à l’esprit ni même au sentiment, mais aux nerfs et aux instincts destructifs de la bête humaine.

and in the material; creation defies the Creator.  The arts, born in rhythm, balance, respect for measure, line and harmony, become a shocking disorder of cacophany, dissonance, disequilibrium and true savagery addressed no longer to the mind or even to sentiment, but to the nerves and the destructive instincts of the human beast.

A la croisée des chemins

At a crossroad

Le libéralisme de la Révolution Française affirmait l’égalité et le nivellement d’une humanité divinisée par elle-même, autonome, indépendante, ne recevant de lois que d’elle-même et ne se devant qu’à elle-même.  Ce ferment anti-chrétien, niant toute divinité en-dehors de l’homme lui-même, a matérialisé et bestialisé l’humanité.  Celle-ci en est aujourd’hui rendue à la croisée des chemins, où elle doit décider si elle va continuer sa descente vers un matérialisme absolu, une destruction définitive des religions, une république qui englobera toutes les races sous un même pouvoir central ; ou si elle va effectuer un retour vers le spiritualisme, vers la conscience religieuse et nationale, et se débarrasser des liens qui enchaînent déjà une grande partie des populations au matérialisme.

The liberalism of the French Revolution affirmed the equality and the levelling of a self-divinized humanity, autonomous, independent, receiving its laws only from itself and answerable only to itself.  This anti-Christian ferment, denying any divinity outside of man himself, has materialized and bestialized humanity.  Which, today, has arrived at a crossroad where it must decide to continue its descent toward absolute materialism, a final destruction of religions, a republic to encompass all the races under the same central power; or effect a return toward spiritualism, toward religious and national consciousness, and rid itself of the chains which already connect a large part of the populations to materialism.

La question se pose, devant le monde entier, devant chaque pays en particulier.  Il va falloir y répondre, pour nous comme pour les autres.  Et, à cette question, il n’y a que deux alternatives possibles :  le fascisme ou le socialisme.  Il n’y a pas à songer à la démocratie, parce qu’elle est faite de l’idée libérale qui forme l’essence du socialisme, parce qu’elle est moribonde et expirante, parce qu’elle a fait fausse route, parce qu’elle a misérablement failli, parce qu’elle a provoqué la crise et le chaos dans lesquels le monde se débat présentement et dont il veut se dégager.

The question is posed for the whole world and for each country separately.  It must be answered, for us, as for the others.  And, to this question there are only two possible alternatives:  fascism or socialism.  There is no dreaming of democracy, called forth from the liberal idea which forms the essence of socialism, because it is dying and expiring, it has taken the wrong road, it has failed miserably, it has caused the crisis and chaos in which the world is presently struggling and from which it wants to free itself.

Seulement deux alternatives

Only two
alternatives

Il n’y a donc que deux seules alternatives :  détruire toute spiritualité, tout sentiment national et religieux, toutes traditions passées, et c’est alors le socialisme ; ou effectuer un retour à la spiritualité, au sens national et traditionnaliste, et c’est le fascisme.  Avant d’entrer dans l’explication de ces deux modes politiques et sociaux, il est bon d’étudier comment il se fait que nous sommes en présence de pareil problème, et quelles en sont les causes véritables.

There are just two alternatives:  destroy all spirituality, all national and religious feeling, all past traditions, and this then is socialism; or, return to spirituality, to national and traditionalist ways, and this is fascism.  Before embarking on an explanation of these two political and social modes, it is advisable to study how it happens that we are faced with such a problem, and what the real causes are.

Toutes les philosophies s’accordent à dire que les modes politiques sont la forme extérieure de l’état d’esprit des peuples.  Et tous les penseurs s’accordent sur cet axiome que :  la politique n’est, en somme, qu’une question de race et de religion.  La politique définit quels doivent être les rapports entre l’individu et

All the philosophers agree in saying that political regimes are the exterior form of the spirit of peoples.  And all thinkers agree on this axiom:  that politics, in sum, is only a question of race and religion.  Politics defines what must be the relationships between the individual and

[26]
[26]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

l’Etat, entre l’individu et ses semblables, entre l’Etat et l’étranger.  Mais avant de connaître ces définitions, il est absolument nécessaire de définir ce qu’est l’individu lui-même.  Et cela nous conduit à une question élémentaire du petit catéchisme.

the State, between the individual and his fellow-man, between the State and the foreigner.  But before knowing these definitions, it is absolutely necessary to define what the individual himself is.  And this leads us to an elementary question of the little catechism.

La clef de tout le
problème

The key to the whole problem

L’homme est-il un être composé d’un corps transitoire et passager, et d’une âme immortelle qui doit atteindra à Dieu ?  Ou bien l’homme est-il simplement un animal sans âme, qui n’existe que durant le court temps d’une vie humaine et qui, alors, doit jouir le plus possible de la vie présente sans souci d’un au-delà ?  Il y a la réponse chrétienne, qui enseigne l’existence de l’âme et qui fait de la vie présente un moyen d’atteindre à la vie éternelle, et non une fin en soi.  Il y a la réponse antichrétienne, qui nie cette définition.  C’est pourquoi, il ne peut y avoir pour l’Etat que deux façons de définir quels doivent être les rapports internationaux, nationaux et sociaux des individus, de faire des lois et des règlements à leur sujet :  en tenant compte de l’âme humaine et des soins qui lui sont dûs, ou en niant l’existence de l’âme et en ignorant toute préoccupation à son sujet.

Is man a being composed of a transient, impermanent body and an immortal soul that must reach God?  Or is man simply an animal without a soul, existing only briefly during the short span of a human life, and who therefore must enjoy the present life as much as possible without concern for an afterlife?  The Christian answer teaches the existence of the soul and makes the present life a means to achieve eternal life, and not an end in itself.  The anti-Christian answer denies this definition.  That is why, for the State, there can only be two ways of defining what must be the international, national and social relations of individuals, of making laws and regulations concerning them: by taking the soul into account and the care that is due to it, or by denying the existence of the soul and ignoring any concern for it.

Les gouvernements sont faits pour administrer des hommes.  S’ils reconnaissent que l’homme a une âme, ils admettent l’existence et la priorité nécessaire de la question religieuse.  S’ils n’admettent pas l’existence de l’âme, ils affirmeront l’inutilité des religions et travailleront à les détruire, comme le font les gouvernements de Russie, d’Espagne et du Mexique.

Governments are made to administer men.  If they recognize that man has a soul, they admit the existence and the necessary priority of the religious question.  If they do not admit the existence of the soul, they will affirm the futility of religions and work to destroy them, as do the governments of Russia, Spain and Mexico.

Des conséquences logiques

Logical consequences

Ainsi, l’on voit que la question politique, qui régit des êtres dont elle reconnaît ou méconnaît la spiritualité est fondamentalement et avant tout une question de religion ou d’irréligion.  De façon ou d’autre, la religion et l’irréligion sont des conclusions normales, logiques et conséquentes de la définition que l’on fait de l’être humain.  La politique, comme tout ce qui se rapporte à la gouverne des êtres humains, est donc une question de foi.  Toutes les autres questions qui se rattachent à la politique sont accessoires et secondaires, puisque le rôle de la politique est moins d’administrer que de guider, gouverner et diriger.

Thus, we see that the political question, which governs beings whose spirituality is either recognized or disregarded, is fundamentally and above all a question of religion or irreligion.  One way or another, religion and irreligion are normal, logical conclusions according to the definition of the human being.  Politics, like everything that relates to the governance of human beings, is therefore a question of faith. All other questions relating to politics are incidental and secondary, since the role of politics is less to administer than to guide, govern and direct.

La question de race

The question of race

La question de race elle-même n’est, au fond, qu’une question de religion.  Il y a, dans chaque race, un code d’éthique, un genre de vie, une particularité de moeurs, un ensemble de

The question of race itself is not, at bottom, a question of religion.  There is, in each race, a code of ethics, a type of life, a particularity of morals, a collection of

[27]
[27]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

traditions qui sont basés sur une seule chose :  la façon dont les membres de cette race se sont comportés entre eux, socialement et individuellement, depuis les origines de cette race.  Et cette façon de se comporter n’a trouvé sa raison d’être, sa justification et sa discipline que dans des préceptes religieux reconnus et admis par la race.

traditions which are based on just one thing:  the manner in which members of this race behave amongst themselves, socially and individually, from the origins of this race.  And this manner of behaving finds its motive and justification and its discipline only in the religious precepts recognized and acknowledged by the race.

Malgré ces vérités élémentaires, la politique démocratique libérale, depuis la Révolution Française dont elle est issue, n’a cessé de s’attaquer à la race et à la religion, essayant par tous les moyens imaginables de les dissoudre, d’usurper leur autorité, de les remplacer par une forme de tyrannie matérialiste.  D’où vient donc ce levain anti-religieux et anti-racial qui se répand sur le monde, quelle est la source de cette contagion, d’où part-elle, qu’est-ce qui l’inspire et l’anime ?  Dans ses mémoires, Steed a écrit qu’aucun homme, qu’il soit philosophe, écrivain politique ou diplomate, ne peut être considéré comme mûr ou comme connaissant les premiers éléments de la question mondiale s’il n’a étudié à fond la question juive.  Repassons donc rapidement cette question, pour voir si nous y trouverons la réponse que nous cherchons.

Despite these elementary truths, liberal-democratic politics, since the time of the French Revolution from which it emerged, has not ceased to attack race and religion, trying by all imaginable means to dissolve them, to usurp their authority, to replace them with a materialist form of tyranny.  Where does this anti-religious and anti-racial leaven come from that is spreading across the world, what is the source of this contagion, where does it start, what inspires and animates it?  In his memoirs, Steed wrote that no man, be he a philosopher, political writer or diplomat, can be considered ripe or knowledgeable in the basic elements of the world question if he has not studied the Jewish question in-depth.  So, let us quickly review this question to see if we can find in it the answer we are looking for.

Avilissement de la race juive

Debasement of the Jewish race

Dans l’antiquité Dieu fit un pacte avec la race juive.  Cette race était tellement dégénérée, sale, déchue, que l’Eternel, dans son infinie miséricorde, crut devoir faire plus pour elle que pour toute autre race.  C’est ce que permet de conclure la lecture attentive de l’Ancien Testament, dans lequel les justes et les saints sont tellement rares, en vingt siècles d’histoire, qu’ils forment la faible exception qui confirme une règle générale de corruption.  Dans le dessein de relever cette race, Dieu lui promit que Son Divin Fils, le Messie, sortirait de ses rangs.  Ainsi le Sauveur, pour vraiment subir les dernières humiliations, ne devait pas seulement naître parmi les animaux, dans une étable, mais il devait voir le jour parmi la race la plus avilie du monde.  Cette faveur divine aurait dû convaincre les Juifs de s’améliorer mais, tout au contraire, ils ne firent que descendre plus profondément dans leur dégénérescence.

In antiquity, God made a pact with the Jewish race.  This race was so far degenerated, soiled, fallen, that the Eternal, in his infinite mercy, thought that more must be done for it than for any other race.  This is what allows us to complete a close reading of the Old Testament, in which the just and the holy are so rare, in twenty centuries of history, that they form the slight exception that confirms a general rule of corruption. With the purpose of raising up this race, God promised it that His Divine Son, the Messiah, would emerge from its ranks.  Thus, the Savior, in order to truly undergo the depths of humiliation, must not only be born among the animals, in a stable, but he must see the light of day among the most debased race on Earth. This divine favor should have convinced the Jews to improve themselves, but quite to the contrary, they only plunged more profoundly into degeneracy.

Cette race ne fut jamais déiste.  Le décret d’Aman, sous Assuérus, nous fait voir à quel point de matérialisme elle était rendue, et quel péril religieux, national et politique elle était pour le pays.  Ce qu’Aman leur reprochait a été reproché aux Juifs de tous temps, sous les pharaons, sous les empereurs romains, à travers tout le moyen-âge et jusqu’à nos jours.  Jamais, nulle part, on ne se plaint de la religion des Juifs, mais partout et toujours de leur matérialisme.

This race was never deist.  The decree of Aman, under Ahasuerus, shows us the point to which materialism had gone, and what a religious, national and political danger it was for the country.  That for which Aman reproached them had been held against the Jews of all eras, under the Pharaohs, under the Roman emperors, across the whole Middle Ages to our own day.  Never, anywhere, was the religion of the Jews complained of, but everywhere and always their materialism.

[28]
[28]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

Engeance matérialiste et satanique

A materialist
and satanic race

Les Juifs, à cause de leur profonde bassesse, ont justifié de la Miséricorde divine des interventions extraordinaires.  Mais cette race était si peu déiste que, chaque fois qu’un messager de Dieu lui était envoyé, elle l’assassinait.  Les écrits des prophètes sont déistes mais les Juifs, en regard de ces écrits, ont posé des actes de répudiation et d’assassinat.  Au moment où ils étaient le plus près de Dieu, sous leur grand chef et prophète Moïse, les Juifs nous prouvent leur profond athéisme.  Ils venaient d’être témoins des dix plaies d’Egypte, ils venaient de voir la main de Dieu dans leur passage de la Mer Rouge, ils venaient d’entendre le tonnerre de l’Eternel promulguant la Loi sur le Sinaï, mais cela ne les empêcha pas d’élever une idole au véritable dieu de leur coeur :  le Veau d’Or.  Passe encore pour les prophètes.  Mais que firent-ils quand Dieu leur envoya son Fils, qui fit devant eux des miracles et des prodiges capables de détruire tout doute et tout scepticisme ?  Ils s’acharnèrent contre Lui dès sa naissance, Le poursuivirent durant toute sa vie publique et ne furent satisfaits que lorsqu’ils L’eurent fait assassiner, demandant que son sang retombe sur eux et toute leur descendance, malgré le juge et gouverneur romain qui Le proclamait juste et innocent.  D’eux-mêmes, volontairement, ils rompirent avec l’Eternel, et prouvèrent au monde que, si Dieu leur avait fait des messages particuliers et des faveurs uniques pour les sauver, leur avait envoyé (et à eux seuls) ses prophètes, ses législateurs, son Fils, cette “race au cou roide” avait toujours été réfractaire à toute divinité et ne pouvait jamais prendre parti pour Dieu.  Aussi comprend-on mieux, quand on a lu l’atroce et sanguinaire histoire des Juifs, ces paroles de Jésus-Christ à leur sujet (Saint Jean, VIII) :  “Vous ne me reconnaissez pas parce que vous n’êtes pas de Dieu ; je suis d’en-haut, et vous, vous êtes d’en-bas; si vous étiez de mon Père, vous me reconnaîtriez ; mais votre père, à vous, c’est le diable, père du mensonge, qui fut homicide dès le commencement, et vous faites son oeuvre”.  On comprend aussi pourquoi cette race sataniste, à qui Dieu a vainement communiqué tous les messages de la divinité, a proscrit et poursuivi les apôtres, a inspiré les persécutions chrétiennes, les schismes et les hérésies, pourquoi elle inspire, dirige et exécute, de nos jours, les abominables persécutions contre tout ce qui est chrétien en Russie, en Espagne, au Mexique et dans d’autres pays socialistes, comment la juiverie tente en ce moment de crucifier la chrétienté sur une croix d’or, comme elle a crucifié son Fondateur sur une croix de bois.

The Jews, because of their profound baseness, thoroughly earned the Divine Mercy of extraordinary interventions.  But this race was so little deist that every time a messenger of God was sent to it, it killed him.  The writings of the prophets are deist, but the Jews, with regard to these writings, carried out acts of repudiation and murder.  At the moment when they were closest to God, under their great leader and prophet, Moses, the Jews proved to us their profound atheism.  They had just witnessed the ten plagues of Egypt, they had just seen the hand of God in their passage through the Red Sea, they had just heard the Eternal One’s thunder promulgating the Law from Sinai, but that did not stop them from raising up an idol to the true god of their heart:  the Golden Calf.  Pass again on the prophets.  But what did they do when God sent them His Son, who performed miracles and wonders before them capable of destroying all doubt and all skepticism?  They persecuted Him from His birth, pursued Him throughout His public life and were not satisfied until they had Him murdered, demanding that His blood be spilled upon them and upon their descendants, despite the Roman judge and governor who proclaimed Him just and innocent.  Of themselves, voluntarily, they broke with the Lord, and proved to the world that, if God had given them special messages and unique favors to save them, had sent to them (and them alone) his prophets, his legislators, his Son, this “stiff necked race” had always been resistant to any divinity and could never stand with God.  So we understand better, when we read the atrocious and bloodthirsty history of the Jews, these words of Jesus Christ concerning them (Saint John, VIII):  “You do not recognize me because you are not of God; I am from above, and you are from below; if you were from my Father, you would recognize me; but your father is the devil, the father of lies, who was a homicide from the beginning, and you do his work”.*  We also understand why this satanist race, to whom God vainly communicated all the messages of divinity, outlawed and pursued the apostles, inspired the Christian persecutions, schisms and heresies, and why it inspires, directs and executes in our own day the abominable persecutions against all that is Christian in Russia, Spain, Mexico and in other socialist countries, how Jewry is trying at this moment to crucify Christendom on a cross of gold, as it crucified its Founder on a cross of wood.

[29]
[29]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

L’écho du cri luciférien

Echo of the cry of Lucifer

Les Juifs sont les enfants de Satan, ils font l’oeuvre de leur père, a déclaré Jésus-Christ dans son terrifiant jugement.  Quelle est la caractéristique de Satan ?  Le désir de l’émancipation, de la liberté.  “Je ne servirai pas !” fut son premier cri de révolte contre l’ordre établi par Dieu lui-même.  Cette caractéristique luciférienne est aussi celle des Juifs, les enfants de Satan.  Comme leur père, les Juifs ne veulent rien servir, ni la Gentilité, ni un drapeau, ni un souverain, ni une patrie, ni aucun ordre établi, ni aucune loi existante, ni aucune autorité régulière.  Comme leur père, les Juifs demandent l’émancipation, la liberté.  Emancipation de tout ce qui n’est pas Juif !  Liberté de poursuivre leur oeuvre sataniste.

The Jews are children of Satan, they do the work of their father, said Jesus Christ in his terrifying judgment.  What is the characteristic of Satan?  The desire for emancipation, for liberty.  “I will not serve!” was his first cry of revolt against the order established by God Himself.  This Luciferian characteristic is also that of the Jews, the children of Satan.  Like their father, the Jews wish to serve nothing, neither Gentility, nor a flag, nor a sovereign, nor a homeland, nor any established order, nor any existing law, nor any regular authority.  Like their father, the Jews demand emancipation, liberty.  Emancipation from all that is not Jewish!  Liberty to pursue their Satanic work.

Nombreux sont les auteurs juifs qui ont tenté d’approfondir les causes de l’éternel esprit de révolte des Juifs.  Kurt Munzer, Oscar Lévy, Bernard Lazare, Werner Sombart, Elie Eberlin et plusieurs autres penseurs juifs ont vainement demandé, dans leurs livres, pourquoi la race juive, contrairement à toutes les autres races, est une rebelle indomptable, une révoltée incurable, une éternelle mécontente, mais n’ont pas trouvé de réponse satisfaisante.  Si l’on réfléchit un seul instant à la parole du Christ, la parole de vérité et de lumière :  “Les Juifs sont les enfants de Satan, et ils font son oeuvre”, on comprend très facilement comment ces “élus” déchus, ces Lucifers sur qui Dieu avait répandu plus de lumière divine que sur tous les autres humains, perpétuent au sein de l’humanité le cri de leur père, “élu” déchu comme eux :  “Non serviam !”

Countless are the Jewish authors who have tried to plumb the causes of the eternal spirit of revolt of the Jews.  Kurt Munzer, Oscar Lévy, Bernard Lazare, Werner Sombart, Elie Eberlin and many other Jewish thinkers have asked in vain, in their books, why the Jewish race, contrary to all the other races, is an untameable rebel, an incurable insurgent, an eternal malcontent, but have found no satisfactory answer.  If we reflect for a moment on the word of Christ, the word of truth and light:  “The Jews are the children of Satan, and they do his work”, we understand easily how these fallen “Chosen” ones, these Lucifers on whom God has shed more divine light than on all other humans, perpetuate, within humanity, the cry of their father, the fallen “Chosen” one like them:  “Non serviam!”.

Parce qu’ils n’ont jamais été déistes, les Juifs n’ont jamais su comprendre les messages de Dieu pour les sauver.  D’un pacte spirituel, ils ont fait une entente matérialiste.  Et, aujourd’hui comme hier, ils croient que leur ancien privilège de race-élue n’est qu’un privilège matériel qui leur donne le droit de dominer toutes les autres races ; ils croient que les autres races, composées de goyim sans âmes, ont été créées simplement pour servir Israël et lui assurer la suprématie mondiale, ils croient qu’ils ont un droit de naissance à toutes les richesses de la terre et qu’ils sont les princes réels de ce monde.  Leur Talmud le leur enseigne explicitement et perpétue en eux l’orgueil de leur père.

Because they have never been deists, the Jews have never been able to understand the messages of God to save them. Out of a spiritual compact, they made a materialist contract. And today as yesterday, they believe that their ancient privilege as the Chosen race is a material privilege that gives them the right to dominate all the other races; they believe that the other races, composed of soulless goyim, were created simply to serve Israel and to assure its world supremacy, they think they have a birthright to all the wealth of the Earth and that they are the real princes of this world. Their Talmud teaches them explicitly and perpetuates in them the pride of their father.

Barrières qu’il fallait renverser

Barriers that had to be toppled

Le rêve juif de la domination mondiale n’a jamais cessé un seul instant.  Ce rêve doit, suivant les écritures juives, se couronner par la judaïsation de toute l’humanité.  Cependant, des barrières énormes barraient aux Juifs la route de la conquête universelle.  Ces barrières, c’était le christianisme, qui

The Jewish dream of world domination has never ceased for an instant.  This dream must, according to Jewish writings, be crowned by the judaization of all humanity.  However, enormous barriers barred the way of the Jews to universal conquest.  These barriers were Christianity, which

[30]
[30]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

proclame que le Messie est venu, qu’il ne faut plus l’attendre, que Dieu a déchiré le voile du Temple et remplacé par une nouvelle alliance universelle l’ancienne alliance avec les Juifs, que c’est le Christ-Roi et non Israël qui doit conquérir le monde ; ces barrières, c’étaient les caractéristiques nationales de chaque peuple, caractéristiques établies sur des traditions chrétiennes millénaires.  Il fallait renverser ces barrières.

proclaimed that the Messiah had come, that He should no longer be awaited, that God had torn the veil of the Temple and replaced by a new universal covenant the ancient covenant with the Jews, that Christ the King and not Israel, must conquer the world; these barriers were the national characteristics of each people, characteristics established on millennial Christian traditions.  These barriers had to be overthrown.

Comment s’y prit la juiverie ?  Elle fit comme son père Satan avait fait pour entraîner à sa suite les anges rebelles.  Elle répandit chez les chrétiens le venin libéral, ce poison qui fait demander de l’émancipation et des libertés, qui fait lancer le cri “non serviam” contre l’autorité et l’ordre établis.

How did Jewry go about it?  Jewry did as its father Satan had done to drag the rebel angels in his wake.  It spread the liberal venom among the Christians, this poison which demands emancipation and liberties, which hurls the cry, “non serviam!” against authority and the established order.

Les débuts de l’ère libérale

Beginnings of the liberal era

Bien préparée par la Renaissance, la Révolution Française apporta dans le monde le cri libéral, le cri sataniste de liberté qui détruisit une grande partie des libertés dont jouissaient jusque-là les Français, mais qui étendit tous les droits et privilèges de la citoyenneté française aux Juifs qui n’étaient ni de race française, ni de tradition française.  Innombrables sont les auteurs juifs qui proclament que la Révolution Française fut l’oeuvre des Juifs et des sociétés secrètes qu’ils contrôlaient totalement, et que la Révolution Française, tout en leur assurant une forte emprise sur la France, établit la pierre angulaire de leur oeuvre de révolution mondiale.

Well prepared by the Renaissance, the French Revolution brought the liberal cry into the world, the Satanist cry of liberty that destroyed a large part of the liberties hitherto enjoyed by the French, but which extended all the rights and privileges of French citizenship to Jews who were neither of the French race, nor the French tradition.  Countless are the Jewish authors who proclaim that the French Revolution was the work of Jews and the secret societies they totally control, and that the French Revolution, while guaranteeing them a powerful grip on France, established the cornerstone of their work of world revolution.

Les Juifs dans toutes les révolutions

Jews in all the
revolutions

Le libéralisme de 1789 n’a libéré et émancipé que d’une seule chose :  de l’autorité de droit divin et de l’autorité du christianisme ainsi que des devoirs imposés par l’idée chrétienne dans les manifestations publiques de l’individu, que ce soit dans le monde politique, dans le monde économique ou dans le domaine social.  Ce cri de révolte libertaire et émancipatrice, de la France, s’est répandu dans le reste du monde, n’ayant toujours qu’un seul ennemi :  le christianisme, et qu’un seul remède à lui opposer :  le laïcisme et le neutralisme, formes préliminaires de l’anti-christianisme.  Le même ferment judéo-libéral, en se répandant dans les pays d’Europe, a apporté partout le même cri luciférien “Non serviam” et la même méthode révolutionnaire.  Et, dans les révolutions qui s’ensuivirent, au Portugal, en Russie, en Autriche, en Hongrie, en Allemagne, en Turquie, en Espagne, en Grèce, etc., c’est toujours le Juif qui organise, qui finance, qui exécute, qui s’empare du pouvoir.  Et, aussitôt que la prise du pouvoir l’a rendu suffisamment fort pour ne rien craindre dans le pays qu’il a usurpé, le Juif jette bas son masque, se montre tel qu’il est, terroriste, cruel, sanguinaire,

The liberalism of 1789 liberated and emancipated from just one thing:  the authority of divine law and the authority of Christianity along with the duties imposed by the Christian idea in public expressions of the individual, whether in the political or economic world, or the social domain.  This libertarian and emancipating cry of revolt by France has spread to the rest of the world, having always just one enemy: Christianity, and just one remedy to oppose it:  secularism and neutralism, the preliminary forms of anti-Christianity.  The same judeo-liberal ferment, in spreading throughout the countries of Europe, has everywhere brought the same Luciferian cry, “Non serviam!” and the same revolutionary method.  And, in the revolutions that follow, in Portugal, in Russia, Austria, Hungary, in Germany, in Turkey, Spain, Greece, etc., it is always the Jew who organizes, who finances, who executes, who takes power.  And as soon as the grip on power has made him sufficiently strong to fear nothing in the country he has usurped, the Jew throws down his mask, shows himself as he is, a terrorist, cruel, sanguinary,

[31]
[31]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

destructeur, et il s’empresse d’abattre définitivement les grandes barrières qui arrêtaient sa marche vers la conquête mondiale :  les caractéristiques religieuses et nationales.

a destroyer, and he hastens to conclusively fell the great barriers which stopped his march toward world conquest:  religious and national characteristics.

L’aboutissement final

The end result

Le libéralisme, cri de révolte contre l’autorité et la discipline chrétiennes (car, il n’est pas opposé à autre chose), n’est que le cri précurseur du socialisme.  Ce dernier, comme les faits le prouvent abondamment, conduit inévitablement au bolchévisme.  Et à quoi conduit en définitive le bolchevisme, avec son athéisme, sa destruction de toute idée religieuse et nationale ?  Au culte de Satan, que l’on adore maintenant dans de nombreux cercles de la Russie soviétique.  Tant il est vrai que le cri de révolte conduit au père de la révolte, que la juiverie fille de Satan conduit à Satan lui-même ; que, pour les soi-disants athées et Sans-Dieu, la politique finit, comme partout ailleurs, pour aboutir à une question religieuse, la religion fût-elle celle du diable !

Liberalism, a cry of revolt against Christian authority and Christian discipline (for, it is opposed to nothing else), is only the precursor cry of socialism.  The latter, as the facts abundantly prove, leads inevitably to Bolshevism.  And to what does Bolshevism lead in the end, with its atheism, its destruction of the religious and national idea?  To the cult of Satan, who is now adored in many circles in Soviet Russia.  So true is it that the cry of revolt leads to the father of revolt, that Jewry, the daughter of Satan, leads on to Satan himself; so that for so-called atheists and the Godless, politics ends, as everywhere else, at a religious question, be it the religion of the devil!

Le libéralisme est anti-spirituel

Liberalism is
anti-spiritual

Les Juifs, et leur Talmud les force d’y ajouter foi, croient que les Gentils, ou goyim, sont des chiens sans âme.  La plus récente des éditions du Talmud, publiée à Paris en 1932, sous l’autorité du Collège rabbinique de France, assimile les non-juifs aux animaux, dans presque tous ses chapitres.  Si nous, Gentils, n’avons pas d’âme, il ne peut y avoir d’au-delà pour nous et il nous est donc absolument inutile d’avoir des religions ; il nous est donc futile de dépenser de l’argent à édifier des églises, des couvents, des monastères, des collèges, des écoles confessionnelles, financer des missions et faire des oeuvres charitables, quand cet argent pourrait être porté dans les bouges, les théâtres, les cabarets, les antres d’agiotage et d’usure du peuple-élu !  Si nous, Gentils, n’avons pas d’âme, nous avons tort d’avoir des traditions et des aspirations à base religieuse, et il convient de les détruire !  Est-il étonnant alors que le libéralisme, dont l’unique source est la juiverie, s’attaque à ces aspirations et à ces traditions ?  Est-il étonnant que le libéralisme fasse appel à notre tolérance pour ce qui s’oppose à notre héritage spirituel ?  Est-il étonnant que le libéralisme nous demande de ne pas affirmer nos distinctions de race et de religion ?  Est-il étonnant que le libéralisme réclame de nous un anonymat internationaliste plutôt qu’une identité nationaliste fermement affirmée ?  Est-il étonnant que le libéralisme s’éloigne des principes immatériels inhérents à notre race et son histoire, pour n’imposer que des aspects matérialistes dans toutes nos manifestations ?  Non, ce n’est pas étonnant, puisque

The Jews believe — and their Talmud forces them to believe it — that the Gentiles, or goyim, are soulless dogs.  The most recent edition of the Talmud, published in Paris in 1932, under the authority of the Rabbinical College of France, equates non-Jews with animals in nearly all its chapters.  If we Gentiles have no soul, there can be no after-life for us, and so there is absolutely no need for us to have religions.  It is thus futile for us to spend money building churches, convents, monasteries, colleges, denominational schools, financing missions and doing charitable works, when this money could be spent in slums, theaters, cabarets, gambling dens and the usury of the Chosen people!  If we Gentiles have no soul, we are wrong to have religious traditions and aspirations, and we must destroy them!  Is it any wonder then that liberalism, whose only source is Jewry, attacks these aspirations and traditions?  Is it any wonder that liberalism appeals to our tolerance for that which is opposed to our spiritual heritage?  Is it surprising that liberalism asks us not to affirm our distinctions of race and religion?  Is it any wonder that liberalism demands of us internationalist anonymity in lieu of a firmly asserted nationalist identity?  Is it any wonder that liberalism retreats from the non-material principles inherent in our race and history, only to impose materialist outlooks on all issues?  No, it is no surprise, since

[32]
[32]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

liberalism is nothing but a Jewish idea invented to make us renounce ourselves to the benefit of a race that wants to live in every national homeland, while recognizing none as its own.

liberalism is nothing but a Jewish idea invented to make us renounce ourselves, to the benefit of a race that wants to live in all national homelands without recognizing even one as its own.

Le Juif n’ajoute rien à la richesse spirituelle ou matérielle d’une nation.  Il arrive toujours en immigrant pauvre et, à force d’expédients malhonnêtes, finit par s’emparer de toute la richesse matérielle.  Il se sert ensuite de celle-ci pour détruire, par de multiples organisations de propagande et d’action directe, la richesse spirituelle du pays.  Dans le domaine spirituel, le Juif, matérialiste, ne peut gagner aucune bataille.  Dans le domaine matériel, il les gagne toutes, parce qu’il joue de malhonnêteté avec des rivaux que leurs traditions et leur formation forcent d’être honnêtes.  Aussi, le Juif ne voit-il la possibilité de sa conquête mondiale qu’en faisant descendre l’humanité dans le domaine matérialiste.

The Jew adds nothing to the spiritual or material wealth of a nation.  He always arrives as a poor immigrant and through dishonest means he ends by appropriating its material wealth.  He then uses this wealth to destroy the spiritual wealth of the country, through multiple agencies of propaganda and by direct action.  In the spiritual domain, the materialist Jew can win no battle.  In the material domain, he wins them all, because he plays dishonestly with rivals whose traditions and training force them to be honest.  Also, the Jew only sees the possibility of his world conquest by reducing humanity to the materialist domain.

Ce n’est pas l’effet du hasard

It isn’t by chance

Le Juif est la seule source de satanisme, d’anti-christianisme et de matérialisme, dans les pays civilisés.  Il y a des personnes, cependant, qui disent que la question juive est un mythe, que les antisémites sont des hallucinés qui voient du juif partout, des toqués qu’une haine injustifiée, des intolérants qu’un fanatisme aveugle font crier sans raison contre les Juifs.  Je ne vous demande pas de lire le Talmud, ni les innombrables livres écrits par les Juifs eux-mêmes sur leur plan de révolution mondiale et de conquête universelle, ni les proclamations de leurs chefs, ni leurs discours significatifs reproduits dans les publications juives.  Voyez simplement ce qui se passe aujourd’hui dans le monde entier ; voyez quel est le but du bolchevisme, qui le propage, qui le conduit ; voyez quels sont les chefs révolutionnaires de tous les pays ; voyez quels sont les prophètes du socialisme et quels groupes le répandent ; voyez quels sont les maîtres de la finance mondiale, de la presse mondiale, du commerce international ; voyez quels sont les assassins du clergé chrétien et les destructeurs des institutions chrétiennes dans les pays communistes et socialistes ; voyez comment les Juifs contrôlent les plus grandes organisations du monde, dans leur lutte actuelle contre le gouvernement hitlérien d’Allemagne.  La domination mondiale juive, un rêve ?  Mais, ouvrez les yeux, et demandez-vous si c’est par simple hasard que 90% du gouvernement de Russie, 60% du gouvernement d’Espagne sont Juifs ; si c’est par hasard que Masaryk, élu président à vie de Tchécoslovaquie, est un Juif ; si c’est par hasard que DeValera et Briscoe, les maîtres de l’Irlande, sont des Juifs ; si c’est par hasard que Irigoyen, président de la République Argentine, était juif ; si c’est par hasard que Venizelos, maître de la poli-

The Jew is the only source of Satanism, of anti-Christianity and materialism in civilized countries.  There are, however, those who say that the Jeiwsh question is a myth, that antisemites are hallucinating who see the Jew everywhere, they are mad with unjustified hatred, intolerants led by blind fanaticism to cry without reason against the Jews.  I am not asking you to read the Talmud, nor the countless books written by Jews themselves on their plan of world revolution and universal conquest, nor the manifestos of their leaders, nor their major speeches reproduced in Jewish publications.  Simply see what is happening today in the whole world; see what the goal is of Bolshevism, who propagates it, who leads it; see who the revolutonary leaders are in every country; see who the prophets of socialism are and what groups are spreading it; see who the masters of world finance are, of the world press; of international trade; see who the murderers are of Christian clergy and who the destroyers are of Christian institutions in Communist and socialist countries; see how the Jews control the largest organizations in the world in their current fight against the Hitlerian government of Germany.  World Jewish domination a delusion?  But, open your eyes, and ask yourself, is it simply by chance that 90% of the government of Russia, 60% of the government of Spain, are Jews?  Is it by chance that Masaryk, the elected president of Czechoslovakia, is a Jew; is it by chance that DeValera and Briscoe, the masters of Ireland, are Jews; is it by chance that Irigoyen, president of the Argentine Republic, was a Jew; is it by chance that Venizelos, the master of

[33]
[33]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

tique grècque, est un demi-juif ; si c’est par hasard que le dictateur de la Turquie, Mustapha Kemal, est un Juif originaire de Salonique ; si c’est par hasard que le général Cohen, qui porte aussi un nom chinois, est le maître de la Chine soviétique ; si c’est par hasard que Hymans et Vandervelde, les maîtres de la politique internationale de Belgique, sont des Juifs ; si c’est par hasard que le ministre de la Justice du Danemark, le plus influent chef politique du pays, est un Juif ; si c’est par hasard que les trois premiers aviseurs imposés à Roosevelt par la banque internationale :  Morgenthau, Baruch et Warburg, sont trois Juifs ; si c’est par hasard que Sir Herbert Samuel, chef du principal parti libéral d’Angleterre, et ses premiers lieutenants, sont des Juifs ; si c’est par hasard que, avant l’ère hitlérienne, les gouvernements d’Allemagne étaient de forte proportion juive ; si c’est par hasard que la Mandchourie, jusqu’à l’an dernier, était totalement aux mains de Juifs ; si c’est par hasard que l’Australie, la France, une dizaine de républiques de l’Amérique du Sud et de l’Amérique Centrale, La Havane, la Roumanie, la Suisse sont de simples instruments entre les mains des Juifs, qui y contrôlent toute la vie politique et économique.  La juiverie commande déjà directement à plus de la moitié du globe.  Et tout cela ne serait que simple coïncidence, pur hasard ?  Non, c’est la preuve tangible de l’exécution d’un vaste plan de conquête, conquête qui s’étend sans cesse avec chaque révolution, avec chaque emprunt consenti par la banque internationale de l’or, conquête qui se consolide davantage à mesure que le libéralisme juif, que le socialisme juif, que le matérialisme juif sont répandus par mille moyens différents dans l’esprit des masses.

Greek politics is a half-Jew?  Is it by chance that the dictator of Turkey, Mustapha Kemal, is a Jew originally from Salonica; is it by chance that General Cohen, who also has a Chinese name, is the master of the Chinese Soviet; is it by chance that Hymans and Vandervelde, the masters of Belgian international politics, are Jews; is it by chance that the minister of justice of Denmark, the most influential political leader in the country, is a Jew; is it by chance that the three principal advisers imposed on Roosevelt by the international bank:  Morgenthau, Baruch and Warburg, are three Jews; is it by chance that Sir Herbert Samuel, leader of the principal liberal party of England, and his first lieutenants, are Jews; is it by chance that, prior to the Hitler era, the governments of Germany were in large proportion Jewish; is it by chance that Manchuria, until last year, was totally in the hands of Jews; is it by chance that Australia, France, a dozen republics in South and Central America, Havana, Roumania, and Switzerland are mere instruments in the hands of Jews who control the whole of their political and economic life.  Jewry already directly controls more than half the globe.  And all that would be just a coincidence, pure chance?  No, it is tangible proof of the execution of a vast plan of conquest, a conquest which extends ever more with each revolution, with each loan granted by the international gold bank, a conquest which consolidates the more that Jewish liberals, Jewish socialism, Jewish materialism, are spread by a thousand different means into the mind of the masses.

Une question basique

A basic question

La juiverie, à cause de son essence même, à cause de ses instincts destructifs, à cause de son immémorial atavisme de corruption, à cause de son sentiment exclusivement matérialiste, voilà le grand danger, le seul, l’unique, tant pour le destin matériel que pour le destin spirituel des peuples.  C’est pourquoi la question juive doit être à la base de tout véritable fascisme, de tout mouvement sérieux de régénération nationale.  Autant il est nécessaire pour les réactionnaires de détruire toute influence juive et tout juivisme, autant il est nécessaire pour le socialisme d’avoir des chefs juifs.  Dans tous les gouvernements socialistes, dans tous les groupes socialistes, les principaux chefs et inspirateurs sont juifs, en quelque pays que l’on regarde, car ces mouvements juifs ne pourraient réussir avec une direction non-juive.  De même, les véritables dirigeants du libéralisme sont juifs, pour les mêmes raisons.  Et ceux qui ont étudié cette question à fond n’ont pas été surpris de voir, tout dernièrement,

Jewry, due to its very essence, its destructive instincts, its immemorial atavism of corruption, its exclusively materialist sentiment, is the great, the singular danger for both the material and the spiritual destiny of peoples.  This is why the Jewish question must be at the basis of any true fascism, of any serious movement of national regeneration.  As necessary as it is for the reactionaries to destroy all Jewish influence and Jewishness, it is just as necessary for socialism to have Jewish leaders.  In all socialist governments, in all socialist groups, it is likewise necessary for socialism to have Jewish leaders.  The main leaders and inspirers are Jews, in whatever country one looks at, because these Jewish movements cannot succeed with non-Jewish leadership.  Equally, the real directors of liberalism are Jews, for the same reasons.  And those who have studied this question in-depth were not surprised to see, quite recently,

__________
Note de la traductrice:  Il manque un ou plusieurs mots dans le document français, que j’ai téléchargé sur Internet, et qui ressemble à une numérisation d’un original.  Le passage dit:  «le grand danger, le seul, l’unique, tant pour le matériel que pour le spirituel des peuples».

J’avais d’abord pensé à ajouter «vies» pour compléter la phrase, mais vies est féminin, et les mots qui la modifieraient sont matériel et spirituel.  Si ce sont des adjectifs, ils sont masculins.  J’ai donc besoin d’un mot masculin pour compléter la phrase.  J’ai choisi le mot «destin», inséré deux fois, car Arcand utilise souvent le mot «destin» dans ses écrits.  La ligne se lit maintenant comme suit:  «le grand danger, le seul, l’unique, tant pour le destin matériel que pour le destin spirituel des peuples».  Et ma traduction en anglais se lit comme suit:  «the great, the singular danger for the material and the spiritual destiny of peoples.»

__________
Translator’s note:  One or more words are missing in the French document, which I downloaded from the Internet, and looks like a scan of an original.  The passage says:  “le grand danger, le seul, l’unique, tant pour le matériel que pour le spirituel des peuples.”  (the great, the singular danger for both the material and the spiritual of peoples.)

I had first thought of adding “lives” vies” in French to complete the sentence, but vies is feminine, and the words that would modify it are matériel and spirituel.  If these are adjectives, they are masculine.  I thus need a masculine word to complete the sentence.  I settled on the word “destin” (destiny), inserted twice, because Arcand often uses the word “destiny” in his work.  The line now reads:  “le grand danger, le seul, l’unique, tant pour le destin matériel que pour le destin spirituel des peuples.”  And my English translation reads:  “the great, the singular danger for the material and the spiritual destiny of peoples.”

[34]
[34]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

le Juif Sir Herbert Samuel, chef du libéralisme britannique venir conférer privément avec l’hon. W.-L. Mackenzie King, à Ottawa, pour lui transmettre ses mots d’ordre.

the Jew, Sir Herbert Samuel, the leader of British liberalism, come to confer privately with the Hon. W.-L. Mackenzie King, in Ottawa, to communicate his orders.

Philosophie à détruire

A philosophy to destroy

Les antisémites n’ont pas de griefs personnels contre les Juifs pris isolément.  Ce qu’ils veulent détruire, c’est la philosophie libérale des Juifs, parce que cette philosophie est l’antithèse et l’ennemie de la philosophie chrétienne, et parce que l’organisation internationale secrète des Juifs est le système politique de cette philosophie destructrice.  Et comme les Juifs malgré toutes les qualités que les meilleurs d’entre eux peuvent avoir, sont les propagateurs de cette philosophie et les instruments de ce système, ils doivent, dans les pays chrétiens, être placés dans un état tel qu’ils ne puissent consciemment ou inconsciemment, poursuivre leur oeuvre de satanisme.

The antisemites have no personal grudges against the Jews, taken on their own.  What they want to destroy is the liberal philosophy of the Jews, because this philosophy is the antithesis and enemy of Christian philosophy, and the secret international organization of the Jews is the political system of this destructive philosophy.  And as the Jews, in spite of all the best qualities that the best among them may have, are the propagandists of this philosophy and the instruments of this system, they must, in Christian countries, be placed in such a state that they cannot consciously or unconsciously pursue their work of Satanism.

Le moyen-âge et
le ghetto

The Middle Ages and
the ghetto

C’est parce que les Juifs étaient contenus dans leurs ghettos et mis hors d’état de nuire, durant le moyen-âge, que cette époque fut si brillante, si policée, socialement si pacifique, si positivement chrétienne.  C’est pour la même raison que les Juifs, avec leur libéralisme, appellent le moyen-âge l’époque la plus obscure, la plus ténébreuse, la plus intolérante et la plus fanatique de l’histoire de l’humanité.  Et, quand ils lancent ces qualificatifs, c’est toujours avec des allusions contre la chrétienté et ses chefs du temps.  Depuis que le libéralisme a renversé les murs du ghetto et mis les anti-chrétiens d’Israël sur le même pied que les chrétiens, dans les pays chrétiens, on peut constater la rapide déchéance du spiritualisme, et parallèlement la rapide montée du matérialisme.  Si longtemps que l’on cherche, il est impossible d’en trouver une autre cause que la présence du Juif et son action au sein de la société chrétienne.  Et l’action anti-chrétienne du Juif a toujours été parallèle à l’action chrétienne, depuis le début de cette dernière, car au moment même où les apôtres et leurs disciples parcouraient le monde pour “enseigner toutes les nations”, les Juifs, chassés d’Israël et dispersés sur toute la terre, niaient partout le messianisme du Christ et combattaient son oeuvre.

It was because the Jews were contained in their ghettos and put out of harm’s way during the Middle Ages, that this epoc was so brilliant, so polished, socially so peaceful, so positively Christian.  For the same reason, the Jews, with their liberalism, call the Middle Ages the most obscure, the dark ages, the most intolerant and most fanatical in the history of humanity.  And when they hurl these qualifiers, it is always with allusions against Christianity and its leaders of the time.  Since liberalism threw down the walls of the ghetto and put the anti-Christians of Israel on the same footing as the Christians, in Christian countries, we note the rapid decline of spirituality, and at the same time the rapid rise of materialism.  So long as one searches, it is impossible to find any other cause than the presence of the Jew and his action within Christian society.  And the anti-Christian action of the Jew has always been parallel to the Christian action from the beginning of the latter, because at the very moment when the apostles and their disciples traveled the world to “teach all nations”, the Jews, expelled from Israel and scattered over the Earth, everywhere denied the messianism of Christ and fought His work.

La question juive, avec ses multiples aspects et ses conséquences dans tous les domaines, est donc basique et fondamentale dans tout projet de restauration nationale et politique et elle doit être d’autant plus considérée que chaque axiome fasciste, nationaliste et chrétien trouve dans la philosophie judaïque et son action un axiome opposé qui tend à le détruire

The Jewish question, with its multiple aspects and its consequences in all fields, therefore is basic and fundamental in any project of national and political restoration.  And it must be all the more considered, since every fascist, nationalist and Christian axiom is met in Jewish philosophy and its action with an opposed axiom which tends to destroy it.

[35]
[35]

Subscribe for the next segment!
Abonnez-vous pour le prochain segment!


Wanted!  We are looking for unknown and lost works by Adrien Arcand (1899-1967)

A new project has been launched.

Looking for Unknown and Lost Works of Adrien Arcand


Our Kijiji ad went up today:

https://www.kijiji.ca/v-view-details.html?adId=1496030771&siteLocale=fr_CA


First Kijiji ad to recover lost and unknown works of Adrien Arcand (12 April 2020)

As you know, if you’ve read this blog for awhile, I’m a “poor Anglo” (pôvre anglophone).  I had to use google translate to put this ad into French.  Therefore, if you notice any improvements or corrections that should be made to the French, please let me know in the comments.

Thank you!

FRENCH TEXT OF THE AD (English below)

Download a PDF of the ad in a zip file.

Description

Adrien Arcand est né à Montréal en 1899 et y est décédé en 1967. Il a vécu dans le centre-ville de Montréal, où il a prononcé des discours politiques au Monument National et ailleurs comme par exemple au Théâtre Saint-Denis.

Arcand a publié des brochures, prospectus et pamphlets, souvent pliés et agrafés, qu’il a vendus lors de ses discours publics dans les années 1930, puis dans les années 50 et 60.

La plupart de ceux des années 1930 sont maintenant perdus. Cependant, ces œuvres perdues font partie du patrimoine québécois.

Le travail d’Arcand est actuellement en cours de traduction en anglais (sans frais) pour la Bibliothèque et Archives Nationales du Québec. Nous souhaitons retrouver les œuvres manquantes d’Arcand afin de les traduire et aussi afin d’enrichir la collection de son travail à la BAnQ.

Nous essayons donc, avec cette publicité, de redécouvrir les œuvres manquantes et inconnues d’Adrien Arcand.

Cette publicité vise à localiser des copies de discours et de brochures d’Adrien Arcand, généralement publiés par Joseph Menard dans les années 1930 et par lui et par d’autres éditeurs dans les années 50 et 60.

Arcand était un chef politique catholique ultra-conservateur. C’était un fasciste catholique romain qui luttait pour la survie de son propre peuple, les Canadiens français.

Il fonda le Parti national social chrétien en 1933 et le Parti de l’unité nationale du Canada en 1939.

Si vous avez des objets de ce genre ou tout autre élément intéressant par Arcand ou son parti politique et ses dirigeants, dans votre sous-sol, votre grenier ou parmi vos vieux livres et magazines, veuillez nous contacter.

Nous aimerions transmettre copies ou photos de ces objets aux Archives nationales du Québec (BAnQ) en tant que documents patrimoniaux.

Adrien Arcand était également portraitiste et violoniste. Il a peint de grands portraits après la Seconde Guerre mondiale dans sa modeste maison de Lanoraie, au Québec. Arcand peint souvent des portraits pour «payer» les dettes qu’il doit.

Si vous avez un portrait qui, selon vous, a été peint par Adrien Arcand, nous apprécierions d’en voir une photo, afin de déterminer comment une copie pourrait être réalisée et incluse dans la collection patrimoniale d’Arcand à la BAnQ à Montréal.

Arcand jouait du violon. Il est possible qu’il ait écrit des partitions pour son violon. Si vous connaissez une partition signée par Adrien Arcand, qui a souvent signé son nom simplement comme “A. A.”, nous apprécierions d’en voir une copie pour les mêmes raisons.

Parfois, Arcand montait des spectacles dans des théâtres locaux avec des talents locaux. Nous aimerions retrouver ses anciens programmes de théâtre, vieilles affiches publicitaires, vieilles affiches de théâtre, de vieilles enregistrements audio de ses spectacles de talents; ou de ses discours ou également des enregistrements de discours de son collègue Joseph Menard.

Si vous avez des photos d’Adrien Arcand, seul ou avec sa famille, ses collègues et amis, nous aimerions en obtenir une copie pour enrichir sa collection au BAnQ.

AIDEZ-NOUS À ENRICHIR LA COLLECTION!
MERCI!

ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE AD

Description

Adrien Arcand was born in Montreal in 1899 and died there in 1967. He lived in downtown Montreal, where he gave political speeches at the National Monument theatre and elsewhere, for example at the Théâtre Saint-Denis.

Arcand published brochures, flyers and pamphlets, often folded and stapled, which he sold during his public speeches in the 1930s, and then in the 1950s and 1960s.

Most of those from the 1930s are now lost. However, these lost works are part of Quebec’s heritage.

Arcand’s work is currently being translated into English (free of charge) for the National Library and Archives of Quebec. We want to find Arcand’s missing works in order to translate them and also to enrich the collection of his work at the BAnQ.

We are therefore trying, with this advertisement, to rediscover the missing and unknown works of Adrien Arcand.

The advertisement seeks to locate copies of speeches and brochures by Adrien Arcand, generally published by Joseph Menard in the 1930s and by him and other publishers in the 1950s and 1960s.

Arcand was an ultra-conservative Catholic political leader. He was a Roman Catholic fascist who fought for the survival of his own people, the French Canadians.

He founded the National Christian Social Party in 1933 and the National Unity Party of Canada in 1939.

If you have such items or any other item of interest to Arcand or his political party and leaders, in your basement, your attic or among your old books and magazines, please contact us.

We would like to transmit copies or photos of these objects to the National Archives of Quebec (BAnQ) as heritage documents.

Adrien Arcand was also a portrait painter and violinist. He painted large portraits after the Second World War in his modest house in Lanoraie, Quebec. Arcand often painted portraits to “pay” the debts he owed.

If you have a portrait that you think was painted by Adrien Arcand, we would appreciate seeing a photo, to determine how a copy could be made and included in Arcand’s heritage collection at the BAnQ in Montreal.

Arcand played the violin. He may have written scores for his violin. If you know of a score signed by Adrien Arcand, who often signed his name simply as “A. A.”, we would appreciate seeing a copy for the same reasons.

Sometimes Arcand put on shows in local theaters with local talent. We would like to find his old theater programs, old advertising posters, old theater posters, old audio recordings of his talent shows; or of his speeches or also recordings of the speeches of his colleague Joseph Menard.

If you have photos of Adrien Arcand, alone or with his family, colleagues and friends, we would like to obtain a copy to enrich his collection at BAnQ.

HELP US ENRICH THE COLLECTION!
THANK YOU!


Subscribe and rediscover history
with Adrien Arcand Books!
Abonnez-vous et redécouvrez l’histoire
avec Adrien Arcand Books!

Adrien Arcand Books

Jews Trying to Soften Us For Russian Drive’—Arcand (Montreal Gazette, 25 February 1947)

Adrien Arcand at home at Lanoraie, showing internment souvenirs to son Pierre

AMONG HIS SOUVENIRS:  Adrien Arcand, anti-semitic proponent of totalitarianism, is shown above at his home at Lanoraie, Que., showing some of his souvenirs from his stay in internment camp to his son Pierre.  During his five-year sojourn Arcand carved a number of brooches, buttons, boxes and similar objects, each bearing the emblem of the National Unity Party—a flaming torch.

Jews Trying to Soften Us For Russian Drive’—Arcand


Canada Has Become New Belgium, Says Fascist Leader; Maintains Reds Will Strike at United States Through Dominion


By Kenneth G. Wright

THE MONTREAL GAZETTE, 25 FEB 1947

(Following is the last of three articles by Kenneth G. Wright, Gazette staff writer, on Adrien Arcand, Canadian Fascist leader who was interned for five years.)

Read Part 1.  Read Part 2.

(Copyright 1947)

Canada faces a double danger from Russia today, an attack from the north and steady disintegration of the country from within by “Jewish Bolshevik spies,” according to Adrien Arcand, pre-war leader of the Canadian Fascists.  Arcand, interned for five years as a menace to his nation’s war effort, in an interview at his home at Lanoraie, Que., last week, declared his anti-Jewish organization is now stronger than before.

Official emblem of the National Unity Party of Canada

Official emblem of the National Unity Party of Canada

“Canada has become the new Belgium,” he said.  “We are geographically and economically an American country, and Russia some day must strike through Canada at the United States  The greatest danger, however, is from within, for both nations.  You see every day instances of how the Jews are trying to soften us up, ready for the big blow.  Russia is not powerful enough to attack today, but she hopes to be in time, and meanwhile the Jews are preparing the way.

“Look at the spy trials.  And don’t forget, that was one group, it was reported there are four more.  I have definite information there are four more such groups, and that they are seeking to destroy us.”

“Did you see the outcome of the recent war between Fascism and Democracy?” he was asked.

“It wasn’t a war between Fascism and Democracy, it was s war, instigated as the First Great War was, by the Jews against the rest of the world.  In smashing the fighting power of Russia, the anti-Jews have won the first round.  I am doing my part, with my fellow believers in Canada and other parts of the world to help win the second, which is inevitably coming.”

His blueshirt legions, prominent at Arcand’s meetings in Montreal around 1938, were merely a “protective organization” against the Communists, the National Unity Party leader said.

‘Ahead of Our Time’

“I put my men into uniform and insisted they keep neat and clean and look smart merely because the Communists who tried to break up our meetings were the opposite — a dirty unshaven Jewish rabble, only out for trouble.

“We were trying at those meetings to tell the people of Canada what was in store for them, we tried to warn them of the Jewish-Communist menace.  We were 10 years ahead of our time in that work.

“Our real organization, however, was one of thinkers and planners.  That organization today is stronger than it ever was.”

Denying that his blueshirts ever had violent aims, Arcand reiterated that his present goal is to achieve his ends through peaceful methods.

“I am against harming any man.  I believe in faith, hope and charity.  My present aim in life is to enjoy my family and to watch events until the time comes.”  A Roman Catholic in religion, Arcand and his family have a pew in the Lanoraie parish church.  His philosophy, however, does not prevent him from reading with delight of British plans to take a firm hand with the terrorists in Palestine.  This he sees as action “for the cause.”

Much of the Arcand story remains to be told — much that only Arcand knows.  He has friends, some of them undoubtedly sympathetic, in high places in this province and in the rest of Canada.  How far those friends, and the people they can influence, will march with Arcand, “when the time comes,” he probably doesn’t know himself.

For the present, however, he is keeping his secrets.  “Memoirs?  A book?”

“That’s an old man’s job.  I’m too busy now.”


Download the original article, “‘Jews Trying to Soften Us For Russian Drive’—Arcand“.

* The image of the NUPC emblem was added by yours truly.

SIGN UP! DON’T MISS A POST!
S’INSCRIRE! NE MANQUEZ PAS UN POSTE!


Solution to Palestine problem:  “Send Jews to Madagascar”, Says Fascist Adrien Arcand (24 February 1947)

Adrien Arcand at his typewriter in Lanoraie, February 1947

EARNING HIS LIVING:  Adrien Arcand, Montreal newspaperman who became leader of the Fascist movement in Canada, is shown at his typewriter in Lanoraie, doing commercial translation.  This work and his portrait painting, he says, earns him his living.  (Gazette Photo by Davidson.)

Send Jews to Madagascar, Says Fascist Adrien Arcand


Notorious Anti-Semite Has Own Solution for Palestine Problem; Exposé Finds Him Boasting That National Unity Party Still Growing


By Kenneth G. Wright

THE MONTREAL GAZETTE, 24 FEB 1947

(Following is the second of three articles by Kenneth G. Wright, Gazette staff writer, on Adrien Arcand, Canadian Fascist Leader who was interned for five years.)

Read Part 1.  Read Part 3.

(Copyright 1947)

The solution to the Palestine problem is to transport all the Jews in that country “and in the rest of the world” to the Island of Madagascar, according to Adrien Arcand, Fascist-minded leader of the anti-semitic movement in Canada.

“Palestine has been populated for the past 1900 years by non-Jews — why do they ask for it now?  It is only to embarrass Britain, to start a conflict which would eventually smash the British Empire as part of their plan for Jewish world domination.”

Arcand, who was interned for five years during the war under the Defence of Canada regulations, in an interview at his home at Lanoraie, Que., this week credited the Madagascar idea to his friend, Henry Hamilton Beamish.  Beamish, a South African, has been a Jew-baiter for years, and was imprisoned during the war on similar grounds to those which led to Arcand’s internment.  The two correspond regularly, and Arcand expects Beamish to pay him a visit next year.

Proposes Plan

“Palestine is and was until the heavy Jewish immigration of the past 15 years an Arab country,” said Arcand.  “The Jews there and in the rest of the world should be sent to Madagascar.  The climate is suitable for colonization, the island is 1,300 miles long and it can comfortably contain 100 million people.  There are some four million negros there now, they could be sent to Africa, to Liberia*, for instance.  Then the Jews from America, from Britain, from every country in the world, could be isolated there, without contact with the white race, and spend the rest of their lives carrying out their nefarious plotting among themselves.”

Adrien Arcand, musician, portrait artist, philosopher, Roman Catholic Fascist

Adrien Arcand, musician, portrait artist, philosopher, Roman Catholic Fascist

Arcand is a curious paradox.  Tall, thin, with ascetic features, he is well-educated, plays the violin with more than ordinary skill and has a working knowledge of Yiddish and German besides a wide English vocabulary although a strong French accent.  His conversation jumps from the Winnipeg Grain Exchange to the Battle of Narvik to early Kings of England to American politics almost in a single breath, with every reference to illustrate some anti-Jewish belief.  He is fanatical about anything Jewish, and firmly believes he and his fellow thinkers are carrying on a crusade to “save” the world from that race.  He delights in quoting Jewish authors, including the Talmud, to make his point that the “Asiatics,” as he sometimes calls them, are plotting to crush the “white race.”

Yet he denies having any racial prejudice.

“I am against no race in the world.  I am against the Jews not as Jews but because of what they are trying to do.  Anti-semitism, you must remember, is not an offensive* status, it is a defensive one.”

This thought process leaves him, for instance, in sympathy with the Columbians, anti-racial group in Georgia, only as far as they are anti-Jewish and therefore helping “the cause.”  With their other tenets, especially their use of violence, he has no sympathy.

His only knowledge of the work of the Columbians is through the newspapers, nor has he had any direct communication with Sir Oswald Mosley in Britain.

Arcand did not like the use of the word “resurgence” in a question about British Fascism since the war.

“You cannot say ‘resurgence,’ the real thing never died down, although there may not have been much outward manifestation.  More people are thinking as we do, yes, that is going on everywhere in the world.  It is the same thing in Canada, my party members who come to see me here tell me.  Ideas cannot be shot or hanged or interned.”

The exact number of members of the National Unity Party in Canada today Arcand will not discuss, although he continually says it is a considerable and growing total.  He has many fellow travellers, he says, who for various reasons do not wish to come into the open “just yet.”  His mail is heavy, however, not only from Canada but from other parts of the world.  He showed me a number of letters in his voluminous files, which contain also much anti-Jewish literature of the type which the R.C.M.P. seized in raids on party headquarters just before he was interned.  Much of that material has been returned to him and is stored about the house.*  Over his desk is a plaque on which is emblazoned the emblem of the party — a flaming torch within a wreath surmounted by a beaver and bearing the Latin word “Serviam.”*

He is immensely proud, too, of a number of wooden brooches, buttons, jewel boxes, buckles and similar items he carved during his stay in the internment camp, each bearing the party’s device.

Arcand talks freely and often amusingly of his stay in the camps, first at Petawawa and later at Fredericton, N.B. Incidentally, he had little to do with Mayor Camillien Houde, interned at the same time, and one gathers there was no love lost between the two.

If he felt it would advance his cause he would face internment again, Arcand said.

“I don’t care personally whether I live to be there when the time comes for action or not, as long as the ideals in which I believe are successful.  If I felt it would advance those ideals I would face internment again, or shooting.  A bullet in the head on the battlefield for those ideals in which one believes, that is the death of a soldier.”

* The image of the violin was added by yours truly.


EXTRA

ON THE SAME PAGE

World Government Held Solution
To Prevent War, Create Peace

THE MONTREAL GAZETTE, 24 FEB 1947

World government, based on universal brotherhood of men, or some sort of Christian socialism and moral as well as spiritual democracy is no Utopia.  It is a practical and thoroughly feasible government with authority in power to enforce world legislation which will prevent war and create lasting peace, Dr. Mortimer J. Adler, well-known American author and lecturer, stated at Loyola College last night.

Dr. Mortimer J. Adler

Dr. Mortimer J. Adler

Speaking under the auspices of the Loyola Ladies’ Auxiliary on “Unity or Chaos,” Dr. Adler, who also is professor of philosophy of law at the University of Chicago, said, “One world or none is our only choice.”  He added that the present nations, individually and collectively would only be ready to accept such a world government after having undergone an economic, moral and spiritual revolution.

He stated, “the United Nations will not do” because, he said, it has no legislative powers, no authority, too many foreign policies, and too many diplomats, each trying to enforce his own or his nation’s particular interests.

He admitted that the United Nations “however good it may be as a debating society may serve as a stepping stone to the real world government.”  The present peace period according to Dr. Adler is nothing but an “armed truce”.  He maintained that real peace in the world can only be achieved through elimination of what he called “small peaces.”  The latter he defined as peace treaties among one or several nations [sic] opposed to other nations or ideologies.

He specifically mentioned as an example (of small peaces) a recently proposed federation of capitalistic powers uniting against Communistic forces.  He said nationalism would have to play “a secondary role in any future world governments.”

Sovereign right which Dr. Adler divided into internal and external right, will have to be granted to the future world governments and to the national or sectional authorities respectively.  He said “this world government must have an armed force in order to execute law and legislative matters in order to preserve peace.”  He urged each individual to “contribute his share to the blueprint of the future world government by propagating its ideas and fundamental laws.”

Miss S. A. Murray was chairman of the meeting.

* The photo of Dr. Mortimer J. Adler was added by yours truly.


EXTRA

ON THE SAME PAGE

THE MONTREAL GAZETTE, 24 FEB 1947

Peace or Perish, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt 24 Feb 1947

“Peace or Perish”:  Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt 24 Feb 1947


AFTERWORD

I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO BE THERE…

I would have liked to be there … when Adrien Arcand received his complimentary copy of the Montreal Gazette for 24 February 1947, containing part two of Kenneth Wright’s interview with him … and also containng a big push for World Government.

Madagascar or World Government?

Madagascar or World Government? The Montreal Gazette of 24 February 1947.  Download the Gazette page.

What would Arcand have said?  Perhaps he’d have smiled wryly and returned to his portrait-painting or his violin.

On the same page with Arcand recommending quarantine for the Jews to save the white race from their “nefarious plotting”, the Montreal Gazette covers a Jew from New York pushing a “Christian socialist” world government on the “Loyola Ladies’ Auxiliary” and their guests.

And, side by side, like balls racked up in a billiard frame, is a “Peace or Perish!” ad with a big exclamation point.

We know what “Peace” means.  “Peace” is a stick-up, a protection racket, a code-word for “World Government”.  “World Government” or Perish!  Give us your guns, give us your legislative powers!  One world or none!  We rule, or everybody dies!

I think they dropped those bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a little demo to push their agenda.

And I am guessing that if Arcand analyzed the proposal of Mr. Adler for a “universal brotherhood of men” or “some sort of” ‘Christian socialist’ world government, Arcand would quote from an encyclical.  He was known to quote from Pope Pius XI.  Here’s what I think Arcand would have chosen for Mr. Adler.  Divini Redemptoris:

“Le communisme athée s’est montré au début, tel qu’il était, dans toute sa perversité, mais bien vite il s’est aperçu que de cette façon il éloignait de lui les peuples:  aussi a-t-il changé de tactique et s’efforce-t-il d’attirer les foules par toutes sortes de tromperies, en dissimulant ses propres desseins sous des idées en elles-mêmes bonnes et attrayantes.”

“In the beginning Communism showed itself for what it was in all its perversity; but very soon it realized that it was thus alienating the people.  It has therefore changed its tactics, and strives to entice the multitudes by trickery of various forms, hiding its real designs behind ideas that in themselves are good and attractive.”

Interesting that Adler should pinpoint “Christian socialism” while speaking in Canada, where the CCF is working on world government under just that brand.  Adler must know the Jews will not convert. But if the Christians become communists, big score for the Zionists.

In my post entitled “Canada’s Tax-Exempt Foundations:  A Look at the Ontario Woodsworth Memorial Foundation, the Praxis Research Institute and the roots of the federal NDP,” I noted that Arcand, in 1933, at page 43 of “Fascism or Socialism?” (Fascisme ou Socialisme ?), under the bold header, ‘There is no Christian Socialism’ (“Il n’y a pas de “socialisme chrétien”“), points out:

“Contrairement à ce que certains illusionnés prétendent, il n’y a ni ne peut y avoir de socialisme chrétien.  Ce mythe a été confondu par la plus haute autorité chrétienne, celle du Vatican, lorsque Pie X a condamné les erreurs du “Sillon”.  D’ailleurs, les grands doctrinaires du socialisme, entre autres Proudhon, Millerand, Jaurès, ont affirmé que toute prétention à un socialisme chrétien est aussi illusoire qu’idiote.”

“Contrary to what some illusionists claim, there is not nor can there be Christian socialism.  This myth was confounded by the highest Christian authority, that of the Vatican … Moreover, the great doctrinarians of socialism, among others Proudhon, Millerand, Jaurès, have affirmed that any claim to Christian socialism is as illusory as it is idiotic.”

The “illusionists” must be the CCF’ers, for Arcand was probably addressing himself to Woodsworth who founded the CCF in Calgary in 1932, the year before Arcand founded his National Social Christian Party in Quebec.

The Universal Republic (1950), Adrien Arcand

The Universal Republic (1950), Adrien Arcand

Adler spoke the previous night.  More speakers are coming this night, the 24th, from the world-government gang:  Coldwell of the communist CCF (mislabelled “Christian socialist”), and traitor Louis Saint-Laurent who just the previous year said:  “we can try to make of it (the UNO) the basis of the world government“; and featuring the widow of American traitor Roosevelt (the Jews’ asset) who lured Japan to attack Pearl Harbor so he could deliver the US to the war effort.

Not long after, in The Universal Republic (1950), Arcand will say:

Le Super-Gouvernement
Mondial

Nos chefs civils, à Ottawa, nous ont parlé plusieurs fois de la nécessité d’un super-gouvernement mondial, depuis qu’ils ont été embobinés à San Francisco, en 1945, par le texte Juif, rédigé par le Juif Harry White qui forme la charte des Nations-Unies.  Et tout leur travail, depuis cette date, a surtout consisté à nous inféoder toujours plus intimement sous l’autorité de l’O.N.U.  Ces chefs, pour la plupart francs-maçons, ne font que suivre la ligne de conduite dictée par les loges, elles-mêmes sous la coupe des Juifs.

The World Super-
Government

Our civil leaders in Ottawa have spoken to us many times of the necessity for a world super-government, since they were all wound up at San Francisco in 1945 by the Jewish text drafted by the Jew Harry White, which forms the Charter of the United Nations.  And all their work, from that date, has above all consisted in ever more tightly subordinating us to the authority of the U.N.O.  These leaders, for the most part Freemasons, are merely following the line of conduct dictated by the lodges, themselves under Jewish control.

Subscribe!  It only gets better!
Abonnez-vous!  Ça va de mieux en mieux!


A portrait of Adrien Arcand by Someone who Knew Him:  Ernst Zündel, with Tom Metzger on “Race and Reason”

Ernst Zündel and Adrien Arcand

Left to right:  A young Ernst Christof Friedrich Zündel, and Adrien Arcand, veteran of the Canadian concentration camps.  Arcand looks like the cat that ate the canary.  He’s very pleased with his new recruit.

ERNST ZÜNDEL
THE AWAKENING!


A VIDEO TRANSCRIPT


TOM METZGER:  I’m Tom Metzger, your host for Race and Reason, that longest-running racially oriented television show in the United States.

We are on now in over sixty cities across the country. And we keep producing.

Race and Reason is dedicated to total, absolute free speech.  That island of free speech in a sea of controlled and managed news.

And we’re glad to have you with us today, because we’re on the road again.  And today, we have a very interesting guest from Canada.

His name is Ernst Zündel.

He’s a writer, publisher, artist, and quite a figure in the press up in Canada.  So, welcome to the show, Ernst.  Good to have you with us.

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  Glad to be here.

TOM METZGER:  Ernst, most of the people, or some of the people, or maybe all the people, have not heard so much of Ernst Zündel in the United States.

Why are you such a controversial figure here in Canada?

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  Basically, I became famous — or infamous — with a number of court cases.  Legal battles.  And, uh, that basically topped my fame.  I was uh, quite a well known artist. I sold over 700 paintings in Canada.  Hanging in some of the most famous places.  And uh, sold paintings to Japan; Johannesburg, South Africa; sold them to Germany.  So, the first part of my fame was for my art.

The second part of my fame was in the 60s when I was running for Prime Minister of Canada against the then later-leader, Pierre Elliott Trudeau.  Made it to the inner circle, to the shock and astonishment of all the pros in politics.

And then drifted out of things into the publishing field, published a number of controversial books, and eventually got sued by a Jewish woman, and she really made me a household word.

TOM METZGER:  Now, wait a minute, now.  Are, are you a German national?

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  I’m, I was born in Germany —

TOM METZGER: — born in Germany.

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  Yeah.  Raised in Germany.  Left because I didn’t like to join America’s vassal army, the Foreign Legion that they created in Germany.

And I looked around the world, where I could go without having to put on a uniform and shoot my fellow men.  In those days, I was extremely liberal; I believed in all the propaganda the Allies had given us, and I was pacifist.

And I was raised a very strong Christian.  And I found in Canada, the country, the one country in the world at that time where they had no draft.  And so, I came here.

TOM METZGER:  So, you’re — here you are and you ran for public office, you’re an artist and you’re doing quite well, and paintings all over, all over the world.  But then, all of a sudden, you did something.  You, you were publishing, and you published books —

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  Well, I, I —

TOM METZGER: — what did you do that set the world on fire?

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  Maybe it’s the name.  Zündel in German means to spark something.

[Laughter]

Zündel is the root word for a spark plug, and uh, ignition of a car, you know, it all has to do with Zündelism, so, uh —

No, actually, quite simply, I came to Canada, as I said, for conscience reasons.

And uh, loved Canada, enjoyed it here.  It was a wonderful country when I came here in 1958.  And, I was young, healthy, quickly married the French-Canadian girl that I met in night school when I was learning English and established a family.

Moved to Quebec, lived amongst French people for nine years in the province of Quebec.  Did my business in both French and English.  And uh —

TOM METZGER: — Now, so far, we’re not very controversial —

Ernst Zündel, Adrien Arcand

Ernst Zündel, Adrien Arcand

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  No, no, no.  But, I, I, I met a French-Canadian man in Quebec who was known as the Hitler of Canada.

And uh, he was a man known to Adolf Hitler.  He was the leader of the largest political movement in the thirties and forties in Canada, called the Unity, National Unity Party of Canada.  At one time, they had a swastika as their national emblem.

And, uh, he turned me — within a three-and-a-half-hour session — into a German.

I was so guilty, up until that moment, I felt so terribly guilty for what German people allegedly had done, that I wanted to forget that I was a German.

And here, this, in this far-away land, this man of French-Canadian origin, who had been an editor of one of the large newspapers in Quebec, turned me into a German who was proud of his country, proud of his heritage, and started me out on a quest that I had no idea that I was getting into.

But he made such an impression on me, after that three-and-a-half-hour detoxification, or, or whatever you want to call it —

TOM METZGER: — This, this must have been quite a man.

Now, here you are, you’re a pacifist.  You’ve come to the United States [Canada] because you — and you obviously believed everything that the Allies had said about Germany.  You come here, and you’re married, and you’re an artist, and uh, and you meet one man, and what was his name?

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  His name was Adrien Arcand.

And he spent, himself, seven years — six-and-a-half years [five years and three months] in a Canadian concentration camp.

TOM METZGER:  During the forties?

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  During the, well, immediately when the war broke out, they arrested him without trial and kept him in Canadian concentration camps as a prisoner of war.

He showed me the mail that he would get from his wife, and it said “Prisonnier de guerre“, Prisoner of war, in his own country.

TOM METZGER:  Now, you must — this man must have been one great salesman.

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  He, well, he was — I consider him one of the geniuses that I have met in my life.  He spoke seven languages, he spoke fluent German, he could speak English, Hebrew, Greek that he had taught himself.

He was also quite an artist.  He was a brilliant writer, and a magnificent orator.

That man was a Canadian genius.

And he really did turn me around.  I was, it was my great fortune to have met him.

TOM METZGER:  So, in, briefly, how did he peel this guilt away?

ERNST ZÜNDEL:  It was really quite simple. He had a huge library, of uh, in many different languages, three of which I spoke:  German, English, French.  And, uh, he was very clever in pointing out historical events using Jewish sources.  When he knew the sting would be for me to react negatively towards the argument, he would bring a Jewish source, you know, it made it easier for me to accept it.  Or bring an English source, or bring an American source, you know.

It was a magnificent — that man had deep insight into human beings.  He was a very moral man, a very deeply spiritual, deeply Christian man, like many French-Canadians are.

And, uh, he set me on the right path.  I’m forever grateful.  Whatever happens to me in this country — whatever else happens to me — I mean, all the bombs, and the spitting at, and being punched out, and going to jail, and being dragged through the courts, that man made it worth it.

– 30 –

This part of segment one ends @ 6 minutes 50 seconds in.

The whole film is 56 minutes, 25 seconds, in two big segments.  Download the full-length video to enjoy the rest.


Subscribe!  You never know what’s coming next!
Souscrire! Vous ne savez jamais ce qui va suivre!

‘Stronger Than Ever Here’ is Arcand’s Fascist Boast, Montreal Gazette (22 February 1947)

ADRIEN ARCAND at his home in Lanoraie working on a portrait

ADRIEN ARCAND, leader of Canada’s National Unity (Fascist) Party, is shown above at his home in Lanoraie working on a portrait.  Arcand learned painting during his five years in an internment camp during the war, and now augments his income by it, earning the remainder of his money by commercial translation.  (Gazette Photo by Davidson.)

‘Stronger Than Ever Here’ is Arcand’s Fascist Boast


His Attitude Supporting Anti-Semitism Not Dampened By Internment During the War; Claims Contact With Groups in Other Nations


By Kenneth G. Wright

THE MONTREAL GAZETTE, 22 FEB 1947

(Following is the first of three articles by Kenneth G. Wright, Gazette staff writer, on Adrien Arcand, Canadian Fascist leader who was interned for five years.)

Read Part 2.  Read Part 3.

(Copyright 1947)

The National Unity Party headed by Adrien Arcand, who as a
violently anti-semitic exponent of Canadian Fascism was interned for five years during the war, is stronger than ever, Arcand declared yesterday.

“I am in communication with people who think as I do in Great Britain, New Zealand, South Africa, the United States and other countries.  In Canada we have grown tenfold.  When we are going to take advantage of that growth is a tactical question.”

I first met Adrien Arcand in 1937 when, in the course of my duties as a newspaperman, I attended early secret meetings of the then National Christian Socialist [sic] Party’s blue-shirted “legions.”  I recently spent many hours with him at his home at Lanoraie, Que., listening to him propound his theory that the Jews are responsible for most of the ills of the world.  I am convinced he is perfectly sincere in his statement that “my beliefs are stronger than ever and I have been most happy to suffer for them.”

Nor is he afraid of any further punitive action against him or his followers.

Claims Party Legal

“You must remember our party is now perfectly legal.  Neither the Royal Canadian Mounted Police nor the laws of Canada forbid it.  I am still the duly elected leader of the party in Canada.  The other leaders and the thinkers who were with me when I formed the party are with me today, and there are more people in the country who think as I do than there were before the war.  We have not gone backward a single step.  We have merely changed our tactics.”

Broadly speaking, the party’s change in tactics has been to work quietly where 10 years ago they were beginning to come into the open.  For the time being at least there will be no more blue shirts, no more public meetings.

Arcand has been Fascist-minded since the early 1930’s — at least that is when his anti-semitic ideas crystallized.  By profession he is a newspaperman, and according to his confrères a good one.  Born 48 years ago in Montreal, he is of French-Canadian-Scottish descent.  He attended primary schools here, and after studying philosophy at St. Mary’s College, took up chemical engineering with private tutors.  But illness forced him to abandon this.  He started newspaper work with La Patrie as a proofreader and later as a reporter.  He was also for 15 years secretary to his father, the organizer for the American Federation of Labor Carpenters’ and Joiners’ Union.  He was with the Montreal Daily Star for a short time as political reporter, and then for many years on La Presse, from which newspaper he was fired, he says, in 1929, for helping to organize a professional syndicate of newspapermen, an example of his early leanings to corporatism.

Corporate Views

Today, he believes newspapermen should be a group in the corporate state, electing one or more of their fellows to a parliament at Ottawa, setting, with the publishers (who should be another corporate group) their wages and the prices at which newspapers and advertising should be sold.

The doctors, the lawyers and similar professional men have corporate groups in this province — why not everybody?” he asks.

After leaving La Presse he helped found or was active in several anti-Jewish weeklies, including Le Patriote, Le Miroir and the Combat National, the latter the organ of his party.

He came into the open with his blueshirt party in the early months of 1938, and held meetings in Montreal, largely in the east end, as well as in Toronto.  At one in Maisonneuve Market in August, 1938, he forecast that:  “Success will crown our efforts in June, 1940, in a march on Ottawa.”1  A month before that date he was interned for violation2 of the Defence of Canada Regulations.

Five years and five weeks later he was released and today lives with his wife and three sons, the oldest of whom volunteered for active service with the Canadian Army on reaching his 19th birthday, and was on a draft for overseas when the war ended.3  Arcand himself holds the King’s commission as a lieutenant in the Regiment de Chateauguay (Reserve).  He lives quietly in a modest but comfortable home at Lanoraie, 40 miles down the north shore of the St. Lawrence from Montreal, making his living, he says, by painting portraits and by translation.

Blames Jews

He holds his internment against neither the people of Canada nor the government.

“I hold it only against the Jews — I know where the pressure which was brought to bear came from.”

He sees nothing disloyal in his actions, in fact he believes he is acting loyally to Canada in attacking Judaism.  At the national convention of the party in Kingston, Ont., July 1, 1938, at which he was elected leader and where the National Christian Socialist [sic] Party’s swastika emblem was changed to the National Unity Party’s flaming torch, he sent a telegram of loyalty to the Governor-General.  Today he expresses immense admiration for British institutions and history as a “civilizing force.”  He wants to save the Empire for himself and his fellow Canadians by, he says, “taking it out of the hands of the Jews who are slowly gaining control of it to smash it.”

__________
(Download a free copy of the original article, “Stronger Than Ever Here”.)

FOOTNOTES

1.  In 1938, war hadn’t been declared yet; and federal elections were ultimately called for March 26, 1940; so Arcand’s “march on Ottawa” was a figure of speech for the slogan in his 1938 party brochure on corporatism, “Heading for Ottawa!”.  The 1945 federal election was held in June; the 1940 election seems to have been held a couple of months early.

2.  “Alleged” violation; no violation was ever proved, he had no trial.  And after the war, it was admitted that there was no evidence.  I’ll go into this in more detail in the Memorandum and Request ebook and post that I’m still developing.

3.  We have a fact that needs to be checked.  David Rajotte of Library and Archives Canada seems to have been under the impression that Arcand’s eldest son (Yves) had in fact gone to war.  In his research article, “L’État canadien contre le Parti de l’unité nationale et Adrien Arcand” (“The Canadian State Versus The National Unity Party And Adrien Arcand”), Rajotte says:  “Le fils aîné d’Arcand a aussi rejoint l’armée en 1944” (“Arcand’s eldest son also joined the army in 1944.”)  And at his footnote 59 attached to that statement, Rajotte says:

Les dossiers de service des soldats ayant servi durant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale ne sont accessibles au public que 20 ans après la mort du militaire.  Yves Arcand étant décédé en 2002, il n’est pas encore possible de connaître ses faits d’armes exacts. Voir: Anonyme, «Notice nécrologique de Yves Arcand», L’expression de Lanaudière, 29 septembre 2002, p. 60.

The service records of soldiers who served during the Second World War are only accessible to the public 20 years after the death of the soldier. Yves Arcand died in 2002, it is not yet possible to know his exact feats of arms. See: Anonymous, “Yves Arcand’s obituary”, L’expression de Lanaudière, September 29, 2002, p. 60.

The proper cite for that article would be:  Rajotte, D. (2018). L’État canadien contre le Parti de l’unité nationale et Adrien
Arcand. Bulletin d’histoire politique, 26 (3), 189–211.
https://doi.org/10.7202/1046920ar

“Mr. Arcand, Canada’s Own Mosley Thinks The Sun Wronged Him” By Adrien Arcand (1947)


FOREWORD

Canada’s own Mosley Thinks The Sun Wronged Him by Adrien Arcand, Vancouver Sun, Letters to the Editor, 4 December 1947

Newspapers.com is double-dealing, and double-dipping.  I ran a search and was asked to pay to view the search results.  I chose the cheapest option presented, $7.95 USD for one month.  Newspapers.com happily took my money.  I then found 99% of the results on the results page blocked off, and a message popped up demanding an upgrade to see the items I had already paid to see.  Minimum charge of the so-called “Publisher Extra Upgrade”: $19.90 USD.  And this, IN ADDITION to the $7.95 USD already paid.  In other words, they’re the “Publisher” and I must fork over the “Extra”.  Total cost of one month to look at newspaper clippings:  $39.26 CAD.  I hope I have enough time this month to make the extortion worthwhile.

UPDATE.  I stand corrected.  Newspapers.com voluntarily notified me (without my asking) that “We have refunded the Basic charge of $7.95 to your card.  It will post to your account ending in 2477 in 3-5 business days.”  That brings the real cost for one month’s access to $19.90 USD or 27.85 CAD.  Still a pretty penny.


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Mr. Arcand, Canada’s Own Mosley

Thinks The Sun Wronged Him

By Adrien Arcand

THE VANCOUVER SUN, DEC 4, 1947


Editor, The Sun:  Sir,— I have read with amazement and amusement your editorial of November 24, entitled “The Menace of Arcand,” because I still ignored that editorials could be based on inaccuracies, untruths, misinformation, distortion and propaganda platitudes in a daily paper claiming some importance.  When one has truth or complete knowledge, he has not to resort to such proceedings.  Here are some of your affirmations and the truth about them:

1.  I was leader of the Canadian Unity Party.  The so-called party, quite distinct from the National Unity Party on many grounds, existed only in a section of the Canadian West and Mrs. Dorise Nielsen was its representative in the House of Commons.

2.  The National Unity Party never had black shirts.

3.  I am holding no public meetings, nor have done so in the last two years.

4.  I never believed in a “rigidly disciplined dictatorship” as “the most efficient form of human government.”  I believe in corporatism, wherein national classes, such as agriculture, labor, trade, fishing, etc., replacing political partis (even mine), elect their own representatives who choose among themselves their own ministers for representation in the government, and who in the House look after their own financial, economic, professional interests, thus allowing people more freedom, more initiative and more security than they are “enjoying” now or under the knout-rule1 of a few gangsters in the “workers’ paradise.”

5.  The men around me, whom you call “fanatical zealots who live to agitate, whose frustrations and resentments and dreams of future power,” are cool-headed people, not frustrated, having no resentments nor hatreds; they are good Canadians, law-abiding and orderly, who refuse to believe in the negative propaganda of those eternally against, be it religion, patriotism, tradition, property, family, in the propaganda of envy and jealousy, or destruction and revenge.

6.  Mr. Arcand, you note, is astute enough to range behind him all the more extreme advocates of separatism, playing upon the distorted grievances of French-Canadian Nationalists.  Yet, the Montreal Herald of November 012, 1947, gloated over the fact that Quebec Separatists were against the National Unity Party; the official organ of the Separatists, La Nation, anathematized me because our program made French Canadians empire-conscious, called for a “more immediate co-operation with the British Empire,” and for such the same paper called me an agent and stooge of the British Intelligence Service, a “man playing the game of English Freemasonry,” while at the same time the CCF Commonwealth wrote that I was an agent of … the Pope and financed with Vatican funds, while L’Autorité Nouvelle made me an agent of the Mikado, the Clarion of Fred Rose made me an agent and spy of Mussolini, and the Canadian Jewish Congress boasted of “identifying Arcand in the public mind with the sinister forces of German Naziism.”

7.  You find it disquieting that “a recent Arcand rally was held in a church hall, with anti-Semitic speeches.”  It was not a political rally and it was not held in a church hall, but an anniversary private gathering held in a hall located two blocks away from any church and belonging to the Corporation of the parishioners of St. Stanislaus.  As to my “anti-Semitic” speech, it consisted in anti-Gentile quotations extracted from Jewish authors. … To Jewish threats and plots against the Gentile culture and way of life, I answered that we Gentiles must all unite and see to it that we can frustrate the conspiracy.  If there is anti-Semitism in it all, well!  Gentiles did not start it.  And if Jews have a right in opposing unjustified anti-Semitism, Gentiles have an equal right to oppose anti-Gentilism in action, whether under the form of financial, economic, revolutionary, terror or smear oppression.

8.  You claim that the best way to combat my “menace” is by exposing my doings and ideas in the open.  It is exactly with the purpose of helping you do so that I am addressing this letter to you.

ADRIEN ARCAND.
Lanoraie, Que.

__________

1.  Knout:  a whip used to inflict punishment, often causing death.
2.  The first digit of the day in the date of the issue of the Montreal Herald is whited out in the news clipping.  Only the second digit appears, the “1”.