Fascism or Socialism?  The Fifth and final segment of a Talk by Adrien Arcand at Montreal in 1933, published by “Le Patriote

“I put my men into uniform and insisted they keep neat and clean and look smart...”

“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.” — Adrien Arcand, quoted by Montreal Gazette reporter Kenneth G. Wright on 25 February 1947.

Fascism reminds us that National life, like individual life, is not only pleasure, but constant submission to the sense of duty, honor, and work.  In national life, as with individual life, nothing beautiful or great is achieved without effort and sacrifice.  Fascism is the war cry against unhealthy forces, against social injustices, destructive doctrines, demoralizing principles, at the same time as the cry of resurrection and rebirth, a frank, clear and pure cry that penetrates into the great inner collective consciousness and will save us if we can repeat it over and over until the day of the great awakening.  And we will summarize this cry, which will oppose all materialistic cries, in a way that real French Canadians will understand, having been so long asleep:  “Soul of old Quebec, awake!”

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

This is the fifth and last instalment of the main body of the talk from 1933.  But, there is one more element, the Appendix, already published in the form of an eBook:  “The Swastika:  What It Represents”.  I will not repeat that whole text here, but I will update the Foreword to the Swastika later, in the new eBook, Fascism or Socialism?, now in production.  Subscribe and look for it.

The whole of this English translation, therefore, is now online.  It consists of part one, part two, part three, part four, part five (below), and “The Swastika”.

I will not ask you to backpedal and locate the segment, “The Fascist Parliament” which begins at the end of the fourth installment.  It really properly belongs right here, and I’m going to reproduce it and then move on with the new page, 56.

By the way, I realized today that I had left an “e” off the French “Fascisme” in all the page headers.  I think I’ve caught them all, and they’ve been fixed.

Thanks for visiting.  I hope you enjoy this.  (Keep in mind, those fellows in the photo up above are all in blue.  I did a lot of Photoshop work to repair that old, torn photograph.  I’m rather pleased with it.)


FASCISM OR SOCIALISM?

Preview of a Talk by Adrien Arcand

GIVEN AT MONTREAL IN 1933

For the first time in English


Adrien Arcand

Fascism ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

Le Parlement fasciste

The Fascist Parliament

Le fascisme ne se contente pas de critiquer et souligner les graves défauts du système parlementaire démocratique, il offre mieux. Son système parlementaire est un système corporatif à base consultative, c’est-à-dire un système d’administration d’Etat fonctionnant comme une administration de compagnie ordinaire, le peuple étant appelé à faire connaître ses besoins à des époques déterminées, généralement tous les cinq ans. Le fascisme établit d’abord comme principe que le système représentatif n’est pas d’imposer la volonté d’une masse impersonnelle et aveugle aux hommes d’Etat en autorité, mais seulement pour que ceux-ci puissent prendre connaissance des besoins des diverses parties de la communauté. Et, sur ce principe, il échafaude le système parlementaire le plus logique, le plus pratique et le plus scientifique qui puisse satisfaire aux ‘besoins modernes.

Fascism is not content to criticize and underline the serious flaws of the democratic parliamentary system, it offers better.  Its parliamentary system is a consultative-based corporate system, that is, a system of State administration functioning like an ordinary company administration, the people being called upon to make known their needs at specified times, generally every five years.  Fascism first establishes as a principle that the representative system is not to impose the will of a blind impersonal mass upon Statesmen in authority, but only to acquaint them with the needs of various parts of the community.  And on this principle, it constructs the most logical, practical, and scientific parliamentary system that can satisfy modern needs.

Comme je l’ai dit plus haut, le fascisme n’exige pas une forme identique de gouvernement dans tous les pays, et il n’est d’aucune nécessité de copier le système italien, ou allemand, ou autrichien. Cependant, comme le fascisme exige une forme gouvernementale corporative et une autorité permanente et stable pour l’Etat, il s’ensuit que tous les systèmes fascistes ont des affinités qui les rendent Semblables dans leurs grandes lignes. Comme notre système gouvernemental canadien est copié sur le système anglais, je m’en tiendrai au système que désirent les Fascistes d’Angleterre. Vous me permettrez de citer textuellement ce que préconise à ce sujet l’Impérial Fascist League, de Grande-Bretagne.

As stated above, fascism does not require an identical form of government in all countries, and there is no need to copy the Italian, or German, or Austrian system.  However, since fascism requires a corporate governmental form and a permanent and stable authority for the State, it follows that all fascist systems have affinities that make them broadly similar.  Since our Canadian government system is copied from the English system, I will stick to the system that the Fascists of England want.  You will allow me to quote verbatim what the Imperial Fascist League of Great Britain advocates on this subject.

[55]
[55]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

“L’Etat Corporatif Fasciste peut être défini comme le Conseil Industriel Conjoint poussé à ses conclusions logiques. Les intérêts économiques de la nation sont groupés en trois grandes Confédérations :

“The Fascist Corporate State can be defined as the Joint Industrial Council pushed to its logical conclusions.  The economic interests of the nation are grouped into three great Confederations:

1. La Confédération des employeurs;
2. La Confédération des employés;
3. Les travailleurs intellectuels (professionnels, artistes, etc.)

1. The Employers’ Confederation;
2. The Employees’ Confederation;
3. Intellectual workers (professionals, artists, etc.)

“Les unités qui composent ces Confédérations sont les associations d’employeurs, les syndicats ouvriers et les sociétés professionnelles. Elles sont formés en Fédérations de différentes catégories, telles que les fédérations de l’Agriculture, de l’Industrie productive, des Mines, du Commerce, du Transport sur terre, du Transport sur mer, de la Finance. Dans les unes et les autres, les Fédérations d’employeurs et les Fédérations d’employés restent distinctes et séparées.

“The units that make up these Confederations are the employers’ associations, the labor unions and the professional societies. They are formed into Federations of different categories, such as the Federations of Agriculture, Productive Industry, Mining, Trade, Land Transport, Sea Transport, Finance.  In all of them, the Employers’ and Employees’ federations remain separate and distinct.

“ECONOMIQUEMENT, les grandes Confédérations sont reliées par un organisme d’Etat, la Corporation pour l’industrie concernée. Toutes les corporations travaillent sous l’autorité spéciale d’un ministre des Corporations. Leur rôle consiste à voir à ce que les Confédérations fonctionnent en accord avec la loi, règlent leurs disputes mutuelles par la conciliation, coordonnent leur travail d’avancement et de bien-être, et règlent le chômage et les échanges de main-d’oeuvre dans la catégorie particulière d’industrie dont s’occupe la corporation.

“ECONOMICALLY, the big Confederations are linked by a State body, the Corporation for the industry concerned.  All the corporations work under the special authority of a Minister of Corporations.  Their role is to ensure that the Confederations operate in accordance with the law, settle their mutual disputes through conciliation, coordinate their work of advancement and well-being, and regulate unemployment and labor exchanges in the particular category of industry dealt with by the corporation.

“POLITIQUE ME NT, les Confédérations, ou plutôt les Fédérations qui les composent, sont appelées à soumettre leur liste de candidats pour la Chambre des Communes, et bien que les employeurs et les employés choisissent un nombre égal de candidats pour représenter leurs intérêts respectifs, les différentes subdivisions de l’industrie ne sont pas traitées avec la même importance. Ainsi, l’Agriculture est traitée avec une importance nationale beaucoup plus grande que, par exemple, la Finance, et on lui accorde un plus grand nombre de représentants.

“POLITICALLY, the Confederations, or rather the Federations that compose them, are called upon to submit their list of candidates for the House of Commons, and although employers and employees choose an equal number of candidates to represent their respective interests, the different subdivisions of the industry are not treated with the same importance.  Thus, Agriculture is treated with much greater national importance than, for example, Finance, and is given a greater number of representatives.

“Une fois -dressées par les Fédérations, les listes de candidats sont soumises au Grand Conseil National, qui exerce le pouvoir sélectif d’amender ces listes. Les listes, ainsi amendées, sont alors soumises au vote d’un électorat qui comprend les membres des Confédérations et les personnes qui paient un certain minimum d’impôts et de taxes. L’électorat vote sur la liste globale. Si la liste obtient une majorité, ceux qui y figurent deviennent membres du nouveau Parlement; si la majorité vote contre la liste, une autre doit être dressée suivant la même procédure et soumise de nouveau.

“Once drawn up by the Federations, the lists of candidates are submitted to the Grand National Council, which has the selective power to amend these lists.  The lists, as amended, are then submitted to the vote of an electorate which includes the members of the Confederations and persons who pay a certain minimum of taxes.  The electorate votes on the global list.  If the list obtains a majority, those who appear in it become members of the new Parliament; if the majority votes against the list, another must be drawn up following the same procedure and resubmitted.

“Ainsi, d’après ce procédé qui combine le pouvoir électoral et le pouvoir sélectif, la représentation à la Chambre des Communes se fait par catégorie industrielle; de sorte qu’un citoyen

“Thus, according to this process which combines electoral power and selective power, the representation in the House of Commons is by industrial category; so that a citizen

[56]
[56]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

devient député en tant que représentant d’une catégorie d’intérêt économique bien spécifique, et il n’a pas de comté ni d’électeurs en-dehors de cette catégorie d’intérêt. Voilà comment la Chambre des Communes devient un Parlement industriel d’experts pratique?. Et le député est toujours responsable à la catégorie d’intérêt qui l’a élu et qu’il représente.

becomes a Member of Parliament as a representative of a very specific economic interest category, and he has no county and no electors outside this interest category.  See how the House of Commons becomes an industrial Parliament of practical experts?  And the Member is always accountable to the category of interest that elected him and that he represents.

“Le ‘Souverain choisit son premier ministre, qui n’est responsable qu’à lui. Le premier ministre choisit ses ministres d’Etat, qui sont responsables, par lui, au Souverain.

“The Sovereign chooses his prime minister, who is responsible only to him.  The Prime Minister chooses his ministers of State, who are responsible, through him, to the Sovereign.

“La Chambre Haute consiste en un certain nombre de membres nommés à vie, éligiblès par leur éminence dans les affaires nationales. Ils ont nommés par le Souverain, sur l’avis de son premier ministre. Cette Chambre Haute correspond à la Chambre des «Lords ou Sénat, alors que la Chambre Industrielle déjà nommée correspond à la Chambre des Communes, et le Grand Conseil National forme le gouvernement permanent de la nation.

“The Upper House consists of a number of members appointed for life, eligible due to their eminence in national affairs.  They are appointed by the Sovereign, on the advice of his prime minister.  This Upper House corresponds to the House of Lords or Senate, while the already appointed Industrial House corresponds to the House of Commons, and the Grand National Council forms the permanent government of the nation.

“Les fonctions du Parlement fasciste sont d’abord de contrôler les limites générales dans lesquelles le Gouvernement peut agir, ce qui est rendu possible par son pouvoir de contrôle sur le budget, puis d’agir comme corps aviseur du Gouvernement”.

“The functions of the Fascist Parliament are first of all to control the general limits within which the Government can act, which is made possible by its power of control over the budget, and then to act as the advising body of the Government”.

“Le Grand Conseil National fasciste, ou gouvernement permanent, se compose de certains ministres, de hauts officiers des Corporations Economiques et d’autres personnes. Il est consultatif dans ses fonctions, coordonne tous les actes du régime fasciste et forme la dernière Cour d’Appel pour l’interprétation des lois. Il a le pouvoir de promulguer des lois par décret royal en certains cas d’urgence, mais le Parlement doit par la suite approuver ces lois, sans quoi elles deviennent alors désuètes et nulles. Lorsque le poste de premier ministre devient vacant, c’est le Grand Conseil National qui dresse la liste des candidats à sa succession et dans laquelle le Souverain doit choisir.”

“The Fascist National Grand Council, or permanent government, consists of certain ministers, senior officers of Economic Corporations, and other persons.  It is advisory in its functions, coordinates all the acts of the fascist regime and forms the final Court of Appeal for the interpretation of the laws.  It has the power to promulgate laws by Royal Decree in certain cases of urgency, but the Parliament must subsequently approve these laws, otherwise they become obsolete and null.  When the office of Prime Minister becomes vacant, the Grand National Council draws up the list of candidates for his succession and from which the Sovereign must choose.”

École de sacrifice et de renoncement

School of sacrifice and renunciation

C’est du haut en bas de l’échelle, le respect des hiérarchies, des valeurs et des compétences, puisque personne ne peut entrer dans le Grand Conseil, à la Chambre Haute ou à la Chambre Basse pour aucun autre motif que le mérite, la confiance et la dignité. C’est aussi, du haut en bas de l’échelle, une école de sacrifice et de renorfcement. Hitler ne touche pas un sou de salaire comme chancelier d’Allemagne; Mussolini, qui dirige plusieurs ministères, est moins payé qu’un constable ou un facteur de Montréal. En Italie, une milice de deux cent cinquante mille jeunes gens; en Allemagne un groupe de quatre cent mille, tous déterminés à barrer la route au socialisme,

From top to bottom of the ladder, with respect for hierarchies, values and competencies, no one can enter the Grand Council, the Upper House or the Lower House for any reason other than merit, trust and dignity.  Also, from top to bottom of the ladder, it is a school of sacrifice and renunciation.  Hitler does not touch a penny of salary as Chancellor of Germany; Mussolini, who heads several departments, is paid less than a constable or a Montreal postman.  In Italy, a militia of two hundred and fifty thousand young men; in Germany a group of four hundred thousand, all determined to block the road to socialism,

[57]
[57]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

travaillent sans un seul sou de compensation, rémunérés par la conscience et le plaisir de faire quelque chose d’utile pour leur patrie. Les chefs fascistes et leurs ministres sont tous pauvres* ; des membres des grands conseils et une foule de hauts fonctionnaires ne reçoivent absolument rien, et le fascisme tient à constamment imposer une discipline nationale qui empêche de considérer le fonctionnarisme comme une source de richesse. La participation à la chose publique est considérée comme un devoir rigoureux pour ceux qui en ont la compétence, et c’est par centaines que l’on cite les exemples de personnes qui, à l’appel des chefs nationaux, ont abandonné des positions lucratives ou de hautes professions pour accomplir des tâches publiques très dures et fort peu rémunératrices dans la plupart des cas. Toutes ces personnes apprécient comme leur plus grande récompense l’honneur et d’estime dans lesquels les tiennent leurs compatriotes, et comme plus grande satisfaction la conscience de faire quelque chose de beau pour leur pays.

work without a single penny of compensation, remunerated by conscience and the pleasure of doing something useful for their country.  The fascist leaders and their ministers are all poor*; members of the great councils and a host of high officials receive absolutely nothing, and fascism is anxious to constantly impose a national discipline which prevents viewing government employment as a source of wealth.  Participation in public affairs is regarded as a rigorous duty for those who have the competence, and examples in the hundreds could be cited of people who, at the behest of national chiefs, have given up lucrative positions or eminent professions to carry out very hard and in most cases very low-paying public tasks.  All these people appreciate as their greatest reward the honor and esteem in which their compatriots hold them, and as greater satisfaction the awareness of doing something beautiful for their country.

Le fascisme et la liberté

Fascism and freedom

Le fascisme a des données très précises sur la liberté. Ces données sont, en résumé, l’opposé exact de l’interprétation apportée par la Révolution Française sur la liberté. La liberté n’existe pas, par elle-même, car c’est simplement la conséquence de la jouissance d’un droit. On est libre d’user ou non d’un droit, mais la liberté n’engendre aucun droit. Les socialistes et les libéraux en font un principe premier, justement pour placer sur !e même pied que les nationaux d’un pays ceux qui sont totalement étrangers à ce pays et n’y jouissent d’aucun droit. Un Canadien a des droits, en Canada, et n’a aucune liberté à demander. C’est parce qu’il n’a pas de droits que le Juif, partout, fait appel a la liberté.

Fascism has very precise data on freedom.  These data are, in short, the exact opposite of the French Revolution’s interpretation of freedom.  Freedom does not exist, by itself, because it is simply the consequence of the enjoyment of a right.  One is free to use or not to use a right, but freedom does not give rise to any right.  Socialists and liberals make it a primary principle, precisely in order to place on the same footing as the nationals of a country those who are totally foreign to the country and enjoy no rights in it.  A Canadian has rights in Canada and has no need to demand freedom.  It is because he has no rights that the Jew everywhere calls for freedom.

Il n’existe aucun droit qui permette de faire le mal, et par conséquent toute liberté à ce sujet est inexistante. Quant au bien, il a tous les droits et il n’est aucunement nécessaire de réclamer la liberté de le faire. De plus, le droit de se libérer du bien n’existe pas. On ne peut se libérer que du mal, et tout autre signification donnée à la liberté est fausse.

There is no right to do evil, and therefore there is no freedom to do so.  As for the good, it has all rights and there is no need to claim freedom to do good.  Moreover, the right to free oneself from good does not exist.  One can only liberate oneself from evil, and any other meaning given to freedom is false.

Qu’est-ce qui est mal, alors1 ? Le fascisme considère comme un mal tout ce qui peut attenter à l’unité nationale, aux traditions, aux coutumes, aux moeurs, au patriotisme, à la suprématie politique, économique et sociale des nationaux sur la terre que leur ont léguée leurs ancêtres; tout ce qui peut affaiblir ou amoindrir les institutions nationales et religieuses acceptées ; tout ce qui peut entraver le progrès des nationaux dans toutes les sphères économiques, sur la seule terre où ils peuvent donner libre cours à leurs aspirations. La presse elle-

Then, what is evil?  Fascism considers as an evil everything that can undermine national unity, traditions, customs, manners, patriotism, political, economic and social supremacy of nationals on the land bequeathed to them by their ancestors; anything that can weaken or diminish accepted national and religious institutions; all that can hinder the progress of nationals in all economic spheres, on the only land where they can give free rein to their aspirations.  The press itself

__________
Note de la traductrice:  Dans la biographie d’Arcand, Adrien Arcand devant le tribunal de l’histoire : Scandale à la société Radio-Canada, écrite par son parti et publiée en 1983 (traduite ici comme A Short Study of the Life of Adrien Arcand), l’auteur note:

__________
Translator’s note:  In Arcand’s biography, Adrien Arcand before the Court of History: Scandal at CBC Radio-Canada, written by his Party and published in 1983 (part being translated here as A Short Study of the Life of Adrien Arcand), the author notes:

Les biens terres­tres ne l’intéressaient pas, et ce détachement su­blime demeure vraiment, selon tous ceux qu’il a si hautement inspirés, la preuve la plus tangible de sa sincérité, en ce monde dépravé par l’amour de l’argent.  Proclamer à la face de l’univers ce re­noncement extraordinaire est bien le plus grand hommage que ses disciples et amis puissent lui rendre.

Earthly goods were of no interest to him, and therefore sublime detachment really remains the most tangible proof of his sincerity, according to all those whom he greatly inspired in this world depraved by the love of money.  To proclaim in the face of the universe this extraordinary renunciation is really the greatest homage that his disciples and his friends could pay to him.

J’ai déjà cité ceci, dans mon article sur «The Last Will and Testament of Adrien Arcand – 9 September 1960

I have quoted this before, in my post on the “The Last Will and Testament of Adrien Arcand – 9 September 1960”:

David Rajotte de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada, dans son précieux article, « L’État canadien contre le Parti de l’unité nationale et Adrien Arcand», résume efficacement la richesse matérielle d’Arcand dans son état actuel, évaluée par le État canadien lors de son internement sans procès en 1940.  Selon Rajotte:

David Rajotte of Library and Archives Canada, in his valuable article, “L’État canadien contre le Parti de l’unité nationale et Adrien Arcand”, effectively summarizes Arcand’s material wealth as it stood, assessed by the Canadian State upon his internment without trial in 1940.  Says Rajotte:

Les ennemis du Canada durant la guerre voyaient leurs avoirs saisis et administrés par le Bureau du séquestre des biens ennemis (BSBE).  Aucun interné n’y a échappé. … La situation a été plus simple pour Adrien Arcand.  Un comptable a examiné ses possessions.  Il a finalement expliqué qu’il n’avait rien de valeur.  Dans une entrevue d’après-guerre, Arcand a raconté que sa femme a pu passer à travers le conflit en bonne partie grâce à l’aide d’amis.  Elphège Deaudelin, propriétaire d’épiceries, lui fournissait des aliments.

Canada’s enemies during the war saw their assets seized and administered by the Office of the Custodian of Enemy Property (OCEP).  No internees escaped this. … The situation was easier for Adrien Arcand.  An accountant3 examined his possessions.  He finally explained that there was nothing of value.  In a post-war interview, Arcand said that his wife was able to get through the conflict largely thanks to the help of friends.  Elphège Deaudelin, a grocery store owner, provided her with food.

Arcand était-il pauvre par hasard, ou était-il pauvre parce qu’il vivait selon ses propres normes pour un chef fasciste?  N’a-t-il pas été payé un sou pour ses efforts au nom du Canada, des Canadiens français et de tous les peuples occidentaux, et surtout pour le christianisme, dont il considérait la charité comme un principe fasciste?  Il semble qu’Adrien Arcand, comme les «chefs fascistes et leurs ministres» qui sont tous «pauvres», n’a travaillé que pour l’honneur et la dignité.

Was Arcand poor by chance, or was he poor because he was living according to his own standards for a fascist leader?  Was he paid not a penny for his efforts on behalf of Canada, of the French-Canadians and all Western peoples, and most importantly for Christianity, whose Charity he viewed as a fascist principle?  It seems that Adrien Arcand, like the “fascist leaders and their ministers” who all are “poor”. worked only for honor and dignity.

[58]
[58]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

même est sujette à ces conditions, de même que la finance locale et étrangère, qui peuvent tout faire sauf ce qui vient en conflit avec le véritable intérêt des nationaux, auquel elles sont rigousement assujetties. Le droit de critique existe pour la presse, en Italie et en Allemagne comme partout ailleurs, mais une critique qui n’offre pas le remède au mal qu’elle dénonce, une critique qui n’a pas d’autre but que de diminuer la confiance dans les instructions dévouées à l’avancement du pays, une critique qui tend à compre l’unité nationale ou susciter des antagonismes de classes, sont sévèrement réprimées. Pareilles critiques, on le conçoit, sont au service de choses mauvaises, et le mal n’a aucun droit, dans l’Etat fasciste.

The press itself is subject to these conditions, as are local and foreign finance, which can do anything except what comes into conflict with the true interests of nationals, to which they are strictly bound.  The right of criticism exists for the press in Italy and in Germany as everywhere else, but a criticism which does not offer a remedy for the wrong it denounces, a criticism which has no other aim than to reduce confidence in the instructions devoted to the country’s advancement, a criticism which tends to undermine national unity or arouse class antagonisms, is sternly repressed.  Such criticisms, as can be understood, serve bad things, and evil has no rights in the fascist State.

Le sujet britannique et le citoyen

The British subject and the citizen

Ces considérations nous amènent forcément au problème de la nationalité. Quels sont ceux qui ont des droits, en Canada ?  Les Canadiens, me répondrez-vous.  Qu’est-ce qu’un Canadien ?  Est-ce qu’un Zoulou d’Afrique peut devenir un Canadien ?  Les libéraux ont terriblement embrouillé ces questions, dans le passé, au point que très rares sont ceux qui peuvent y répondre.

These considerations necessarily bring us to the problem of nationality.  Who are those who have rights in Canada?  Canadians, you will answer me.  What is a Canadian?  Can an African Zulu become a Canadian?  The Liberals have confused these questions terribly in the past, to the point that very few can answer them.

Dans l’empire britannique, tous sont sujets britanniques, ayant droit à la protection des lois impériales et du drapeau britannique. Le titre de sujet britannique n’est pas un titre anglais, ni écossais, ni gallois, ni canadien, ni australien. C’est un titre purement impérial. Et un sujet britannique qui a droit à la protection britannique impériale n’a pas nécessairement un titre aux droits des Canadiens en Canada, ou des Australiens en Australie. Depuis que le Statut de Westminster a été passé, le Canada et les autres dominions sont des pays entièrement autonomes, égaux entre eux et égaux avec la Grande-Bretagne, n’ayant pour lien politique que la personne du Souverain, qui forme le principe actif d’autorité pour tous ces pays. Il s’ensuit donc que le Canada a des titres de citoyenneté pour ses nationaux, comme n’importe quel autre pays du monde. Le titre de sujet britannique accorde la protection royale, mais ne confère aucun droit national. Dans notre pays, il faut donc avoir plus que ce-titre pour jouir de droits positifs: il faut être citoyen canadien. Je suis d’autant plus à l’aise pour parler dans ce sens que les Fascistes d’Angleterre, qui font d’immenses progrès de mois en mois, tiennent un langage identique au mien. “Un Hindou, disent-ils, aura beau être vingt fois sujet britannique, nous ne lui reconnaissons pas le droit de se dire Anglais et de venir, à la Chambre des Communes, faire des lois pour régir les Anglais chez eux. A plus forte raison éliminerons-nous le Juif, qui est le plus dangereux des Asiatiques”. Dans la pratique, c’est d’ailleurs ce

In the British Empire, all are British subjects, entitled to the protection of the imperial laws and the British flag.  The title of British subject is not an English, Scottish, Welsh, Canadian, or Australian title.  It’s a purely imperial title.  And a British subject who is entitled to British imperial protection does not necessarily have a title to the rights of Canadians in Canada, or Australians in Australia.  Since the Statute of Westminster was passed, Canada and the other dominions are fully autonomous countries, equal to each other and equal with Great Britain, having for political connection only the person of the Sovereign, who forms the active principle of authority for all these countries.  It follows that Canada has citizenship titles for its nationals, like any other country in the world.  The title of British subject grants royal protection, but confers no national right.  In our country, more than just this title is necessary to enjoy positive rights:  one must be a Canadian citizen.  I am all the more at ease in speaking this way than are the Fascists of England, who make great progress from month to month, and speak as I do.  “A Hindu,” they say, “may be twenty times a British subject, we do not recognize his right to call himself English and come to the House of Commons to make laws to govern the English at home.  All the more reason for us to debar the Jew, who is the most dangerous of Asians.”  Besides which, in practice, this is

[59]
[59]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

que nous faisons en ce pays. L’Hindou est sujet britannique, et pourtant non seulement nous ne lui reconnaissons pas la citoyenneté canadienne, mais encore nous ne lui permettons pas de franchir nos frontières. Pourquoi faire exception pour le Juif, même celui qui vient ici sans être préalablement sujet britannique ? Il n’y a qu’une seule réponse possible, et nous l’avons constaté par d’autres considérations : le libéralisme n’a émancipé et affranchi que le Juif, et il est seul à en profiter, dans les pays qui ont imprudemment répondu à cette néfaste doctrine.

what we do in this country.  The Hindu is a British subject, and yet not only do we not recognize his Canadian citizenship, but we do not allow him to cross our borders.  Why make an exception for the Jew, even one who comes here without being a British subject?  There is only one possible answer, and we have seen it from other considerations:  liberalism has emancipated and enfranchised only the Jew, and he alone benefits from it in countries which have recklessly responded to this harmful doctrine.

Il sera donc absolument nécessaire, dans l’avenir, de modifier nos lois de façon à faire une démarcation bien définie entre les titres de sujet britannique et de citoyen canadien. Le citoyen canadien est par naissance un sujet britannique, mais un sujet britannique n’a pas, par ce seul titre, des droits nationaux en Canada. Il faudra donc réparer une grave erreur que nous avons entretenue jusqu’ici et ne conférer le droit de vote, le droit d’éligibilité, le droit de représentation et le droit d’office public qu’aux citoyens canadiens, et non aux sujets britanniques. Ceux-ci seront protégés, suivant les exigences du droit naturel et du droit impérial, mais ils n’auront aucun droit national et public.

It will therefore be absolutely necessary, in the future, to amend our laws so as to make a definite demarcation between the titles of British subjects and Canadian citizens.  The Canadian citizen is by birth a British subject, but a British subject does not, by this title alone, have national rights in Canada.  It will be necessary to repair a serious error that we have maintained so far and to confer the right to vote, the right of eligibility, the right of representation and the right of public office only to Canadian citizens, and not to British subjects.  They will be protected according to the requirements of natural law and imperial law, but they will have no national and public rights.

Pour être citoyen canadien, il faudra être ce que les Canadiens ont été jusqu’ici: des gens de race blanche, d’une ou l’autre religion chrétienne, parlant la langue anglaise ou la langue française. Et, par mesure de protection contre les dangers possibles de l’immigration future, il faudra même pour ceux qui le sont déjà, faire une probation de plusieurs années comme sujets britanniques avant de devenir des citoyens canadiens jouïssant de tous les droits politiques et civils.

To be a Canadian citizen, you will have to be what Canadians have been so far:  people of the white race, of one or the other Christian religion, speaking English or French.  And, as a measure of protection against the possible dangers of future immigration, it will even be necessary for those who already are to be put on probation for several years as British subjects before becoming Canadian citizens enjoying all political and civil rights.

Conclusions

Conclusions

Voilà, mesdames et messieurs, quels sont les principaux aspects, les doctrines et le fonctionnement du fascisme, la grande formule moderne de redressement, de régénération chrétienne, et de restauration nationale, politique, sociale et économique.  C’est, en résumé, un retour énergique à la tradition, a la justice et la charité chrétiennes, en tenant compte des conditions de notre époque, des ruines accumulées par le libéralisme démocratique, et des besoins de l’heure; c’est l’affirmation intense des droits nationaux et religieux; c’est la lutte contre un matérialisme contraire à ce qui forme notre essence propre; c’est la destruction definitive de la fausse démocratie, qui a construit l’édifice social suivant des données qui ne correspondent pas avec les fondations du même édifice; c’est la libération de l’emprise juive sur le monde, du contrôle de notre héritage par les étrangers, de notre vie économique étranglée par des dictatures tyranniques.

These, ladies and gentlemen, are the main aspects, the doctrines and the functioning of fascism, the great modern formula of recovery, Christian regeneration, and national, political, social and economic restoration.  It is, in short, an energetic return to Christian tradition, justice and charity, taking into account the conditions of our time, the ruins accumulated by democratic liberalism, and the needs of the hour.  It is the intense affirmation of national and religious rights; it is the fight against a materialism contrary to what forms our own essence.  It is the final destruction of false democracy which has built the social edifice according to data which do not correspond to the foundations of that edifice.  It is liberation from the Jewish grip on the world, from the control of our heritage by foreigners, of our economic life strangled by tyrannical dictatorships.

[60]
[60]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

II faut un changement, non un changement superficiel, mais un changement radical de tout notre système politique. L’Etat ne .doit plus se contenter d’être un simple administrateur des deniers qu’il perçoit, mais il doit reprendre son rôle de dirigeant, qui est le rôle le plus important, si nous admettons que nous avons des destinées nationales réelles et que nous devons y atteindre. Dans les mouvements populaires que tous peuvent étudier facilement, on discerne à ne pas s’y tromper un désir de changement dans le sens indiqué. Les masses populaires remuent partout et font entendre le même cri, dans chaque province, dans chaque ville, dans chaque village. Ce cri se traduit par l’expression populaire suivante: “Rouge ou bleu, c’est la même chose, il n’y a pas de différence. Que l’un ou l’autre soit au pouvoir, c’est toujours la même clique financière qui nous exploite, et c’est toujours le gouvernement, rouge ou bleu, qui soutient cette clique, la protège et lui permet de poursuivre l’oeuvre qu’elle a commencée”. Ce cri de la foule, il ne faut pas s’y méprendre, indique que l’on n’a plus confiance dans la démocratie et dans son système politique. La démocratie, qui a créé les oligarchies financières et les dictatures matérialistes, est devenue leur esclave et elle est totalement incapable de les contrôler, encore moins de les détruire. Ce cri de la foule, et les partis politiques devront en prendre avis, pour orienter leur conduite, est un cri pour ce que seul le fascisme peut offrir. Dans le pays le plus démocratique du monde, aux Etats-Unis, le président Roosevelt, débordé par les aspirations de la foule et guidé par l’expérience de la catastrophe qu’a causée le régime démocratique, est forcé malgré lui d’osciller vers le fascisme; Dieu veuille que sa force morale soit plus grande que la force économique des Juifs, qui détiennent près de êofc de la richesse américaine.

We need a change, not a superficial change, but a radical change in our entire political system.  The State should no longer be content to be a simple administrator of the money it receives, but it must resume its role of leader, which is the most important role, if we admit that we have real national destinies and we must achieve them.  In popular movements that everyone can easily study, one detects an unmistakable desire for change in the direction indicated.  The masses of the people are stirring everywhere and the same cry is heard in each province, in each city, in each village.  This cry translates into the following popular expression:  “Red or blue, it’s the same thing, there is no difference.  Whether one or the other is in power, it is always the same financial clique that exploits us, and it is always the government, red or blue, that supports this clique, protects it and allows it to pursue the work it started”.  Make no mistake, this cry from the masses indicates that people no longer have confidence in democracy and its political system.  Democracy, which created financial oligarchies and materialist dictatorships, has become their slave and is completely incapable of controlling them, much less destroying them.  This cry of the masses — and political parties must take note of it to guide their conduct — is a cry for what fascism alone can offer.  In the most democratic country in the world, in the United States, President Roosevelt, overwhelmed by the aspirations of the masses, and guided by the experience of the catastrophe caused by the democratic regime, is forced in spite of himself to oscillate towards fascism.  God grant that his moral strength will be greater than the economic strength of the Jews, who hold close to 60% of American wealth.

La crise va continuer, car ceux qui l’ont déclanchée, après l’avoir préparée de longue main, ont intérêt à ce qu’elle se continue.  La bataille qu’ils ont engagée va se poursuivre jusqu’au bout; ils ne desserront pas la contraction de leur or, paralysant tout crédit, et par conséquent tout commerce, toute industrie.  Par des moyens extraordinaires, les chefs politiques pourront trouver des calmants temporaires, mais ils ne pourront guérir ni le mal ni ses causes.  Seule la destruction du matérialisme abusif, par le fascisme, apportera le remède.

The crisis will continue because those who unleashed it, having long prepared it, have an interest in continuing it.  The battle they have engaged will continue until the end; they will not loosen their gold contraction, paralyzing all credit, and consequently all commerce, all industry.  By extraordinary means, political leaders will be able to find temporary sedatives, but they will not be able to cure either the malady or its causes.  Only the destruction of abusive materialism, by fascism, will provide the remedy.

Le régime démocratique, et les partis qui le soutiennent, auront disparu d’ici dix ans. Les progrès que fait le socialisme dans rOuest canadien et les centres industriels d’Ontario, de même que le mouvement qui couve pour le fascisme dans tout “Est du Canada, sont une preuve que la démocratie ne peut plus conserver ses positions et qu’elle n’est plus désirée, pas plus par les tempéraments de gauche que les tempéraments de droite. Et ce mouvement s’accentue avec une rapidité qui, avouons-le, ne manque d’effrayer les chefs sérieux des vieux

The democratic regime, and the parties that support it, will be gone within a decade.  The progress socialism is making in western Canada and the industrial centers of Ontario, as well as the smoldering movement for fascism in all of eastern Canada, is proof that democracy can no longer maintain its positions and that it no longer is desired by the temperaments of the left any more than by the temperaments of the right.  And this movement is intensifying with a speed which, let’s face it, doesn’t fail to frighten the serious leaders of the old

[61]
[61]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

partis politiques. Comme il faudra faire un choix entre les deux systèmes qui s’offrent: le socialisme et le fascisme, il importe de préparer les esprits en faveur du système qui convient le mieux à nos traditions et notre mentalité : le fascisme. L’élite, les chefs de groupes, ceux qui commandent l’attention des masses, portent en ce moment la plus grave responsabilité de toute notre histoire canadienne. De leur action dépendra la direction dans laquelle le peuple, aux grands moments de détresse et peut-être de panique, se lancera. C’est présentement pour eux un devoir impérieux, une pressante obligation, non seulement d’étudier et de se convaincre, mais d’user de toute leur influence pour faire pencher l’opinion du côté le plus conforme à nos traditions et nos aspirations véritables. Il n’est pas suffisant, pour tous les chefs responsables, de se contenter du rôle négatif et passif de dénoncer le socialisme qui lève, il faut prendre activement fait et cause pour sa contre-partie la meilleure ; il faut se faire apôtre de la cause qui sauvera le pays. Car, à quoi servira tout notre bagage de traditions, à quoi serviront les bonnes doctrines, à quoi servira l’élite, s’il faut attendre que le socialisme s’empare du pays, chasse et détruise toutes ces grandes forces morales ? C’est aux heures du danger que le sentiment du devoir doit le plus héroïquement s’exprimer, et le sentiment du devoir s’impose plus rigoureusement pour l’élite, pour les chefs, que pour les masses incohérentes qui, elles-mêmes, demandent des chefs et des directions.

political parties.  Since we must choose between the two available systems, socialism and fascism, it is important to prepare minds for the system that best suits our traditions and mentality:  fascism.  The elite, the group leaders, those who command the attention of the masses, bear the gravest responsibility at this time, out of all our Canadian history.  The road on which the people will embark, in great moments of distress and even panic, will depend on their action.  It is an imperative duty, an urgent obligation, not only to study and convince themselves, but to use their influence to incline opinion toward the side that most accords with our traditions and our true aspirations.  It does not suffice for responsible leaders to content themselves with the negative and passive role of denouncing the rising socialism, they must actively take up the cause of its best alternative; they must become apostles of the cause that will save the country.  For, what will be the use of all our baggage of traditions, what purpose the good doctrines, to what avail the elite, if we must wait for socialism to seize the country and hunt and destroy all these great moral forces?  In times of danger, the sense of duty must be heroically expressed by the elite, the leaders, to whom the inarticulate masses are looking for direction.

Il faut, en précurseurs de sa venue certaine, porter partout l’évangile fasciste, le .seul qui pourra nous sauver et nous restaurer. Alors que le socialisme essaie de tuerie peu de foi nationale et chrétienne qui nous reste, le fascisme vient la réveiller. Car, le fascisme est essentiellement un mouvement de foi, foi dans la vérité et la justesse de nos traditions, foi dans notre mission nationale, foi dans notre race, foi dans notre caractère chrétien. Le fascisme, c’est le dégagement individuel et collectif du matérialisme, en même temps qu’une plongée dans les sources spirituelles de la nation. Le fascisme, c’est le refoulement de l’appel aux sentiments égoïstes et aux instincts inférieurs de l’homme, en même temps qu’un contre-appel à l’esprit de sacrifice et aux instincts les plus nobles, nous rappelant que la vie nationale, pas plus que la vie individuelle, n’est une partie de plaisir, mais une soumission constante au sens du devoir, de l’honneur et du travail; que, dans la vie nationale -comme dans la vie individuelle, rien de beau ni de grand ne s’obtient sans effort et sans sacrifice. Le fascisme, c’est le cri de guerre contre les forces malsaines, contre les injustices sociales, contre les doctrines destructrices, contre les principes démoralisateurs, en même temps que c’est

As forerunners of its certain arrival, we must carry the fascist gospel everywhere, the one that can save and restore us.  While socialism attempts to murder what little of national and Christian faith remains to us, fascism comes to reawaken it.  For, fascism, essentially, is a movement of faith, faith in the truth and justness of our traditions, faith in our national mission, faith in our race, faith in our Christian character.  Fascism is individual and collective liberation from materialism, and a plummet into the spiritual sources of the nation.  Fascism is the forbearance of selfish feelings and the baser instincts of man, with a counter-appeal to the spirit of sacrifice and the most noble instincts.  Fascism reminds us that National life, like individual life, is not only pleasure, but constant submission to the sense of duty, honor, and work.  In national life, as with individual life, nothing beautiful or great is achieved without effort and sacrifice.  Fascism is the war cry against unhealthy forces, against social injustices, destructive doctrines, demoralizing principles, at the same time as

[62]
[62]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

le cri de résurrection et de renaissance, un cri franc, clair et pur qui pénètre jusque dans la grande conscience intérieure collective et qui nous sauvera, si nous savons le répéter sans relâche jusqu’au jour du grand réveil. Et ce cri, chez nous, qui s’opposera à tous les cris matérialistes, nous le résumerons dans un mot que tous ‘les vrais Canadiens-français sauront comprendre, après avoir été si longtemps endormis: “Ame du vieux Québec, éveille-toi !”

the cry of resurrection and rebirth, a frank, clear and pure cry that penetrates into the great inner collective consciousness and will save us if we can repeat it over and over until the day of the great awakening.  And we will summarize this cry, which will oppose all materialistic cries, in a way that real French Canadians will understand, having been so long asleep:  “Soul of old Quebec, awake!”

__________
Note de la traductrice:  Cette phrase a attiré mon attention:  «grande conscience intérieure collective».  Cela m’a d’abord rappelé Carl Jung et son «inconscient collectif» (1916); mais ce n’était pas tout à fait ça.  Teilhard de Chardin est alors venu à l’esprit; c’était un prêtre jésuite qui a écrit «Le phénomène de l’homme».  Wikipédia (curieusement) le dit assez bien, en disant que de Chardin:  “a présenté un compte-rendu général du développement du cosmos et de l’évolution de la matière à l’humanité, pour finalement une réunion avec le Christ”.  Poétique, en effet; mais ce n’est pas du catholicisme.  Pas le genre qu’on m’a appris; et pas le genre qu’Arcand a appris, non plus.  Adrien Arcand était très opposé aux notions d’“évolution” qui représentent l’Homme comme “un singe amélioré” (qui vient de quelque part dans Le Goglu).  Je ne pense pas qu’Arcand inventerait la phrase; Je doute qu’il accepterait de Chardin; Je me demande donc où Arcand a choisi l’expression «conscience collective» et ce qu’il pensait se trouver derrière l’idée.  Personnellement, l’idée d’évolution ne me dérange pas.  Je ne me soucie pas vraiment de la façon dont “Dieu” a tout créé.  Mais je suis sûre qu’un vrai Pape (pas un des papes hérétiques post-VII) n’approuverait pas de Chardin.

__________
Translator’s note:  This phrase caught my eye:  “grande conscience intérieure collective” (“great inner collective consciousness”).  It first reminded me of Carl Jung and his “collective unconscious” (1916); but that wasn’t quite it.  Teilhard de Chardin then came to mind; he was a Jesuit priest who wrote “The Phenomenon of Man”.  Wikipedia (oddly) puts it fairly well, saying that de Chardin:  “set forth a sweeping account of the unfolding of the cosmos and the evolution of matter to humanity, to ultimately a reunion with Christ”.  Poetic, indeed; but that is not Catholicism.  Not the kind I was taught; and not the kind Arcand was taught, either.  Adrien Arcand was very opposed to notions of “evolution” that account for Man as “an improved monkey” (that’s from somewhere in the Goglu).  I don’t think Arcand would invent the phrase; I doubt that he would entertain de Chardin; so, I wonder where Arcand picked up the expression “collective consciousness” and what he thought lay behind the idea.  I personally don’t mind evolution; I don’t really care how “God” created it all, but I’m sure a real Pope (not one of the post-VII heretic popes) would not approve of de Chardin.

[63]
[63]
 

PAGE BLANCHE

BLANK PAGE

[64]
[64]
 
APPENDICE – APPENDIX

The Swastika, What it Represents

La Croix Gammée, ce qu’elle représente

Swastika

The swastika from the frontispiece of Adrien Arcand’s Fascisme ou Socialisme? (1933)

 

Subscribe, and share this web site with your address book!

Abonnez-vous et partagez ce site avec votre carnet d’adresses!


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

Young Christian leader Adrien Arcand lecturing on stage (date unknown)

Young Christian leader Adrien Arcand lecturing on stage (date unknown)

 
The State as fascism conceives it, says Mussolini, is a spiritual and moral entity, because it embodies the political, legal and economic organism of the nation, and this organism, both in its creation and its development, is a manifestation of the spirit of the nation. The State is not only the guarantor of internal security, but it also is the guardian and transmitter of the Spirit of the People, and this spirit has been elaborated throughout the ages through its language, its customs and its faith.  The State lives not only in the present, but also in the past and, above all, in the future.  It is the State which, transcending the brief limits of individual lives, represents the immortal consciousness of the nation.

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

There are four instalments to date of this English translation:  part one, part two, part three, and the fourth is below, after my Foreword.


Foreword

This fourth segment of Adrien Arcand’s 1933 public talk, “Fascism or Socialism?” is thought-provoking.  Arcand exposes the defects of parliamentary democracy as he sees them, to illustrate a part of his motives for preferring fascism.  It is clear that a rational, serious mind was applied to the problems with goodwill.  Fascism, as Arcand understands it, is proposed sincerely, with intent to remedy these defects for the benefit of society.

Much of Arcand’s description of the aims and workings of fascism is poetic, as when he quotes Mussolini, above.

As to other points, there is evidence that Arcand’s grounds for objecting to “universal suffrage” and the liberal parliamentary system are valid.

On the other hand, some of Arcand’s reasons for preferring fascism can be countered with facts from Canada’s British-parliamentary system, inherited by us in 1867.  For example, in “Fascism or Socialism? (1933)”, Arcand says:

“Fascism considers that human law is a reflection of divine law, and that every leader derives his authority from the divine law which he is charged with enforcing and applying.  But, however high a leader may be, no matter how great he is, he remains himself subject to this law, which he cannot disobey without undermining the bases of his own authority.”

But this is Catholic doctrine.  Like promulgation (Thomas Aquinas), we have as a fundamental principle of our British-Canadian Constitution of 1867 that government is subject to the law of the Constitution.

Saint Thomas Aquinas and Saint Augustine

Saint Thomas Aquinas and Saint Augustine

Albert Venn Dicey, the great British constitutionalist, in his Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, framed it as the “Rule of Law”; but it first came from Thomas Aquinas, and even earlier from Saint Augustine.

A classic Christian statement of the doctrine would put it this way:  “A stream cannot rise higher than its source” or “A stream cannot rise above its source”.  Thus, no government under the British-Canadian Constitution can exceed the source of its authority, which is the Constitution.

As I recall, the principle is found in the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas.  Therefore, if one reason Arcand wants fascism is in order to implement this principle; well, we already have it.

Here is how Dicey put it:

Albert Venn Dicey

Albert
Venn
Dicey

“We mean in the second place, when we speak of the ‘rule of law’ as a characteristic of our country, not only that with us no man is above the law, but (what is a different thing) that here every man, whatever his rank or condition, is subject to the ordinary law of the realm and amenable to the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals.”

Normally, today — or anyway, it’s better practice — we capitalize Dicey’s “Rule of Law”.

Dicey goes on:

“In England the idea of legal equality, or of the universal subjection of all classes to one law administered by the ordinary Courts, has been pushed to its utmost limit.  With us every official, from the Prime Minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without legal justification as any other citizen.”

That was found at page 114 in one of the few word-searchable editions online of Dicey’s famous “Introduction to the Study”, so there is the link in case you would like to delve more deeply.  That’s the Liberty Classics edition (Indianapolis), a reprint of the eighth edition published by Macmillan in 1915.  The first edition was issued by the same publisher in 1885.

Now, on the topic of democracy, Arcand has things to say, and here, I tend to agree with him, and I can back him up.  Says Arcand at page 54:

“The quality of a statesman requires foresight, wisdom and sacrifice that the electoral mass can never bestow.  Wisdom is not obtained by multiplying to infinity the number of ignorants; but in the democratic regime, wisdom is summed up in the ‘no’ or the ‘yes’ expressed by the general ignorance called ‘universal suffrage’.

Fascism therefore has no confidence in the democratic electoral system, which always proceeds by the lie of false promises, or intimidation, or corruption, and confers power only on one class or group of interests in the nation.’

It isn’t clear which “class or group of interests” Arcand is referring to.  Perhaps he means that the mass of ignorants is merely manipulated by professional politicians who then serve another “class”, the moneyed class.  And in Arcand’s day, as in our day, increasingly, the moneyed class is the internationalists for whom there are no borders, no concern for nations and whose favoured interests totally conflict with the very existence of nations.  The internationalists discard and disregard the homelands of ethnic majorities, who have a need for and a right to them, and which are the real and only bases of existence for most of any local population.

Albert Venn Dicey, again, in his Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, shows how the British constitution with its unelected upper house and its elected house with its two-party system, tries to share power between the “educated” and the “ignorant” or non-educated classes:

“The working of English parliamentary government has owed half of its success to the existence of two leading and opposed parties, and of two such parties only.  Using somewhat antiquated but still intelligible terms, let me call them by the name of Tories and Whigs.  These two parties have, if one may speak in very broad terms, tended, the one to uphold the rule of the well-born, the well-to-do, and therefore, on the whole, of the more educated members of the community; the other has promoted the power of numbers, and has therefore aimed at increasing the political authority of the comparatively poor, that is, of the comparatively ignorant.”

Notwithstanding the laudable intent to give some voice or power to the masses in making law, there is decent evidence that Arcand’s objection to “universal suffrage” and to the liberal parliamentary party system as we know it has a valid basis.

I’m thinking now of the example of the legal fiction of “legislative intent”, which illustrates a clear understanding that a particular intent to confer (or to restrain) a particular power by passing an act or statute, cannot be gathered by canvassing each of those members of a legislature, or more accurately each member of the majority who voted to pass it.

My point being that if we cannot gather a clear and common intention to confer power through a law from the disparate minds of those in the legislative majority who passed the act, then how can any mere ‘yes’ or ‘no’, as Arcand says, confer any real authority at all.  Here’s my evidence.  Case and Comment in the Cambridge Law Journal of November 1993 (Volume 52, Part 3), sums up the recognized problem:

“Hansard for the purpose of ascertaining the intention of Parliament has been firmly forbidden, both by common law and by rulings of the House of Commons, for over two centuries.”

Hansard means a record of the debates in parliament at the time an act was passed.

“The House of Lords nevertheless declared that it is now permissible,” says Case and Comment, “at any rate for the purpose of construing an enactment which is ambiguous or obscure, or which if literally construed might give rise to an absurdity, and provided that the statement in question was made by a government minister or other promoter of a Bill.”

So, it is recognized that the intention in passing an act cannot be gathered from the majority of those who passed it; but to clear up an ambiguity, or another problem, the court that must implement a statute may look — not to the majority of the minds who passed it, but to the single Minister who led the bill.

And when a court decides what a statute means, it calls that meaning the “legislative intent”, or the “intention of parliament”.  But there is no such intent; again, as above, it’s a legal fiction.  Well then, what can you say about the “democratic Yes”?

There is and can be no equivalent process with the electorate.  There is no one person who led the “yes” who can be consulted as to why there was a “Yes”.

Even greater absurdities arise, in my view, in the liberal democratic system, when the mass of the electorate is conscripted to the polls, but doesn’t really view any party as representing its interests, yet it feels compelled to vote.

In The Universal Republic (1950), Arcand says:

“Eliminate democracy, it’s the end of the world, oblivion.  Listen to our liberals, our socialists and our communists shout out the word, gargle it with hysterical tremolos, see them roll their ecstatic eyes when they declaim it, their mouths pasty, foaming, and you will understand the importance given to this idol, this fetish of modern times …”.

“This idolatry, the most stupid of all since it is based on nothing at all, explains why political partisanship exerts more authority than a religious cult over the ignorant masses and, consequently, that the subject is more prized than things of the Spirit.”

The “elector-RAT” on a democratic treadmill.

The “elector-RAT” on a democratic treadmill.

The masses have to send someone to government, and frequently they send parties to power with whose platforms they disagree in part or in whole, but they feel compelled to tick off a box on voting day.  There is no box on the ballot stating “none of the above”, but of course a voter can rebel and spoil his vote, though apparently that doesn’t happen sufficiently to “crash” the default “liberal democratic” system that puts the electorate on a treadmill.

We are thus back to Arcand’s “tyranny of the democratic power that comes from the numerical majority”.  But, I think by that he means the tyranny of the political party that successfully manipulates the mass to vote a meaningless, incoherent “yes”.

I’ve had my say.  Let’s see what Adrien Arcand has to say.  Here’s the fourth instalment of my exclusive English translation of “Fascism or Socialism?”.


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?

Le fascisme et le pouvoir

Fascism and power

Le fascisme n’admet pas que le pouvoir émane, dans l’Etat fasciste, d’une section du peuple ou d’une majorité électorale accordée à un parti politique, puisque l’Etat comprend tout le peuple. Il décrète que tout pouvoir vient de Dieu ; que le pouvoir n’est pas un droit, mais un devoir qu’on ne peut revendiquer au nom d’un groupe, de certains intérêts ou voire de soi-même, mais seulement au nom de Dieu et de la vérité.

Fascism does not admit that power in the fascist State emanates from a section of the people or from an electoral majority granted to a political party, because the State includes all the people.  It decrees that all power comes from God; that power is not a right, but a duty that cannot be claimed in behalf of a group, of certain interests, or even of oneself, but only in the name of God and Truth.

Le voeu et les aspirations du peuple doivent servir à renseigner le gouvernement sur les besoins du peuple, mais la popularité ne comporte par elle-même aucun titre au pouvoir. Cette différence avec la doctrine libérale paraîtra tout à l’heure plus claire lorsque nous étudierons le fonctionnement gouvernemental et électoral du fascisme.

The wishes and aspirations of the people must serve to inform the government of the needs of the people, but popularity by itself has no title to power.  This difference from liberal doctrine will appear more clearly later when we study the governmental and electoral functioning of fascism.

Le fascisme considère que la loi humaine est un reflet de la loi divine, et que tout chef tire son autorité de la loi divine qu’il est chargé de faire respecter et d’appliquer. Mais, quelque haut placé que soit le chef, quelque grand qu’il soit, il reste lui-même soumis à cette loi, qu’il ne saurait enfreindre sans saper les bases de sa propre autorité. C’est pourquoi la conception fasciste s’oppose à la tyrannie du pouvoir démocratique issu de la majorité du nombre, comme à la tyrannie du pouvoir personnel absolu, puisque personne dans l’Etat fasciste ne peut être au-dessus de la loi. Un chef fasciste peut, en tout temps, être destitué par le grand conseil politique de !a nation s’il trahit la charte qui a été confiée à sa direction, charte à laquelle il est le premier soumis et dont il doit être le serviteur modèle.

Fascism considers that human law is a reflection of divine law, and that every leader derives his authority from the divine law which he is charged with enforcing and applying.  But, however high a leader may be, no matter how great he is, he remains himself subject to this law, which he cannot disobey without undermining the bases of his own authority.  This is why the fascist conception is as opposed to the tyranny of the democratic power that comes from the numerical majority, as it is to the tyranny of absolute personal power, since nobody in the fascist State can be above the law.  A fascist leader may, at any time, be dismissed by the great political council of the nation if he betrays the charter entrusted to his direction, a charter to which he is the first to be subject and of which he must be the model servant.

Qui doit décider la forme de gouvernement que l’Etat doit adopter, pour amener un régime fasciste ? A cette question nous répondons: quiconque est, en réalité, au moment du choix, l’autorité effective. Si une autorité nominale cesse de fonctionner*, une autorité réelle doit être mise à sa place.

Who should decide what form of government the State should adopt to bring about a fascist regime?  To this question, we reply:  whoever is, in reality, at the moment of the choice, the effective authority.  If a nominal authority ceases to function*, a real authority must be put in its place.

Le fascisme et l’Etat

Fascism and the State

Il suffira de donner la définition que Mussolini fait de l’État, définition identique à celle d’Hitler, pour savoir quelle conception s’en fait le fascisme.

It will suffice to give Mussolini’s definition of the State, identical to Hitler’s definition, to know how fascism conceives it.

L’État tel que le fascisme le conçoit, dit Mussolini, est une entité spirituelle et morale, parce qu’il incarne l’organisme politique, juridique et économique de la nation, et cet organisme, tant dans sa création que dans son développement, est une manifestation de l’esprit de la nation.  L’État n’est pas seulement le garant de la sécurité intérieure, mais il est aussi le gardien et le transmetteur de l’Esprit du Peuple, et cet esprit a été élaboré à travers les âges par sa langue, par ses

The State as fascism conceives it, says Mussolini, is a spiritual and moral entity, because it embodies the political, legal and economic organism of the nation, and this organism, both in its creation and its development, is a manifestation of the spirit of the nation. The State is not only the guarantor of internal security, but it also is the guardian and transmitter of the Spirit of the People, and this spirit has been elaborated throughout the ages through its language, its

__________
Note de la traductrice:  “Si une autorité nominale cesse de fonctionner, une autorité réelle doit être mise à sa place.”  Il s’agit d’une déclaration que je garde à l’esprit lorsque je lis qu’Arcand a été accusé de vouloir renverser le gouvernement canadien.  Connaissant le respect religieux d’Arcand pour l’autorité légalement constituée, et son mépris pour la révolution, je pense que tout projet en dehors des élections qu’il aurait pu entretenir pour remplacer le gouvernement fédéral, s’il y en avait, aurait été lié à une risque d’invasion pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale.  Dans ce cas, il aurait fort bien pu être prêt à maintenir le pays à flot en «remplaçant» «l’autorité nominale» qui aurait cessé de fonctionner en raison d’une invasion étrangère.  Mais, bien sûr, Arcand n’a jamais eu de procès, donc nous ne savons pas si c’est ainsi qu’il aurait pu s’expliquer.

__________
Translator’s note:  “If a nominal authority ceases to function, a real authority must be put in its place.”  This is a statement that I keep in mind when reading that Arcand was accused of intending to overthrow the Canadian government.  Knowing Arcand’s religious respect for lawfully constituted authority, and his contempt for revolution, I would think that any plans outside of election that he may have entertained for replacing the federal government, if such plans there were, would have been connected with a war-time risk of invasion during WWII.  In that case, he might well have intended to be ready to keep the country afloat by “replacing” the “nominal authority” that might have ceased to function due to foreign invasion.  But, of course, Arcand never had a trial, so we don’t know if that’s how he might have explained himself.

[46]
[46]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

coutumes et par sa foi. L’Etat ne vit pas seulement dans 1e présent, mais aussi dans le passé et, pardessus tout, dan l’avenir. C’est l’Etat qui, transcendant les brèves limites de vies individuelles, représente la conscience immortelle de 1 nation”.

customs and its faith.  The State lives not only in the present, but also in the past and, above all, in the future.  It is the State which, transcending the brief limits of individual lives, represents the immortal consciousness of the nation.

En un mot, le fascisme considère que nos ancêtres on été nos coopérateurs pour établir le pays dans lequel nou vivons et que nous devons, à notre tour, coopérer avec nos descendants.  L’Etat fasciste est donc un Etat avant tout traditionnaliste, qui fait de la tradition son guide vers la réalisation des aspirations nationales. C’est pour cela que, sans prescrire aucune forme particulière de gouvernement, le fascisme cherche à éviter les défauts de la démocratie, en préférant les intérêts PERMANENTS de la nation et l’incorporation de ses traditions et ses aspirations ETHNOLOGIQUES à n’importe quelle sorte d’agitation politique TEMPORAIRE.  En somme, le fascisme préfère l’ethnocratie à la démocratie.  Le gouvernement de l’Etat fasciste cherche constamment à réaliser les intérêts suprêmes de la nation, tels que confirmé par une large consultation des opinions EXPERTES, à déterminer le peuple, à toujours étudier et défendre l’intérêt national primordial et, s’il est nécessaire, à lui faire faire des sacrifices temporaires en vue d’obtenir des avantages plus durables.

In a word, fascism considers that our ancestors were our cooperators in establishing the country in which we live and that we, in turn, must cooperate with our descendants.  The Fascist State is therefore above all a traditionalist State, and makes tradition its guide toward the realization of national aspirations.  This is why, without prescribing any particular form of government, fascism seeks to avoid the defects of democracy, by preferring the PERMANENT interests of the nation and the incorporation of its traditions and its ETHNOLOGICAL aspirations, to any sort of TEMPORARY political turmoil.  In sum, fascism prefers ethnocracy to democracy.  The government of the fascist State constantly seeks to realize the supreme interests of the nation, as confirmed by a wide consultation of EXPERT opinions, to keep the people determined always to consider and defend the overriding national interest and, if necessary, cause them to make temporary sacrifices to obtain more lasting benefits.

Le fascisme et la religion

Fascism and religion

Le fascisme est une formule de redressement politique, social et économique, et il ne croit pas que l’on puisse opérer ce redressement sans tenir compte des racines profondes de la civilisation occidentale.  Cette civilisation millénaire est la civilisation chrétienne.  Elle a pour inspiratrice et pour guide la religion chrétienne, formatrice des individus.  Comme les individus qui composent la nation doivent vivre suivant les principes de leur formation religieuse, il est indispensable que l’Etat coopère étroitement avec la religion.  Hitler est le gouvernant qui est allé le plus loin, à ce sujet.  Dans sa première déclaration officielle comme chancelier, à Potsdam, il posai le principe politique suivant :  “Le gouvernement de La Nouvelle Allemagne est persuadé que la religion est la seule base de toute morale, de l’instinct de famille, du peuple et de l’Etat et il la défendra”.  C’est pourquoi, dans son programme déclaré intangible pour toujours, Hitler a fait insérer le principe que l’Etat doit être positivement chrétien, qu’il n’a pas le droit d’être neutre ou même indifférent et que, dans toutes ses législations, il doit non seulement éviter de venir en conflit avec la religion mais doit donner aux lois une attitude positive pour faciliter l’accomplissement des enseignements de la religion.  Le fascisme exige que l’instruction et l’éducation soient con-

Fascism is a formula for political, social and economic recovery, and it does not believe that this recovery can be carried out without taking into account the deep roots of Western civilization.  This millennial civilization is Christian civilization.  Its inspiration and guide is the Christian religion, the trainer of individuals.  As the individuals who make up the nation must live according to the principles of their religious training, it is essential that the state cooperate closely with religion.  Hitler is the ruler who has gone the farthest on this subject.  In his first official declaration as Chancellor, at Potsdam, he laid down the following political principle:  “The government of New Germany is convinced that religion is the only foundation of all morality, of the family instinct, of the people and of the State, and it will defend it”.  That is why, in his program declared intangible forever, Hitler inserted the principle that the State must be positively Christian, that it has no right to be neutral or even indifferent, and that in all its legislation it must not only avoid coming into conflict with religion but must confer upon the laws a positive attitude to facilitate the fulfillment of the teachings of religion.  Fascism demands that instruction and education be con-

[47]
[47]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

fessionnelles, à tous les stages. Le fascisme reconnaît que la religion est la dépositaire, la gardienne et l’interprète de la morale. Le fascisme, et la constitution de Potsdam le définit clairement, est le premier défenseur et soutien de la religion. Le fascisme répudie entièrement le rêve de l’homme divinisé et du paradis sur terre, rêve issu de la Révolution de 1789, et il veut imposer un retour aux principes de la pure tradition chrétienne. Et quand nous parlons de tradition chrétienne, il n’est aucunement question de ce qu’on pourrait appeler la bigoterie, le cléricalisme ou le puritanisme, puisque l’Etat est une forme de pouvoir purement laïque.

fessional at all stages.  Fascism recognizes that religion is the custodian, guardian and interpreter of morality.  Fascism, and the constitution of Potsdam clearly defines it, is the first defender and supporter of religion.  Fascism utterly repudiates the dream of deified man and paradise on earth, a dream from the Revolution of 1789, and it wants to impose a return to the principles of pure Christian tradition.  And when we speak of Christian tradition, there is no question of what might be called bigotry, clericalism, or puritanism, since the State is a form of purely secular power.

Le fascisme et
l’individu

Fascism and the
individual

Le fascisme décrète, contrairement au socialisme libéra!, que les individus sont naturellement inégaux.  En vertu de ce principe, l’organisation sociale ne peut plus être individualiste; elle est entièrement sociale.  L’individualisme est un crime qui est puni suivant les maux qu’il occasionne.  L’individu, dans l’Etat fasciste, appartient à la classe à laquelle il est normalement dévolu par naissance, atavisme, éducation, aptitude et avancement personnel.  Cependant, l’individu n’est pas abandonné à ses propres ressources, mais encadré et soutenu par des organisations corporatives.

Fascism decrees, unlike liberal socialism, that individuals are naturally unequal.  By virtue of this principle, social organization can no longer be individualistic; it is entirely social.  Individualism is a crime that is punished according to the harm it causes.  The individual, in the fascist State, belongs to the class to which he is normally devoted by birth, atavism, education, aptitude, and personal advancement.  However, the individual is not abandoned to his own resources, but given a framework and supported by corporate organizations.

Le travail est considéré par le fascisme comme un devoir social obligatoire pour tous les individus. Il ne tolère pas plus les paresseux riches que les paresseux pauvres. Et, dans tout ce qu’il fait, l’individu n’a pas le droit de s’occuper seulement de lui-même; il doit aussi s’occuper des autres. L’individu doit subordonner ses intérêts personnels à ceux du bien général et à ceux de l’Etat qui exerce l’autorité nécessaire. Il n’est pas seulement une unité indépendante, dans la nation, mais membre d’une communauté pour le bonheur présent et futur de laquelle il porte de graves responsabilités. Il peut, et même il doit avoir des intérêts personnels, mais il ne doit pas chercher son avantage dans une direction opposée à celle du bien commun. Il doit donc agir dans un esprit corporatif et patriotique. Sa vie, dans la société, doit se modeler sur les devoirs de sa vie individuelle dans sa famille, qui est naturellement corporative, guidée par une autorité permanente et stable, et dont l’Etat se fait le plus ferme soutien et défenseur. L’Etat considère la nation comme la grande famille nationale, extension de la petite famille, et il se fait le défenseur naturel de la grande et de la petite famille.

Work is considered by fascism as a compulsory social duty for all individuals.  It tolerates the lazy rich no more than the lazy poor.  And, in all that he does, the individual has no right to care only for himself; he must also take care of others.  The individual must subordinate his personal interests to those of the general good and to those of the State which exercises the necessary authority.  He is not only an independent unit in the nation, but a member of a community for whose present and future happiness he bears grave responsibilities.  He may, and even must, have personal interests, but he must not seek his advantage in a direction opposite to that of the common good.  He must act in a corporate and patriotic spirit.  His life in society must be modeled on the duties of his individual life in his family, which is naturally corporate, guided by a permanent and stable authority, and of which the State is the strongest supporter and defender.  The State considers the nation as the great national family, the extension of the small family, and it is the natural defender of both the great and the small family.

Cette doctrine faisait écrire à Harold-E. Goad, M.A., qui a particulièrement étudié la question : “Le principe fasciste, c’est le principe chrétien. Le fascisme forme un tout logique et n’est pas, comme on le prétend, un assemblage de théories

This doctrine caused Harold E. Goad, M.A., who has particularly studied the question, to write:  “The fascist principle is the Christian principle.  Fascism forms a logical whole and is not, as it is claimed, an assemblage of different theories.

[48]
[48]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

différentes. C’est le principe chrétien parce qu’il astreint tout homme à accomplir son devoir envers son prochain. Le socialisme priverait l’individu du privilège de la charité, en rendant toute personne indépendante de son voisin, et dépendant seulement de l’Etat”.

It is the Christian principle because it compels every man to fulfill his duty to his neighbor.  Socialism would deprive the individual of the privilege of charity, by rendering every person independent of his neighbor, and only dependent on the State.”

Le fascisme et les classes
sociales

Fascism and social
classes

Le fascisme combat avec acharnement la lutte des classe sociales, suscitée par le libéralisme et avivée par le socialisme et il prend les moyens législatifs et économiques voulus pou la faire cesser. Il considère que toutes les classes sociales son nécessaires et que, au lieu d’être naturellement antagonistes elles se complètent les unes les autres.

Fascism fiercely combats the struggle of the social classes stirred up by liberalism and enlivened by socialism, and takes the necessary legislative and economic measures to put an end to it.  It considers that all the social classes are necessary and that, instead of being naturally antagonistic, they complement each other.

Il faut admettre l’inégalité des classes comme des individus, conséquence de l’inégalité naturelle, loi fondamentale de 1a nature.  Comme les roues d’un même rouage d’horlogerie, le différentes classes doivent fonctionner suivant un rythm coordonné, dans un mouvement d’ensemble, suivant un ordre et une harmonie qui assurent l’avancement et le progrès de toute la nation.  Chaque classe accomplit sa fonction, dan l’organisme social; chaque classe a ses devoirs et ses droit propres qui forment sa tradition.  À la haine de classe socialiste, comme à la tyrannie de classe du capitalisme, le fascisme oppose une solidarité sociale basée sur une juste répartitioi des droits et des devoirs. Dans chaque classe, le fascisme reconnaît des hiérarchies, des élites personnelles et responsables.

We must admit the inequality of the classes as of individuals, a consequence of natural inequality, the fundamental law of nature.  Like the wheels of the same clockwork, the different classes must function according to a coordinated rhythm, in an overall movement, according to an order and a harmony which ensure the advancement and progress of the whole nation.  Each class performs its function in the social organism; each class has its own duties and its own rights which form its tradition.  To socialist class hatred, as to the class tyranny of capitalism, fascism opposes social solidarity based on the just distribution of rights and duties.  Within each class, fascism recognizes hierarchies, personal and responsible elites.

Le fascisme répudie le socialisme et accepte la doctrine sociale chrétienne.  Il l’applique, suivant un mode corporatif.  Tout, dans le fascisme, est basé sur cette idée corporative mettant chaque aptitude et chaque compétence à sa place normale, comme dans une corporation industrielle ordinaire, avec cette différence que, plus un chef a d’influence et de puissance plus nombreux sont ses devoirs et plus rigoureux sont les comptes que l’Etat exige de lui.

Fascism repudiates socialism and accepts Christian social doctrine.  It applies it in a corporate fashion.  Everything in fascism is based on this corporate idea putting each aptitude and each skill in its normal place, as in an ordinary industrial corporation, with the difference that the more influence a leader has, the more numerous his duties are, and the more rigorous is the accounting that the State requires of him.

Le fascisme et le droit de
propriété

Fascism and property
rights

Le droit de propriété est sacré, dans l’Etat fasciste. Cependant, puisqu’il est reconnu comme, un droit, il comporte des devoirs.  Si le socialisme prêche que “la propriété, c’est le vol”; si le libéralisme proclame que “tout individu peut indistinctement faire ce qu’il veut avec ce qu’il possède”, le fascisme proclame que la propriété privée est un dépôt que l’individu peut posséder et transmettre à ses héritiers sans taxe immodérée sur le capital, POURVU qu’il fasse un usage raisonnable de son privilège et qu’il le développe à sa capacité

The right of ownership is sacred in the fascist State.  However, since it is recognized as a right, it carries duties.  If socialism preaches “property is theft”; if liberalism proclaims that “every individual can indiscriminately do what he wants with what he possesses,” fascism proclaims that private property is a deposit that the individual can possess and transmit to his heirs without immoderate taxes on the capital, PROVIDING that he makes reasonable use of his privilege and that he develops it to the best of his ability

[49]
[49]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

maximum, pour l’interêt commun en même temps que le sien, cette part du sol national ou de capital ou d’industrie qui est laissée entre ses mains.

for the common good at the same time as his own, this share of the national soil or capital or industry that is left in his hands.

Le fascisme décrète qu’aucun homme n’a le droit de laisser une portion de bonne terre improductive pour de seules fins égoïstes de sport ou de plaisir; encore moins qu’un individu puisse appauvrir ses propriétés en les déboisant sans besoin ou en y occasionnant des foyers malsains par négligence de les drainer. Aucun propriétaire n’a le droit de laisser des maisons habitables tomber en ruines; s’il n’a pas le moyen de tenir sa propriété en bon état, le propriétaire doit la vendre, ou l’Etat se charge de la développer pour lui, moyennant rémunération. L’inertie ou la négligence de produire est considérée inexcusable pour tout possesseur de capitaux. Chaque fois qu’un possesseur de capitaux fait preuve de négligence ou d’incapacité, l’Etat fasciste prend charge de ce qu’il a. Personne n’a le droit de démolir une construction magnifique ou d’intérêt historique sans la permission du gouvernement. Personne ne peut vendre, pour exportation dans un pays étranger, des trésors artistiques, car ces trésor» sont considérés comme partie de l’héritage national et ceux qui en sont les dépositaires temporaires ne peuvent les aliéner pour un gain personnel. L’Etat fasciste tient à garantir la propriété individuelle non seulement pour l’individu, mais aussi pour ses héritiers. Les mines, forêts, carrières et autres sources potentielles de richesses doivent être suffisamment développées, et l’Etat fasciste est prêt à aider par des prêts et de la main-d’oeuvre experte leur développement pour le meilleur intérêt collectif national.

Fascism decrees that no man has the right to leave a portion of good land unproductive for selfish ends of sport or pleasure; even less can an individual impoverish his properties by deforesting them without need or causing an unhealthy state of affairs by neglecting to drain them.  No landlord has the right to let habitable houses fall into ruins; if he does not have the means to keep his property in good condition, the proprietor must sell it, or the State shall take care of developing it for him, in return for remuneration.  Inertia or neglect to produce is considered inexcusable for any possessor of capital.  Whenever a possessor of capital shows negligence or incapacity, the fascist state takes charge of what he has.  No one has the right to demolish a magnificent construction or one of historic interest without the permission of the government.  No one can sell artistic treasures for export to a foreign country because these treasure are considered part of the national heritage and those who are the temporary trustees cannot alienate them for personal gain.  The fascist State wants to guarantee individual property not only for the individual, but also for his heirs.  The mines, forests, quarries and other potential sources of wealth must be sufficiently developed, and the fascist State is ready to help their development with loans and expert manpower for the best national collective interest.

L’Etat fasciste dirige un système de coordination du progrès national, et il empêche, à cette fin, toute surcapitalisation, la formation de nouvelles entreprises dans le genre de celles dont le pays est déjà suffisamment pourvu ou qui n’ont pour seul but qu’une compétition de coupe-gorge.

The fascist State directs a system of coordination of national progress, and to this end, it prevents overcapitalization or the establishment of new enterprises similar to those already in sufficient abundance in the country or whose only purpose is cut-throat competition.

Si le fascisme se fait le défenseur du droit de propriété, dans toutes les sphères imaginables, il se permet d’intervenir lorsque le droit de propriété entre en conflit avec l’intérêt de l’Etat et le bien général.  Le fascisme est conscient de son devoir primordial de diriger, et il accomplit ce devoir intelligemment, en coordonnant toutes les forces productrices de la nation.  C’est ce qui peut lui permettre de contrôler la production, suivant les besoins naturels du pays et de ses marchés extérieurs, et restreindre toute surproduction basée sur des besoins artificiels spéculatifs.  C’est donc opposer l’idéal de service1 au mercantilisme industriel et à l’idéal de production pour le seul avantage du profit, ainsi que protéger la propriété personnelle contre le capitalisme agioteur.

If fascism is the defender of the right to property in all conceivable spheres, it allows itself to intervene when the right of ownership conflicts with the interest of the State and the general good.  Fascism is aware of its primary duty to lead, and it fulfills this duty intelligently, by coordinating all the productive forces of the nation.  This is what can allow it to control production according to the natural needs of the country and its external markets, and to limit any overproduction based on artificial speculative needs.  It therefore opposes the ideal of service1 to that of industrial mercantilism and to production for the sole advantage of profit, as well as protecting personal property against exploitive capitalism.

__________
1.  Note de la traductrice:  “l’idéal de service”:  gardez à l’esprit la devise d’Adrien Arcand, SERVIAM.  C’est le contraire de la réponse matérialiste de Satan à Dieu :  “Je ne servirai pas!” (Non-Serviam!).

__________
1.  Note de la traductrice:  “the ideal of service”.  Keep in mind Adrien Arcand’s motto, SERVIAM.  It’s the opposite of materialist Satan’s answer to God:  “I will not serve!” (Non-Serviam!).

[50]
[50]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

Le fascisme et le capital

Fascism and capital

Le fascisme établit une démarcation très nette entre le capital et le capitalisme. Le capital est un élément économique absolument indispensable pour la vie d’une nation. Le capitalisme est une tyrannie économique et sociale exercée par certains détenteurs de capitaux. La démocratie libérale est directement responsable de la tyrannie capitaliste qui a fini par rompre tout équilibre en absorbant la majeure partie du capital des nations, en exploitant cruellement les classes faibles pour augmenter sa puissance, en corrompant les partis politiques en sa faveur, en échafaudant tout un édifice de législations détrimentaires aux autres classes.

Fascism establishes a clear demarcation between capital and capitalism.  Capital is an absolutely indispensable economic element for the life of a nation.  Capitalism is an economic and social tyranny exercised by certain holders of capital.  Liberal democracy is directly responsible for the capitalist tyranny that has ended by upsetting the whole equilibrium, absorbing most of the capital of nations, cruelly exploiting the weaker classes to increase its power, corrupting political parties in its favor, scaffolding up a whole edifice of legislation detrimental for the other classes.

Le fascisme est peut-être plus fanatiquement anti-capitaliste que le socialisme, parce qu’il perçoit plus sainement les méfaits du capitalisme et les remèdes qu’il faut apporter aux maux qu’il occasionne.  Parce que la chirurgie fait souffrir, ce n’est pas une raison pour abolir la chirurgie.  Pourtant, telle est la logique du socialisme: parce que le capital a commis des abus, il faut abolir le capital!  Le fascisme a une façon plus intelligente de régler le problème.

Fascism is perhaps more fanatically anti-capitalist than socialism, because it perceives more soundly the misdeeds of capitalism and the remedies required for the ills occasioned.  The fact that surgery is painful is no reason to abolish surgery.  Yet this is the logic of socialism:  since capital has committed abuses, abolish capital!  Fascism has a more intelligent way to deal with the problem.

Il se propose d’abord, par des lois préconisées dans ses programmes politiques, lois qui diffèrent suivant les lieux et les genres d’abus, d’écraser définitivement le despotisme et la tyrannie du capitalisme. Dans le domaine positif, il décrète que les rôles jusqu’ici maintenus doivent être renversés et que la finance doit cesser d’être la maîtresse, pour devenir la servante de l’agriculture, de l’industrie et du commerce. La force inerte de l’argent doit être assujettie à la force vive des activités humaines.

First, it proposes, through laws advocated in its political programs, laws which differ according to the places and the kinds of abuses, to definitively crush despotism and the tyranny of capitalism.  In the positive area, it decrees that the roles hitherto maintained must be reversed and that finance must cease to be the mistress, to become the servant of agriculture, industry and commerce.  The inert force of money must be subjected to the living force of human activity.

Le fascisme pose aussi en principe que seuls le travail d’un individu ou une mise réelle de fonds peuvent rapporter des profits. C’est dire que le capital ne pourra plus être spéculatif, mais devra devenir purement productif. La spéculation sur des titres sans valeur réelle, sur des stocks de valeur fictive ou imaginaire, est ce qui cause la grande misère moderne et la maldistribution des richesses. Le capitalisme actuel exige de la nature et des classes travailleuses, des produits naturels et un travail humain qui sont compensés par des valeurs dont les trois quarts ne valent pas un sou.

Fascism also posits in principle that only the work of an individual or a real investment of funds can produce profits.  This means that capital can no longer be speculative, but will have to become purely productive.  Speculation on securities without real value, on inventories of fictitious or imaginary value, is what causes the great modern misery and maldistribution of wealth. 
Today’s capitalism requires of nature and of the working classes natural products and human labor which are compensated by assets, three-quarters of which are not worth a penny.

Le fascisme considère comme un devoir de rendre le plus productif possible toute mise réelle de fonds dans une entreprise, mais il est en même temps déterminé à détruire l’exploitation des masses par les capitaux irréels, dont l’existence a été rendue possible par les lois démocratiques régissant les compagnies et les sociétés anonymes.

Fascism considers it a duty to make any real financial investment in a company as productive as possible, but at the same time it is determined to destroy the exploitation of the masses by unreal capital, the existence of which was made possible by the democratic laws governing companies and public limited companies.

Les entreprises capitalistes devront tendre, dans l’Etat fasciste, à revenir à l’ancien système des entreprises de famille, et les chefs en seront entièrement responsables, devant

Capitalist enterprises will have to tend, in the fascist State, to return to the old system of family enterprises, and the leaders will be entirely responsible for this, under

[51]
[51]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

des lois rigoureuses. Le capital sera aidé et protégé, mais dans les limites de devoirs stricts et d’un esprit de juste coopération avec les activités qu’il devra servir.

rigorous laws.  Capital will be helped and protected, but within the limits of strict duties and a spirit of just cooperation with the activities it will serve.

Le fascisme et
l’agriculture

Fascism and
agriculture

Le fascisme considère l’agriculture comme la première, la plus importante et la plus vitale des industries nationales et lui accorde préséance, même dans la représentation parlementaire, où elle a droit à un plus grand nombre de représentants que toute autre industrie. Elle reçoit une aide équivalente à Ja considération qu’on lui porte. Le premier acte du fascisme est de spiritualiser l’agriculture, de la décentraliser et de la réorganiser sur des bases corporatives. Les détails de cette réorganisation, comme on le conçoit, font l’objet de programmes politiques qui viendront à leur heure. La colonisation, considérée comme l’un des aspects de l’agriculture, partage au même titre dans la considération de la première industrie nationale.

Fascism regards agriculture as the first, the most important and most vital of national industries and gives it precedence, even in parliamentary representation, where it has the right to a greater number of representatives than any other industry.  It receives help equivalent to the status attributed to it.  The first act of fascism is to spiritualize agriculture, to decentralize and reorganize it on a corporate basis.  The details of this reorganization, as we see it, are the subject of political programs that will come in due time.  Colonization, considered as one of the aspects of agriculture, shares equally in the status of the primary national industry.

Le fascisme et les
travailleurs

Fascism and
workers

Comme tous les citoyens sont astreints à travailler, dans l’Etat fasciste, il s’ensuit qu’il y a des lois pour protéger les travailleurs de tous genres, de même qu’il y a des lois pour punir ceux qui ne veulent pas travailler. Ces lois vont jusqu’à défranchiser, comme anti-nationaux, les fainéants qui refusent de reconnaître le devoir du travail. Cependant, les travailleurs manuels, parce qu’ils en ont un plus grand besoin, ont une protection toute particulière. L’Italie a produit pour eux le plus remarquable code qui se soit jamais fait. Il porte le nom de “Charte du Travail” et, ‘bien qu’il ne soit pas encore incorporé dans la constitution, il fait loi et a cours devant les tribunaux. Il faudrait lire toute cette Charte, monument de justice, d’équité et de bon sens, pour en révéler la valeur.

As all citizens are forced to work in the fascist State, it follows that there are laws to protect workers of all kinds, just as there are laws to punish those who do not want to work.  These laws go so far as to disenfranchise, as anti-nationals, idlers who refuse to recognize the duty of work.  However, manual workers, because they have a greater need, have special protection.  For them, Italy has produced the most remarkable code ever made, called the “Labor Charter”.  And although it is not yet incorporated in the constitution, it is law and is in the courts.  The whole Charter, a monument to justice, equity and common sense, should be read to reveal its value.

Cette charte réglemente la solidarité qui doit exister entre le capital, le travail, l’administration et le marchandage des produits. Elle décrète que le salaire de l’ouvrier doit non seulement être suffisant pour répondre aux besoins normaux de la vie, mais encore qu’il doit être proportionné à la valeur du travail pour lequel il est payé. Cette dernière clause permet de faire augmenter le salaire de l’ouvrier lorsqu’une machinerie plus efficace est installée dans une usine, car on considère que le travail prend une plus grande efficacité et une plus grande valeur avec une machine plus perfectionnée. C’est donc décourager chez l’employeur la mécanisation dont le seul but est d’éliminer ou avilir la main-d’oeuvre. La même charte comporte un mécanisme pour assurer le plus bas niveau possible des prix de vente, non seulement dans l’intérêt du commerce

This charter regulates the solidarity that must exist among capital, labor, administration and price-fixing of products.  It decrees that the worker’s wages must not only be sufficient to meet the normal needs of life, but also that they must be proportionate to the value of the work for which they are paid.  This latter clause increases the wages of the worker when more efficient machinery is installed in a factory, because it is considered that the work takes greater efficiency and acquires greater value with a more sophisticated machine.  This therefore discourages the employer from mechanizing, the sole purpose of which is to eliminate or debase the workforce.  The same charter includes a mechanism to ensure the lowest possible level of selling prices, not only in the interest

[52]
[52]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

d’exportation, mais aussi dans l’intérêt de l’ouvrier-consom-mateur.

of export trade, but also in the interest of the worker-consumer.

Cette “Charte du Travail” considère donc et concilie le plus équitablement possible ces trois choses capitales: les plus hauts salaires possibles pour le travailleur; un niveau raisonnable de profit pour la direction et l’employeur afin d’assurer un courant constant de cerveaux et de capitaux vers l’entreprise; les plus bas prix de vente possibles afin d’étendre le commerce extérieur et de maintenir un coût de la vie peu élevé pour les consommateurs de l’intérieur du pays. Ces trois intérêts sont reconnus comme solidaires et complémentaires, d’importance égale pour les travailleurs, pour les employeurs et pour la nation. Négliger ou diminuer l’un des trois peut être fatal aux deux autres.

This “Charter of Labor”, therefore, considers and reconciles these three most important things as equitably as possible:  the highest possible wages for the worker; a reasonable level of profit for management and the employer to ensure a constant flow of brains and capital to the company; the lowest selling prices possible in order to expand foreign trade and maintain a low cost of living for consumers in the interior of the country.  These three interests are recognized as mutually supportive and complementary, of equal importance to workers, employers and the nation.  Neglecting or diminishing one of the three can be fatal to the other two.

Ajoutons que la “Charte du Travail” régularise les heures de travail, décrète les congés de semaine, exige des vacances annuelles payées à plein salaire, et oblige l’employeur de payer une gratuité ou une pension proportionnée à la durée de service, lorsqu’un travailleur termine son contrat ou est démis de ses fonctions. La Charte pourvoit à des Bureaux pour le transfert des ouvriers d’une usine à l’autre, afin d’éviter le chômage; à des assurances spéciales oblgatoires contre les accidents industriels, le chômage involontaire, les maladies provoquées par certains métiers, assurances auxquelles l’ouvrier et le patron contribuent chacun pour la moitié. Le fascisme encourage, répand et soutient les syndicats de métiers, exigeant qu’ils soient de contrôle et de caractère national. A cause de son système parlementaire rt des qualités exigées des représentants du peuple, le fascisme désire que tous les travailleurs du pays fassent partie des syndicats de métiers, associations agricoles, associations professionnelles ou autres organisations s’occupant des intérêts de leur profession particulière.

It should be added that the “Labor Charter” regulates working hours, orders time off each week, requires annual holidays paid at full salary, and obliges the employer to pay a gratuity or a pension proportionate to the length of service when a worker finishes his contract or is dismissed.  The Charter provides for Offices for the transfer of workers from one factory to another to avoid unemployment; for compulsory special insurance against industrial accidents, involuntary unemployment, diseases caused by certain trades, insurance to which the worker and the employer each contribute half.  Fascism encourages, propagates and supports trade unions, demanding that they be of national character under national control.  Because of its parliamentary system and the qualities required of the peoples’ representatives, fascism desires that all workers in the country be a part of trade unions, agricultural associations, professional associations or other organizations concerned with the interests of their particular profession.

Le fascisme et les partis
politiques

Fascism and political
parties

Le fascisme comporte l’abolition de tous les partis politiques. En réalité, il n’y a même pas de parti fasciste, sauf pendant le temps que dure encore l’ère démocratique, car le fascisme est un système gouvernemental et non un groupement partisan.

Fascism involves the abolition of all political parties.  In fact, there is not even a fascist party, except while the democratic era still lasts, because fascism is a governmental system and not a partisan group.

La situation canadienne nous prouve suffisamment que le régime des partis empêche tout gouvernement national. Que notre gouvernement soit libéral ou conservateur, c’est toujours le gouvernement d’une moitié de la population, l’opposition représentant l’autre moitié. Quelle unité d’action, quelle permanence de continuité, quelle stabilité réelle, quelle sécurité pouvons-nous avoir, avec un tel régime ? Aucune.

The Canadian situation sufficiently proves that the party system prevents any national government.  Whether our government is Liberal or Conservative, it is still the government of a half of the population, the opposition representing the other half.  What unity of action, what permanence of continuity, what real stability, what security can we have with such a regime?  None.

[53]
[53]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

Le pouvoir, sous le régime démocratique des partis politiques, est basé sur la souveraineté du nombre, sur la majorité des voix, c’est-à-dire sur une masse anonyme, instable, incohérente et totalement irresponsable. Ce mode électoral prête à corruption et, de fait, n’est que corruption. L’autorité qu’il confère n’est que nominale, elle est toujours timide, toujours insuffisante.

Power, in the democratic regime of political parties, is based on the sovereignty of number, on the majority of votes, meaning on an anonymous, unstable, incoherent and totally irresponsible mass.  This electoral method is prone to corruption and, in fact, is nothing but corruption.  The authority it confers is only nominal, always uncertain, always insufficient.

Le suffrage universel, tel qu’il est pratiqué dans les pays démocratiques, est issu du faux principe de l’égalité de tous les citoyens. Et, quelque parti qui soit au pouvoir par le moyen du suffrage universel, il est incapable de gouverner. Le suffrage universel ne produit que des politiciens professionnels, susceptibles de corruption et capables de corrompre l’électorat de qui ils détiennent le pouvoir; il ne produit pas d’hommes d’Etat, sauf en de très rares exceptions. La qualité d’homme d’Etat exige des mesures de prévoyance, de sagesse et de sacrifice que la masse électorale ne consentira jamais. On n’obtient pas la sagesse en multipliant à l’infini le nombre des ignorances; et, sous le régime démocratique, la sagesse se résume dans le “non” ou le “oui” exprimé par l’ignorance générale, que l’on dénomme “suffrage universel”.

Universal suffrage, as practiced in democratic countries, stems from the false principle of the equality of all citizens.  And, whatever the party in power by means of universal suffrage, it is incapable of governing.  Universal suffrage only produces professional politicians, susceptible to corruption and capable of corrupting the electorate from whom they hold power; it does not produce statesmen, except in very rare exceptions.  The quality of a statesman requires foresight, wisdom and sacrifice that the electoral mass can never bestow.  Wisdom is not obtained by multiplying to infinity the number of ignorants; but in the democratic regime, wisdom is summed up in the “no” or the “yes” expressed by the general ignorance called “universal suffrage”.

Le fascisme n’a donc aucune confiance dans le système électoral démocratique, qui procède toujours par le mensonge des fausses promesses, ou l’intimidation, ou la corruption, et qui ne confère le pouvoir qu’à une classe ou un groupe d’intérêts de la nation. Les gouvernants qui doivent exercer des talents d’hommes d’Etat et une grande vision ne doivent pas être forcés de faire leur cour à la popularité, car ce n’est pas le nombre de voix en faveur d’une loi qui doit compter, mais la sagesse et l’équité de cette loi. C’est pourquoi, sous le Fascisme, les majorités ne veulent rien dire, à moins qu’elles ne soient des majorités d’hommes d’expérience et d’esprit patriotique.

Fascism therefore has no confidence in the democratic electoral system, which always proceeds by the lie of false promises, or intimidation, or corruption, and confers power only on one class or group of interests in the nation.  The rulers who must exercise the talents of statesmen and great vision ought not to be forced to court popularity, for it is not the number of votes in favor of a law that must count, but the wisdom and fairness of this law.  This is why, under Fascism, majorities mean nothing unless they are majorities of men of experience and patriotic spirit.

Le fascisme et l’opposition
parlementaire

Fascism and parliamentary
opposition

L’opposition parlementaire est, aux yeux du fasciste, l’une des plus grandes futilités dont il convient de se débarrasser. Toute opposition parlementaire semble être un corps d’agitateurs salariés dont la tâche stupide est de retarder et entraver l’action du gouvernement au pouvoir, de mal représenter sa conduite et de critiquer les lois au point de créer dans l’esprit public des doutes sur leur justice et de diminuer le respect qu’elles devraient inspirer; et souvent, à cause des craintes que lui inspire l’opposition, un gouvernement néglige de passer des lois que les circonstances rendraient impérieuses. Le fascisme répudie l’erreur démocratique des oppositions parle-

The parliamentary opposition, in the eyes of the fascist, is one of the greatest trivialities that ought to be got rid of.  Every parliamentary opposition seems to be a body of paid agitators whose stupid task is to delay and hinder the action of the government in power, to misrepresent its conduct and to criticize the laws to the point of creating doubts in the public mind about their justice and diminish the respect they should inspire; and often, because of fears aroused by the opposition, a government neglects to pass laws that circumstances make imperative.  Fascism repudiates the democratic error of parliamentary oppositions

[54]
[54]

Fascisme ou Socialisme ?

Fascism or Socialism?

mentaires et exige que tout soit avec et dans l’Etat, et qu’aucun groupe ne soit contre l’Etat.

and requires that all be with and in the State, and that no group be against the State.

Le gouvernement de parti est lui-même une source de gaspillage national, car son administration est toujours privée de grands et réels talents qui dépensent leur énergie dans des critiques artificielles et improfitables de la politique du gouvernement, gaspillant aussi le temps et l’énergie des ministres qui, à tout bout de champ, sont obligés de recourir à des moyens artificiels de défense et de contre-attaque. De plus, la nécessité de trouver des excuses, des justifications ou des explications pour les actes administratifs ne permet le succès parlementaire qu’à des avocats, dont la profession consiste en ce genre d’occupations, plutôt qu’à des hommes d’affaires d’une habileté pratique. L’inefficacité de la plupart des ministres dans la conduite de leurs ministères pourrait trouver une explication dans ce facteur psychologique, car on sait que les ministres sont ordinairement sauvés des impasses de leur vie publique par leurs subalternes.

The party government is itself a source of national waste, because its administration is always deprived of great and real talents who spend their energy in artificial and unprofitable criticisms of the government’s policy, also wasting the time and energy of government ministers who, at every turn, are obliged to resort to artificial means of defense and counter-attack. Moreover, the need to find excuses, justifications or explanations for administrative acts only allows parliamentary success to lawyers, whose profession consists of this line of work, rather than to businessmen with practical skill.  The inefficiency of most ministers in the conduct of their ministries might find an explanation in this psychological factor, for it is well known that ministers are usually saved from stalemates in their public life by their subordinates.

Le Parlement fasciste

The Fascist Parliament

Le fascisme ne se contente pas de critiquer et souligner les graves défauts du système parlementaire démocratique, il offre mieux. Son système parlementaire est un système corporatif à base consultative, c’est-à-dire un système d’administration d’Etat fonctionnant comme une administration de compagnie ordinaire, le peuple étant appelé à faire connaître ses besoins à des époques déterminées, généralement tous les cinq ans. Le fascisme établit d’abord comme principe que le système représentatif n’est pas d’imposer la volonté d’une masse impersonnelle et aveugle aux hommes d’Etat en autorité, mais seulement pour que ceux-ci puissent prendre connaissance des besoins des diverses parties de la communauté. Et, sur ce principe, il échafaude le système parlementaire le plus logique, le plus pratique et le plus scientifique qui puisse satisfaire aux ‘besoins modernes.

Fascism is not content to criticize and underline the serious flaws of the democratic parliamentary system, it offers better.  Its parliamentary system is a consultative-based corporate system, that is, a system of State administration functioning like an ordinary company administration, the people being called upon to make known their needs at specified times, generally every five years.  Fascism first establishes as a principle that the representative system is not to impose the will of a blind impersonal mass upon Statesmen in authority, but only to acquaint them with the needs of various parts of the community.  And on this principle, it constructs the most logical, practical, and scientific parliamentary system that can satisfy modern needs.

Comme je l’ai dit plus haut, le fascisme n’exige pas une forme identique de gouvernement dans tous les pays, et il n’est d’aucune nécessité de copier le système italien, ou allemand, ou autrichien. Cependant, comme le fascisme exige une forme gouvernementale corporative et une autorité permanente et stable pour l’Etat, il s’ensuit que tous les systèmes fascistes ont des affinités qui les rendent Semblables dans leurs grandes lignes. Comme notre système gouvernemental canadien est copié sur le système anglais, je m’en tiendrai au système que désirent les Fascistes d’Angleterre. Vous me permettrez de citer textuellement ce que préconise à ce sujet l’Impérial Fascist League, de Grande-Bretagne.

As stated above, fascism does not require an identical form of government in all countries, and there is no need to copy the Italian, or German, or Austrian system.  However, since fascism requires a corporate governmental form and a permanent and stable authority for the State, it follows that all fascist systems have affinities that make them broadly similar.  Since our Canadian government system is copied from the English system, I will stick to the system that the Fascists of England want.  You will allow me to quote verbatim what the Imperial Fascist League of Great Britain advocates on this subject.

[55]
[55]

Tune in again!  Subscribe for the next instalment!
Branchez-vous à nouveau! Abonnez-vous pour le prochain versement!


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 –

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!


“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”.

A Letter to Canon Panneton

FOREWORD / AVANT-PROPOS

This letter to Canon Georges Panneton dated 21 December 1964 was found online in the form of a typed transcript at the web site of Soldat du Christ (Soldier of Christ).  It was posted on Friday, 23 January 2009 under the title “Adrien Arcand écrit au Chanoine Panneton” (Adrien Arcand writes to Canon Panneton).

Cette lettre au chanoine Georges Panneton du 21 décembre 1964 a été trouvée en ligne sous la forme d’une transcription dactylographiée sur le site Internet du Soldat du Christ.  elle a été publiée le vendredi 23 janvier 2009 sous le titre “Adrien Arcand écrit au Chanoine Panneton”.


ADRIEN ARCAND WRITES TO CANON PANNETON

ADRIEN ARCAND ECRIT AU CHANOINE PANNETON

EXCLUSIVE ENGLISH TRANSLATION


 

Adrien Arcand écrit au Chanoine Panneton

Adrien Arcand writes to Canon Panneton

Adrien Arcand
Lanoraie, P.Q.
21 décembre 1964

M. le Chanoine,

Adrien Arcand
Lanoraie, P.Q.
21 December 1964

Mr. Canon,

En juin 1947, en l’hôtel New Yorker de New York se tint un Congrès général des Rabbins américains et canadiens. Durant les quatre jours de ce Congrès, on discuta tous les arguments de fond, et on esquissa la stratégie en vue de l’élimination de toute prière et de toute trace de religion dans les écoles publiques du continent Nord Américain.

In June, 1947, at the New Yorker Hotel in New York, a general Congress of American and Canadian Rabbis was held.  Throughout the four days of this Congress, all the basic arguments were discussed, and a strategy for the elimination of all prayer and all trace of religion in the public schools of the North American continent was outlined.

Quelqu’un enregistra tous les débats sur bande magnétique; cette bande fut envoyée à un certain Rév. Campbell, ministre épiscopalien de Californie. Ce Révérend fit le long travail de transcrire ces débats en trois copies. Pour ne prendre aucun risque de perte par le courrier, il vint à Montréal pour me remettre l’une des copies.

Someone tape-recorded all the debates; this recording was sent to a certain Rev. Campbell, an Episcopalian minister in California.  This Reverent did the long work of transcribing these debates in three copies.  So as not to risk loss in the mail, he came to Montreal to give me one of the copies.

Je passai cette copie au Rév. P. Rufin Turcotte, OFM (maintenant curé à Cité Jacques Cartier, près de Montréal), qui en fit tirer dix copies dont trois pour moi. J’en fis adresser une à l’Honorable M. Duplessis, via l’Hon. Gérald Martineau (qui ne la retrouve plus!). J’en donnai une à un Clerc de St-Viateur, qui devait la transmettre à un Évêque, puis je prêtai la dernière à un clerc qui ne me l’a jamais rapportée.

I passed this copy to Rev. P. Rufin Turcotte, OFM1 (now parish priest at Cité Jacques Cartier near Montreal), who made ten copies of it, including three for me.  I sent one to the Honorable Mr. Duplessis, via the Hon. Gérald Martineau (who can no longer find it!).  I gave another to a Cleric at St. Viateur, who was to pass it on to a Bishop, then I leant the last one to a Cleric who never returned it to me.

Ce document de haute importance indique la source réelle, le but, la procédure de la déchristianisation des écoles en Amérique du Nord. Un rabbin de Philadelphie y dit, entre autres choses: « Nous devons être contre le LORD’S PRAYER, parce que c’est une invention du plus grand ennemi des Pharisiens, et que nous, rabbins modernes, nous sommes les descendants directs des Pharisiens sans discontinuité, hiatus ou césure.»

This document of great importance indicates the real source, the purpose, the procedure for the dechristianization of the schools of North America.  In it, a Philadelphian rabbi says, among other things:  “We must be against the LORD’S PRAYER, because it is an invention of the greatest enemy of the Pharisees, and we, modern rabbis, are the direct descendants of the Pharisees without discontinuity, hiatus or interruption.”

Dès 1942, le Maréchal Pétain était condamné par les Loges, en France, parce que, comme Chef de l’État français, il avait décidé de réadmettre la confession dans les écoles publiques, il avait aboli les lois de confiscation et d’ostracisme des Congrégations religieuses.

As of 1942, Marshal Pétain was condemned by the Lodges in France because, like the head of the French State, he had decided to readmit confession into the public schools, he had abolished the laws of confiscation and ostracism of religious Congregations.

Dès le printemps de 1933, les Loges et la Synagogue avaient condamné Hitler et son régime à cause de l’article suivant de la Proclamation de Potsdam2 :  «Le Gouvernement du 3e Reich proclame solennellement que le Christianisme, sous ses formes protestante et catholique, a été, et restera la base morale fondamentale du peuple allemand.  Les confessions non-chrétiennes ne jouiront pas du Droit public, mais elles jouiront du Droit privé et de toute liberté en autant qu’elles ne seront pas une menace à la sécurité de l’État.»

As of the Spring of 1933, the Lodges and the Synagogue had condemned Hitler and his regime because of the following provision in the Proclamation of Potsdam2:  “The Government of the 3rd Reich solemnly proclaims that Christianity, in all its forms both Protestant and Catholic, has been and will remain the fundamental moral basis of the German people.  The non-Christian confessions have no Public rights, but will refer to Private law and will have all liberty to the extent that they do not threaten the security of the State.”

L’attitude positivement pro-chrétienne des Gouvernements de Franco et Salazar est (quand on lit les compte-rendus des Convents annuels des Loges) ce qui leur vaut l’inimitié des Internationales anti-chrétiennes.  Le motif véritable de l’ostracisme est toujours une cause religieuse; mais la raison que la propagande en donne est toujours une question civile ou autre.

The positively pro-Christian attitude of the Governments of Franco and Salazar (when we read reports of the annual Convents of the Lodges) is what has earned them the enmity of the anti-Christian Internationals.  The true motive for the ostracism is always a religious reason; but the reason that the propaganda gives is always a civil or other question.

C’est l’éternelle histoire qui se répète. Le divin sauveur fut d’abord condamné à mort pour raison religieuse (blasphémateur), mais on fit exécuter la sentence pour motif civil (ennemi de César). Les cardinaux Stepinac, Beran, Minszenty, Wyszyński et tant d’autres en savent quelque chose, à la suite du divin Maître…

Eternal history is repeating itself.  The Divine Saviour was first condemned to death for a religious reason (blasphemer), but the sentence was carried out for a civil reason (enemy of Caesar).  Cardinals Stepinac, Beran, Minszenty, Wyszyński and so many others know something about it, as did the Divine Master …

Si les Juifs ne sont pas coupables de Déicide, alors l’Église catholique a tort de conserver dans la Liturgie du Vendredi-Saint le chant Popule meus; il va falloir expurger les Évangiles de la Passion selon St Matthieu et selon St Luc, ainsi que les discours de Saint Pierre rapportés dans les Actes des Apôtres, enfin les affirmations directes faites dans les Épîtres et l’Apocalypse.

If the Jews are not guilty of Deicide, then the Catholic Church is wrong to preserve in the Good-Friday Liturgy the Popule meus  chant; We will have to expurgate the Gospels of the Passion according to St. Matthew and St. Luke, as well as the speeches of St. Peter reported in the Acts of the Apostles, and lastly the direct affirmations made in the Epistles and the Apocalypse.

En 1956 fut imprimé et publié en France un petit livre en anglais ayant pour titre « Hadst Thou but Known » (Si seulement tu avais su), titre tiré de la déchirante lamentation de Jésus pleurant sur Jérusalem. L’auteur, K.J. Hirschfeld était originaire de Londres, mais il n’avait pu y trouver d’imprimeur assez courageux, pour lancer son livre; c’est pourquoi il le fit imprimer en France, où les imprimeurs ne comprirent rien à sa prose anglaise. L’histoire de sa conversion au catholicisme tient réellement du miracle… Il me l’a raconté dans ses lettres. Ce Hirschfeld, qui demeurait rue Ste-Anne, à Paris, avait passé sa jeunesse en Palestine d’allégeance britannique et avait été élevé dans la plus stricte orthodoxie talmudo-judaïque. Il pensa même à devenir rabbin, car il était de nature pieuse. Dans son livre, au chapitre de l’État d’Israël, il écrit textuellement (je traduis de l’anglais): « Lorsque le Talmud enseigne que le meilleur des Gentils mérite d’être mis à mort ce n’est pas une simple affirmation passagère, c’est le fondement même de la conscience juive et de la foi judaïque. » Un peu plus loin il écrit: « ce que le peuple juif ne peut plus faire aujourd’hui contre la personne même de Jésus devant le prétoire de Pilate, il n’a jamais cessé de le faire contre son oeuvre, l’Église, depuis dix neuf siècles. »

In 1956, in France, a small book was printed and published in English entitled “Hadst Thou but Known”, its title drawn from the heartbreaking lament of Jesus weeping over Jerusalem.  The author, K.J. Hirschfeld, was from London, but he could not find a printer there courageous enough to launch his book; this is why he had it printed in France, where the printers understood nothing of his English prose.  His conversion to Catholicism is truly a miracle … He told me the story in his letters.  This Hirschfeld, who lived at St. Anne’s in Paris, had spent his youth in Palestine of British allegiance and had been brought up in the strictest Talmudo-Judaic orthodoxy.  He even considered becoming a rabbi because he was pious in nature.  In his book, in the chapter on the State of Israel, he writes (Arcand translates the English verbatim into French; I am now translating his French back to English-DWH):  “When the Talmud teaches that the best of Gentiles deserves to be put to death, it is not a passing affirmation, it is the fundamental basis of the Jewish conscience and of the Jewish faith.”  A bit further on, he writes:  “What it can no longer do against the person of Jesus, as before Pilate’s praetorium, the Jewish people has done for nineteen centuries against His work, His Church.”

En 1940, le Rév. P. Auguste Béa, S.J. (pas encore cardinal) rédigea pour M. Vries de Heckelingen une expertise sur le fait que le Talmud considère les non-Juifs comme des bêtes, des animaux sans âme. Le Père Béa était apparemment la plus haute autorité catholique sur le Talmud et les langues sémitiques. Son travail fut soumis au tribunal d’Oron, siégeant à Lausanne, Suisse, les 15, 16, 17 janvier 1940.

In 1940, the Reverent Father, Augustus Béa, S.J. (not yet a cardinal) wrote for Mr. Vries de Heckelingen an expertise on the fact that the Talmud considers non-Jews as animals without souls.  Father Béa was apparently the highest Catholic authority on the Talmud and Semitic languages.  His work was submitted to the court of Oron, sitting at Lausanne, Switzerland, on the 15th, 16th and 17th of January, 1940.

Le Talmud judaïque est l’unique source de haine contre Jésus et contre les hommes non-juifs, haine entretenue par le sionisme, le communisme, par certaines obédiences, maçonniques et autres organisations de contrôle juif.

The Jewish Talmud is the only source of hatred against Jesus and against non-Jewish men, a hatred maintained by Zionism, communism, by certain masonic obediences, and by other organizations under Jewish control.

Adrien Arcand

Adrien Arcand

__________

1.  Note du traductrice:  Je tiens pour acquis que OFM est l’acronyme du nom latin, Ordo Fratrum Minorum, l’Ordre des Frères Mineurs, connu sous le nom de «Observateurs», le plus souvent simplement appelés Frères franciscains, nom officiel:  «Frères mineurs» (OFM).

1.  Translator’s note:  I am assuming that OFM is the acronym for the Latin name, Ordo Fratrum Minorum, the Order of Friars Minor, known as the “Observants”, most commonly simply called Franciscan friars, official name:  “Friars Minor” (OFM).

2.  Note du traducteur :  Il y a une «Déclaration à Potsdam» publiée le 26 juillet 1945 par les vainqueurs alliés de la Seconde Guerre mondiale; il y a une «Journée de Potsdam»:  22 mars 1933 (Joseph Goebbels); il y a un «Mon jour de Potsdam:  entrée du journal» (1933) (Erich Ebermayer).  Le New York Times du mercredi 22 mars 1933, Late City Edition (première page), fait référence au «discours d’Hitler à Potsdam»; mais après avoir payé un abonnement pour le lire, il n’y a aucune mention du christianisme, et le «discours» auquel il est fait référence n’est vraiment que des extraits.  Arcand ne faisait évidemment pas référence ici à la déclaration des Alliés de l’après-guerre.  De plus, il semble y avoir eu de nombreuses références au christianisme et à l’État par Hitler et ses principaux dirigeants.  Dans une recherche rapide, je n’ai pas trouvé de proclamation ou de discours complet d’Hitler lié à «Potsdam» sur le statut du christianisme au Reich.  Cependant, des preuves sont trouvées dans un livre en ligne :  Le Saint Reich :  conceptions nazies du christianisme, 1919-1945 par Richard Steigmann-Gall, Cambridge University Press, 2003. Pp. Xvi, 294.  Dans un chapitre intitulé «Le Saint-Reich», dans la sous-section «Pratiquer une foi« active »», à partir de la page 115, nous lisons:

2.  Translator’s note:  There is a “Declaration at Potsdam” published July 26, 1945 by the allied victors in WWII; there is a “Day of Potsdam”:  22 March 1933 (Joseph Goebbels); there is a “My Day of Potsdam:  Diary Entry” (1933) (Erich Ebermayer).  The New York Times of Wednesday, March 22, 1933, Late City Edition (front page), refers to “Hitler’s Speech at Potsdam”; but after paying for a subscription in order to read it, there is no mention of Christianity, and the “Speech” referred to is really only extracts.  Arcand obviously was not referring here to the post-war Allied declaration.  Moreover, there appear to have been many references to Christianity and the State by Hitler and his leading men.  In a quick search, I have not found a complete proclamation or speech by Hitler linked with “Potsdam” on the status of Christianity in the Reich.  However, evidence is found in a book online:  The Holy Reich:  Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945 by Richard Steigmann-Gall, Cambridge University Press, 2003. Pp. xvi, 294.  In a chapter entitled “The Holy Reich”, in the sub-section “Practicing an ‘Active’ Faith”, starting at 115, we read:

«Le 1er février 1933, deux jours après la prise du pouvoir, Hitler s’est adressé à la nation allemande en tant que chancelier du Reich pour la première fois.  Ses premiers mots furent :  “Nous sommes déterminés, en tant que dirigeants de la nation, à accomplir en tant que gouvernement national la tâche qui nous a été confiée, ne jurant que la fidélité à Dieu, à notre conscience et à notre Volk.”  Plus tard dans le discours, Hitler a proclamé :  “Ainsi, le gouvernement national considérera son devoir avant tout de restaurer l’unité d’esprit et le but de notre VolkIl préservera et défendra les fondements sur lesquels repose le pouvoir de notre nation.  Il prendra le christianisme, comme base de notre morale collective, et la famille comme noyau de notre Volk et de notre État, sous sa ferme protection.”  Après avoir défini l’agenda du nouveau gouvernement ― la défaite du communisme, le service du travail obligatoire [116], le retour à la campagne et une nouvelle politique étrangère agressive ― le discours s’est terminé une fois de plus sur une note pieuse :  “Que Dieu Tout-Puissant prenne notre travail dans sa grâce, donne une vraie forme à notre volonté, bénis notre perspicacité, et donne-nous la confiance de notre Volk.”»

“On 1 February 1933, two days after the Seizure of Power, Hitler addressed the German nation as Reich Chancellor for the first time.  His first words were:  “We are determined, as leaders of the nation, to fulfill as a national government the task which has been given to us, swearing fidelity only to God, our conscience, and our Volk.”  Later in the speech, Hitler proclaimed:  “Thus the national government will regard its first and foremost duty to restore the unity of spirit and purpose of our VolkIt will preserve and defend the foundations upon which the power of our nation rests.  It will take Christianity, as the basis of our collective morality, and the family as the nucleus of our Volk and state, under its firm protection.”  After outlining the agenda of the new government ― the defeat of Communism, compulsory [116] labor service, return to the land, and an aggressive new foreign policy ― the speech ended once more on a pious note:  “May God Almighty take our work into his grace, give true form to our will, bless our insight, and endow us with the trust of our Volk.”

Toujours insistant sur le fait que les actions signifiaient plus que des mots, l’État nazi a commencé à mettre en œuvre un programme idéologique qu’il avait défini dans le Kampfzeit.  C’était un christianisme positif transformé en christianisme «actif».  Comme Goebbels l’a dit dans un discours de 1935, «une confession verbale ne peut pas suffire; nous avons besoin d’une confession active.  Le christianisme n’est pas une forme vide, mais plutôt une action continue.»  Le 23 mars 1933, jour de l’adoption de la loi d’habilitation, Hitler s’est adressé au nouveau Reichstag pour la première fois, abordant deux thèmes simultanément ― le comportement chrétien du nouvel État et la nécessité pour les Églises de se conformer à cet État :

Always insistent that actions meant more than words, the Nazi State began to implement an ideological agenda it had outlined in the Kampfzeit.  This was positive Christianity turned into “active” Christianity.  As Goebbels put it in a speech from 1935, “A verbal confession cannot suffice; we require an active confession.  Christianity is no empty form, but rather a continual action.”  On 23 March 1933, the day the Enabling Law was passed, Hitler addressed the new Reichstag for the first time, touching on two themes simultaneously ― the Christian comportment of the new state and the need for the churches to conform to that state:

Le gouvernement national voit dans les deux confessions chrétiennes les facteurs les plus importants pour la préservation de notre nationalité.  Il respectera les traités conclus entre eux et les Etats; leurs droits ne doivent pas être violés.  Mais le gouvernement attend et espère que les travaux sur le renouveau national et moral de notre Volk  dont il a fait sa tâche seront, en revanche, également respectés …. La lutte contre une conception matérialiste du monde et pour la production d’une véritable communauté populaire sert à la fois les intérêts de la nation allemande et notre foi chrétienne.»

The national government sees in the two Christian confessions the most important factors for the preservation of our nationality.  It will respect the treaties concluded between them and the states; their rights shall not be violated.  But the government expects and hopes that the work on the national and moral renewal of our Volk which it has made its task will, on the other hand, be equally respected …. The struggle against a materialistic conception of the world and for the production of a true Peoples’ Community serves both the interests of the German nation and our Christian faith.”

Ce discours a eu ses utilisations politiques, par exemple, aidant à obtenir l’approbation par le Parti du Centre de la loi d’habilitation.  En effet, la plupart des historiens d’églises ont noté avec beaucoup de scepticisme la fréquence des intonations religieuses d’Hitler au cours de l’année de la prise du pouvoir . Le «jour de Potsdam» du 21 mars 1933, lorsque le nouveau Reichstag a été inauguré par une cérémonie d’État dans l’église de la garnison protestante, remplie de nombreux services religieux, est considéré par Klaus Scholder comme un «chef-d’œuvre de propagande».  Une autre autorité [117] soutient que l’affirmation du christianisme par Hitler dans ses discours publics a marqué une «politique de duplicité étudiée qui a caractérisé dès le départ l’attitude de son gouvernement envers la religion …. dans les coulisses [il] planifiait astucieusement l’anéantissement total de la foi chrétienne.»  Un tel argument ignore entièrement les vues privées qu’Hitler avait énoncées pendant le Kampfzeit.  Bien que la célèbre image d’Hitler serrant la main d’Hindenburg à la fin de la cérémonie soit une tromperie évidente, rien ne prouve que les expressions religieuses d’Hitler soient également trompeuses.  Même si Scholder adopte une vision cynique du jour de Potsdam, il concède que «c’est trop simple de voir tout cela comme rien de plus qu’une émission de propagande national-socialiste».

This speech had its political uses, for instance, helping to secure the Center Party’s endorsement of the Enabling Law.  Indeed, most church historians have noted the frequency of Hitler’s religious intonations in the year of the Seizure of Power with great skepticism.  The “Potsdam Day” of 21 March 1933, when the new Reichstag was opened with a state ceremony in the Protestant Garrison Church, replete with numerous religious services, is regarded by Klaus Scholder as a “masterpiece of propaganda”.  Another [117] authority contends that Hitler’s affirmation of Christianity in his public speeches marked a “policy of studied duplicity which characterized his government’s attitude toward religion from the start …. behind the scenes [he was] craftily planning the utter annihilation of the Christian faith.”  Such an argument entirely overlooks the private views Hitler had enunciated during the Kampfzeit.  Although the famous image of Hitler obsequiously shaking Hindenburg’s hand at the end of the ceremony was an obvious deceit, there is no evidence that Hitler’s religious expressions were likewise deceptive.  Even though Scholder takes a cynical view of Potsdam Day, he concedes that ”It is too simple to see all this as no more than a National Socialist propaganda show.”

Dans un discours célébrant la sortie de l’Allemagne de la Société des Nations, Hitler a de nouveau affirmé que le Troisième Reich appliquait activement un programme chrétien :  «Parallèlement à la lutte pour une morale plus pure, nous avons pris sur nous la lutte contre la décomposition de notre religion. … Nous avons donc entrepris la lutte contre le mouvement impie, et pas seulement avec quelques déclarations théoriques; nous l’avons éradiqué.  Et surtout, nous avons tiré les prêtres des plaines de la lutte des partis politiques et les avons ramenés dans l’église.»  Cette déclaration était tout à fait cohérente avec les discours d’Hitler au début de l’année et également avec l’attitude fondamentale qu’il avait exposée ― en privé comme en public ― en «temps de lutte».  Insistant sur le fait que le nazisme en tant qu’État ne ferait pas de distinction entre protestant et catholique, il n’a reconnu qu’une foi supra-chrétienne commune.  Fidèle à sa promesse, Hitler a défendu le christianisme contre le mouvement «sans Dieu», proscrivant les partis socialistes et communistes très tôt après la prise du pouvoir.  En échange de rester «au-dessus des églises», Hitler s’attendait à ce que les églises restent «au-dessus de la politique» et a ouvertement attaqué «l’ingérence» des prêtres dans la politique parlementaire.  Cependant, cette attaque ne visait pas les deux confessions de la même manière :  l’engagement politique des prêtres catholiques au moyen du Parti du Centre était attaqué ici, pas l’engagement politique des pasteurs protestants, qui, après la prise du pouvoir comme avant, pouvaient fréquemment compter parmi les membres du NSDAP.»

In a speech celebrating Germany’s exit from the League of Nations, Hitler again maintained that the Third Reich was actively implementing a Christian agenda:  “Along with the fight for a purer morality we have taken upon ourselves the struggle against the decomposition of our religion. … We have therefore taken up the struggle against the Godless movement, and not just with a few theoretical declarations; we have stamped it out.  And above all we have dragged the priests out of the lowlands of the political party struggle and have brought them back into the church.”  This declaration was quite consistent with Hitler’s speeches earlier in the year and also with the basic attitude he laid out ― privately as well as publicly ― in the “time of struggle.”  Insisting that Nazism as a state would not distinguish between Protestant and Catholic, he recognized only a common supre-Christian faith.  True to his promise, Hitler defended Christianity against the “Godless” movement, outlawing the Socialist and the Communist parties very early after the Seizure of Power.  In exchange for remaining “above churches,” Hitler expected the churches to remain “above politics” and quite openly attacked the “meddling” of priests in parliamentary politics.  However, this attack was not aimed at both confessions equally:  the political engagement of Catholic priests by means of the Center Party was being attacked here, not the political engagement of Protestant pastors, who, after the Seizure of Power as before it, frequently could be counted among the members of the NSDAP.”

Adolf Hitler Responds to Allegations of Religious PersecutionsPour compléter cela, étant donné que YouTube était si charitable au point de détruire la chaîne vidéo entière de Justice4Germans, il arrive que j’ai une de leurs lectures en anglais d’un discours d’Hitler défendant le Reich contre des accusations d’abus du christianisme.  Vous pouvez en profiter.  Téléchargement gratuit ici, seulement 6 Mo dans un fichier zip:   Adolf Hitler Responds to Allegations of Religious Persecutions.

Adolf Hitler Responds to Allegations of Religious Persecutions To round that off, since YouTube was so charitable as to destroy the entire video channel of Justice4Germans, I happen to have one of their readings in English of a speech by Hitler defending the Reich from accusations of abuse of Christianity.  You may enjoy it.  Free download here, only 6MB in a zip file:  Adolf Hitler Responds to Allegations of Religious Persecutions.

Merci à Google Translate pour la version française de ces notes de bas de page.

Acknowledgments:  Thank you to Google Translate for the French version of these footnotes.

The Last Will and Testament of Adrien Arcand – 9 September 1960

Adrien Arcand, the Roman Catholic fascist

Adrien Arcand, the Roman Catholic fascist /  Adrien Arcand, le fasciste catholique romain


Foreword

Adrien Arcand’s only possessions were his love for God and his devotion to His Church, the only two subjects of his Last Will and Testament.

David Rajotte of Library and Archives Canada, in his valuable article, “L’État canadien contre le Parti de l’unité nationale et Adrien Arcand”,1 effectively summarizes Arcand’s material wealth as it stood, assessed by the Canadian State upon his internment without trial in 1940.  Says Rajotte:

Les ennemis du Canada durant la guerre voyaient leurs avoirs saisis et administrés par le Bureau du séquestre des biens ennemis (BSBE).&nbsp Aucun interné n’y a échappé.  Dans les archives du BSBE, il existe de fait des dossiers sur tous les membres du PUNC qui ont été arrêtés, à l’exception d’Arthur Lebrun, de Cornwall.  La plupart avaient peu de possessions et n’ont pas eu à transiger longuement avec le Bureau.  Quelques cas ressortent quand même du lot.  Albert Abdelahad était un vendeur itinérant et a dû céder tout son inventaire.  Le BSBE a recherché les personnes à qui il avait fait crédit et les a fait payer.  Hugues Clément était pour sa part copropriétaire d’une compagnie d’assurances fondée par son père . Le BSBE est devenu gestionnaire de ses actions.  La situation a été plus simple pour Adrien Arcand.  Un comptable a examiné ses possessions.  Il a finalement expliqué qu’il n’avait rien de valeur.  Dans une entrevue d’après-guerre, Arcand a raconté que sa femme a pu passer à travers le conflit en bonne partie grâce à l’aide d’amis.  Elphège Deaudelin, propriétaire d’épiceries, lui fournissait des aliments.  Le fils aîné d’Arcand a aussi rejoint l’armée en 1944.  On peut donc supposer que la famille du chef fasciste n’a pas vécu la guerre dans la misère la plus totale.  Il reste quand même que la vie des proches des internés a été difficile.

Canada’s enemies during the war saw their assets seized and administered by the Office of the Custodian of Enemy Property (OCEP).  No internees escaped this.  In the OCEP archives, there are in fact records of all the NUPC members arrested, with the exception of Arthur Lebrun of Cornwall.  Most had few possessions and did not have to deal for long with the Office.  A few cases stand out.  Albert Abdelahad was a traveling salesman and had to yield up his entire inventory.  The OCEP looked for those people who had credit with him and made them pay.  Hugues Clément was co-owner of an insurance company founded by his father.  The OCEP became the manager of his shares.  The situation was easier for Adrien Arcand.  An accountant3 examined his possessions.  He finally explained that there was nothing of value.  In a post-war interview, Arcand said that his wife was able to get through the conflict largely thanks to the help of friends.  Elphège Deaudelin, a grocery store owner, provided her with food.  Arcand’s eldest son also joined the army in 1944.  We can therefore assume that the fascist leader’s family did not live out the war in total misery.

Obviously, those things of real value were not considered by the accountant.

The best presentation of the Last Will and Testament of Adrien Arcand that I can find is the following words, by his own political party, in a short biography of Arcand’s life.2

Cet homme racé, d’une énergie débordante, d’u­ne intelligence rare et d’une culture prodigieuse, a servi son idéal jusqu’au bout, malgré sa santé défaillante durant les dernières années, et en dé­pit de toutes les persécutions et des attentats perpétrés contre sa personne.  Les biens terres­tres ne l’intéressaient pas, et ce détachement su­blime demeure vraiment, selon tous ceux qu’il a si hautement inspirés, la preuve la plus tangible de sa sincérité, en ce monde dépravé par l’amour de l’argent.  Proclamer à la face de l’univers ce re­noncement extraordinaire est bien le plus grand hommage que ses disciples et amis puissent lui rendre.

This thoroughbred of a man, overflowing with energy, of rare intelligence and prodigious culture, served his ideal until the end, despite his failing health in the final years, and in spite of all the persecutions and attacks perpetrated against his person.  Earthly goods were of no interest to him, and therefore sublime detachment really remains the most tangible proof of his sincerity, according to all those whom he greatly inspired in this world depraved by the love of money.  To proclaim in the face of the universe this extraordinary renunciation is really the greatest homage that his disciples and his friends could pay to him.


THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF ADRIEN ARCAND

For the First Time, in English


 
My holograph will

Lanoraie, Berthier County,
September 9, 1960,

Having undergone a serious surgical operation this year and knowing that at my age I will have to appear before my Creator and Judge before long, here are my last wishes:

I surrender to my God, Father-Son-Holy Spirit, my soul and all that He had the generosity to lend me for my earthly life (body, talent, faculties, etc.), submitting myself totally and without reservation to His divine Will-Law, hoping that His infinite Mercy will have forgiven my sins, my shortcomings, my omissions which I deeply repent of mainly because they struck the nails and thorns driven into the flesh of my Savior Jesus;

I want to die in complete and unreserved adherence to all the teachings of my Mother the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, which I consider infallible and the sole depositary of true Revelation.

Adrien Arcand


Last Will and Testament of Adrien Arcand, 9 September 1960

Last Will and Testament of Adrien Arcand, 9 September 1960 /  Les dernières volontés et testament d’Adrien Arcand, 9 septembre 19604


LES DERNIÈRES VOLONTÉS ET TESTAMENT D’ADRIEN ARCAND


Mon testament olographe

Lanoraie, Comté de Berthier,
9 septembre 1960,

Ayant subi, cette année, une opération chirurgicale grave et sachant qu’à mon âge je devrai avant longtemps comparaître devant mon Créateur et Juge, voici mes dernières volontés :

Je remets à mon Dieu, Père-Fils-Saint-Esprit, mon âme et toutes qu’Il a eu la générosité à me prêter pour ma vie terrestre (corps, talent, facultés, etc.), me soumettant totalement et sans réservés à Sa divine Volonté-Loi, espérant que Son infinit Miséricorde aura pardonné mes péchés, mes manquements, mes omissions dont je me repens profondément surtout parce qu’ils ont frappé les clous et les épines enfoncés dans la chair de mon Sauveur Jésus;

Je veux mourir dans l’adhésion complète et sans réserve à tous les enseignements de ma Mère l’Eglise Catholique, Apostolique Romaine, que je considère infaillible et seule dépositaire de la vraie Révélation.

Adrien Arcand

__________

1.  Rajotte, D. (2018).  “L’État canadien contre le Parti de l’uniténationale et Adrien Arcand.”  Bulletin d’histoire politique, 26(3), 189–211.  doi:10.7202/1046920ar The title of the article if given in English would be:  “The Canadian State Versus The National Unity Party and Adrien Arcand”.

2.  Exclusive English Translation for Adrien Arcand Books, from Section 1 of Adrien Arcand devant le tribunal de l’histoire :  Scandale à la société Radio-Canada (Scandal at CBC Radio-Canada) circa 1983 by Arcand’s then still existing National Unity Party of Canada.  See our free ebook, A Short Study of the Life of Adrien Arcand, comprising the whole text of Section 1.

3.  Nor, just to clarify, was Adrien Arcand an “enemy of Canada”; he was framed and libeled by his government.  But I won’t go into that here, I’ll have to save it for the Memorandum and Request eBook that I still owe you.  I will however say that it would be fully correct to call Mackenzie-King (“our American Prime Minister” as cartooned in the Goglu) an enemy of Canada, for he planned this country’s end in supporting world government.

4.  The source of Arcand’s handwritten Will is Jean Côté’s 1994 book, Adrien Arcand :  une grande figure de notre temps, published at Outremont, Quebec, 227 p.: 23 cm.


Subscribe for more history and news about Adrien Arcand, the Roman Catholic fascist.

Abonnez-vous pour plus d’histoire et de nouvelles sur Adrien Arcand, le fasciste catholique romain.


Soldier of Christ, an update:  A Papal Encyclical motivated Arcand’s political fight

FOOTNOTE 11 UPDATED 4 DEC 2019

Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio (1922)
Urges Catholic Laity to spread the Faith

Adrien Arcand, a handsome young officer

Adrien Arcand, a handsome young officer.  There’s an inscription in English to his wife written at an angle across the photo.  It seems to say:  “For my darling little wife, all my thoughts and my life.  Adrien”.

For my English translation of Arcand’s Inevitability of a Social Reconstruction, I tracked down, quite by luck, the origin in a papal encyclical, Rerum Novarum, of the two-paragraph quote that begins the pamphlet.  Thus, the influence of papal encyclicals on Arcand’s political views became more apparent.

Today, I will do something different.  I will explain Adrien Arcand’s political action by the existence of another encyclical, this one from 1922.  I will demonstrate that a post-WWI encyclical of Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, provides the “legal authority” (the legislative authority of the Catholic Church) that underpins the spiritually motivated political activity of this devout French-Canadian Catholic.

Said author, Jean Côté:

“Judging from all his writings, Adrien Arcand … was more of a missionary who had strayed into politics, a soldier of Christ … He had the feeling and the certitude that through his speeches he was transmitting authentic and indestructible values.”1

There may be more involved than Arcand’s personal “feeling and certitude”.  A command from the Catholic Church appears to have summoned Arcand to his political objectives, and above all inspired his construction of a new constitutional order without political parties.  An interesting statement in a doctoral thesis online gives a meaningful context to Arcand’s religious-political action in his time.  Thesis author, Peter Ernest Baltutis, points out:

“Depression-era Quebec also provided fertile soil for the Catholic Action movement, an organized apostolate of young lay men and women.  In 1922, Pope Pius XI issued the encyclical Ubi Arcano Dei, which organized Catholic laity, under the close supervision of the bishops, to actively spread Catholic values and political ideals through secular society.” 2

But, the Great Depression era is Arcand’s day, Arcand’s Quebec!

Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio3 is a post-war encyclical in the aftermath of World War I.  It is long, and commences with an account of the suffering of those defeated, that of the victors and that of the neutral States.  It is a call to the Laity to spread the Love of Christ in a war-torn world to prevent another war and secure world peace.

Ubi Arcano Dei helps to explain the political action of Arcand and his yearning for a constitution for Canada to bring about the Kingdom of Christ on Earth.  It helps to explain his urgent personal and political action in an effort to warn a naive world that World War II was on the way:

“For several months prior to the Second World War (Sept. 3, 1939), the National Unity Party of Canada campaigned against “a plot to impose a new world war upon humanity…”4

Monsignor Georges Gauthier, Auxiliary Bishop of Montreal (1912)

Monsignor Georges Gauthier, Auxiliary Bishop of Montreal (1912)

We know from Arcand’s correspondence (what little remains after the mass destructive raids of the ‘liberal’ government in 1940) that Arcand closely collaborated with his local priests and bishops.  He sought their help and advice; he fulfilled their requests for action.  Arcand responded to Monsignor Georges Gauthier, the Auxiliary Bishop of Montreal, to fight the unconstitutional Jewish Schools law of 1930.  Quebec historian Robert Rumilly reports,5 in an excerpt from my exclusive English translation (upcoming in a big historical anthology of Arcand’s 1930 public talk, “Christian or Jew?”):

“So, Mgr. Gauthier exerts more influence than it seems.  But this time, the public gesture seems necessary.  Bishop Gauthier reads and comments on his letter (to Premier Taschereau) during a ceremony at Saint Joseph’s Oratory.  He reads and comments with the intensity natural and appropriate to his sacred character.  On the other hand, he enlists a young journalist, Adrien Arcand, collaborator in Joseph Menard’s little newspapers, to fight (the Jewish Schools) bill —

As late as 1965, Arcand’s A Bas La Haine! is linguistically checked by a priest before publication.6

By October of 1966, the “influential bishops” of Quebec7 were Georges-Léon Pelletier (Three Rivers), Charles-Eugène Parent (Rimouski); Georges Cabana (Sherbrooke), and Paul Bernier (Gaspe), known as the “intégristes” (to borrow a term from constitutional law, we might call them “originalists”) because of their rigid opposition to change in the Catholic Church (one wonders what they thought of the far-left Vatican II, although, of course, Arcand in A Bas La Haine! was not about to admit the “change”); and lastly, Canon Lionel Groulx who inspired the “achat chez nous” campaign, a boycott of Jewish merchants promoted by Arcand with cartoons and editorials.

Where did this collaboration come from between Arcand and the bishops?

I believe it came from Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, the first encyclical of Pope Pius XI, delivered in Rome at St. Peter’s on 23 December 1922, calling for “Catholic action” by the laity under close supervision by the bishops:

58.  Tell your faithful children of the laity that when, united with their pastors and their bishops, they participate in the works of the apostolate, both individual and social, the end purpose of which is to make Jesus Christ better known and better loved, then they are more than ever “a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people,” of whom St. Peter spoke in such laudatory terms.  (I Peter ii, 9)  Then, too, they are more than ever united with Us and with Christ, and become great factors in bringing about world peace because they work for the restoration and spread of the Kingdom of Christ.  Only in this Kingdom of Christ can we find that true human equality by which all men are ennobled and made great by the selfsame nobility and greatness, for each is ennobled by the precious blood of Christ.  As for those who are in authority, they are, according to the example of our Lord Jesus Christ, but ministers of the good, servants of the servants of God, particularly of the sick and of those in need.

Adrien Arcand relied on other encyclicals, including Rerum Novarum, when he designed his “Canadian Corporatism,” also called Catholic Corporatism.  He quoted the encyclicals, or echoed their commands in many of his writings.  In his correspondence, Arcand refers to Saint Thomas Aquinas (not to Hitler!) for his political doctrine on unitary or undivided leadership.  (See Arcand’s letter of 13 June 1963 to Hon. Daniel Johnson, Q.C., Leader of the Opposition:  “Do we see an assistant Pope in the Church, an assistant Colonel in a regiment, an assistant Commander aboard a ship, etc.?”)  Pius XI recommends Aquinas in his Ubi Arcano Dei of 1922 where he also underscores the extreme danger posed by political parties.

If we combine Rerum Novarum, the encyclical of Leo XIII in 1891 with the encyclical of Pius XI in 1922, Ubi Arcano Dei, we have the Catholic foundation for Adrien Arcand’s “missionary” work in Quebec and federal politics.

In Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, Pius XI warns about the added “evils” of:

“… contests between political parties, many of which struggles do not originate in a real difference of opinion concerning the public good or in a laudable and disinterested search for what would best promote the common welfare, but in the desire for power and for the protection of some private interest which inevitably result in injury to the citizens as a whole.  From this course there often arise robberies of what belongs rightly to the people, and even conspiracies against and attacks on the supreme authority of the state, as well as on its representatives.  These political struggles also beget threats of popular action and, at times, eventuate in open rebellion and other disorders which are all the more deplorable and harmful since they come from a public to whom it has been given, in our modern democratic states, to participate in very large measure in public life and in the affairs of government.  Now, these different forms of government are not of themselves contrary to the principles of the Catholic Faith, which can easily be reconciled with any reasonable and just system of government.  Such governments, however, are the most exposed to the danger of being overthrown by one faction or another.”

Arcand then writes, under the heading “Destruction of the Pork Barrel,” in Canadian Corporatism, his plan to restructure Canada:

“As Parliament will be composed of representatives of the great classes of the nation and as there will be no more political parties, as the political ideal will be completely changed, there will be no longer any ‘Pork-Barrel,’ any palm-greasing, any partisan patronage.”

Arcand would thus have done away with “robberies of what belongs rightly to the people.”

On another page of Canadian Corporatism, Arcand says:

“The political parties which divide the nation into artificial and useless factions will be all abolished.  There will be only one single political party, the Canadian nation.  All Canadians will be part of it.  The nationalist system in power will recognize no opposition.”

Goodbye factions, goodbye revolution, goodbye risk of overthrow, all of them “evils” warned against by Pius XI.  Stability would be established by means of undivided unity, and undivided leadership as per Thomas Aquinas.  Leadership, not dictatorship; because in Arcand’s corporate system, the top merely ratifies and sees to enforcement of what the social classes themselves decide.

He concludes:

“The government will be truly national, the government of all the people, and it will concern itself with the whole people.”

Elsewhere, Arcand notes:

“Parliamentarianism is not liberal democracy.  The parliament, consultation, discussion existed long centuries before the arrival of liberal democracy.  Formerly parliaments were really national.  With liberal democracy, we have had only partisan or factional parliaments, representing only part of the people, while the other part, defeated in the elections, was punished by the privations of political or parliamentary opposition.”

Arcand then inquires:

“By what shall we replace the system which is slowly foundering in corruption and falsehood?”

It is incredible that Arcand knew Parliament had once been unitary.  It had been, and still is supposed to be, a circle  of advisers to the King.  He probably became aware of it through the Popes, for I am pretty sure he never studied the Constitution.  Pius XI refers to “modern democracies,” emphasizing the danger of “factions”.

Arcand then contrasts the totalitarian system wanted by the Communists with the Catholic-inspired system that he recommends, making it obvious that he doesn’t view his own system as a dictatorship:

“The disciples of the Jew Karl Marx propose the mischievous doctrine of this false prophet under various names:  socialistm, communism, bolshevism, sovietism, anarchy, popular front.  It is materialism pushed to its final conclusions.  It is, moreover, the dictatorship of one class over all the other classes.  It is the definite destruction of Christianity by destroying that which supports the ideas of God, religion, family, private property, initiative, social justice, order, morality, and spiritual values.”4

My very first impression was that Arcand’s desire to eliminate political parties was an attack on the Constitution, a coup d’état.  And since I am sure he didn’t study the Constitution, I thought he didn’t realize what he was doing.  However, I have changed my mind, at least to some degree.

Arcand may have been right about eliminating political parties.  The only question being the process by which he would accomplish his turn-about back to a unitary Parliament.  (We also have the problem of parties in the Provinces; in order to avoid the equivalent of a coup, they would have to be retained, with local unitary governments.)

The doctrine of laches  in Canadian constitutional law allows the correction of constitutional errors at any time; there is no “prescription,” no expiry date after which a constitutional mistake is no longer correctable.  The error never becomes “constitutional” by neglect to deal with it.  In other words, a violation of the Constitution never becomes constitutional.

We had an example of this fact in the Manitoba Language Rights Reference of 1985,8 but I cite the example with caution because procedurally, it was not correct; the “declarations” made by the “court” were not declaratory of the law; they were made in the course of a mere advisory (also called a reference; like the 1998 Secession Reference).  Advisories are non-judicial, so that no binding declaration of law can be made.  Nonetheless, in 1985, a constitutional error over 90 years old was deemed to have been corrected; although, again, genuine litigation and not a mere advisory would be needed to do it.  (One would also have to be under the right Constitution at the time; for, as Judge Brian Dickson, who sat on the fraudulent “Patriation Reference”9 would have known, and as Barry Lee Strayer admitted in 1982 in his Cronkite Lectures,10 Canada had a coup d’état in 1982, not a “constitutional amendment”.

So, if Arcand had gone about it with, say, a declaration from an appropriate court stating that political parties are not constitutional, and he then sought a constitutional amendment  to expressly rectify the Constitution, it might not have been a coup d’état, but the correction of an error, if he could prove the error.

How could Arcand begin to prove the error?

At page 24 of Defence of the Realm11 ― produced under supervision of the late Leolin Price CBE, QC, and published by The Magna Carta Society (United Kingdom) ― the question is put like this:

“The modern disproportionate dominance of the elected House of Commons over the sovereignty of the people, and the erosion of constitutional checks and balances, were first given serious encouragement by Lord Mansfield, a Scottish Jacobite who became Lord Chief Justice of England in the 18th century.  Despite Blackstone’s12 observations, he had no problem with an executive operating within the legislature.

The institutions and practices which have grown up since that time ― collective cabinet responsibility, organised political parties, career politicians, and the whip system which denies politicians the freedom to vote according to their conscienceare not based on legislation, nor on common law, nor on the law and custom of parliament.

Sir Ivor Jennings pointed out in Law and the Constitution that these conventions had never been formally recognised by parliament or the courts.  The courts recognised a constitution based primarily on the Bill of Rights.”

To this, I add a source I have quoted elsewhere in this blog, Lord Shaw of Dunfermline in Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants v. Osborne, [1910] AC 87:

“Take the testing instance:  should his view as to right and wrong on a public issue as to the true line of service to the realm, as to the real interests of the constituency which has elected him, or even of the society which pays him, differ from the decision of the parliamentary party and the maintenance by it of its policy, he has come under a contract to place his vote and action into subjection not to his own convictions, but to their decisions.  My Lords, I do not think that such a subjection is compatible either with the spirit of our parliamentary constitution or with that independence and freedom which have hitherto been held to lie at the basis of representative government in the United Kingdom.”  (Emphases added.)

If, indeed, political parties are unconstitutional, since they violate the basic principle of the independence of the member of Parliament, and the other principle of the unity of Parliament, there necessarily is a way to restore the proper constitution of Parliament.

Lord Shaw’s rather more “contemporary” observation that political parties are not a part of the true constitution of the United Kingdom brings to mind Adrien Arcand’s “Key to the Mystery”.  The Paris edition of 1939 republished the 1938 edition from Montreal, Canada which appeared under the signature and patronage of the Anticommunist Women’s League of Montreal, one of Arcand’s organizations.

The Paris Edition13, at page 8, says (translation):

“In its issue of July 1st, 1880, ‘Le Contemporain’, the great Paris review, published a long article entitled ‘Report of Sir John Readcliff on the politico-historical events of the last ten years.’  It was the text of a speech given at Prague by Rabbi Reichorn in 1869 on the tomb of the great Rabbi Simeon-Ben-Jehouda.”

Further below, Reichorn is quoted in the section ‘A Jewish Plan for World Conquest’ (translation):

“With untiring praise for the democratic regime, we will divide the Christians into political parties, we will destroy the unity of their nations, we will sow discord among them.  Powerless, they will suffer the law of our Bank, forever united, forever devoted to our cause.”

Arcand had not only the Church to motivate his political redesign, but the boast of Rabbi Reichorn that it was the Jews who had somehow divided Parliament in the first place.  And that would be the Parliament in England; for research indicates the first parties emerged in England and “modern democracy” spread from there.

The speech quoted by Readcliff was given in 1869, two years after Confederation, at which time we indeed had political parties.  Lord Mansfield, referred to in Defence of the Realm was active in the previous century.  The Reichorn speech was a ritual repetition of a speech delivered at hundred-year intervals.  That means there must have been a basic text, updated with news at each reading.  This might account for the future tense, “we will divide,” “we will destroy”; which implies that an earlier text predates political parties.

A fascinating article, “The Origin of English Political Parties” by W.C. Abbott in The American Historical Review, Vol. 24, No. 4 (July, 1919), pp. 578-602 (25 pages) (you can find it at JSTOR), supports the idea that parties emerged first in England at the time of the Reformation.  See pages 583-584.

Arcand, who viewed the Reformation as a product of Jewish influence, would be deeply interested.  For, we would then have both the splitting of the Catholic Church and the splitting of our unitary Parliament in the same era by the same aggressor, if Rabbi Reichorn is believed.

In the section “Judaisation through the Reformation” (“Judaïsation par la Réforme”) in his book, Is Christianity Bankrupt? (1954), Arcand writes:

Des chercheurs anglais — chose curieuse, ils sont protestants — se sont dépensés pour trouver l’origine véritable des hérésies qui ont affligé l’Eglise du Christ depuis ses débuts, depuis le simonisme jusqu’à la toute récente secte des Témoins de Jéhovah, en passant par l’arianisme, le manichéisme, le nestorianisme, le catharisme des Albigeois et combien d’autres et leurs statistiques révèlent qu’au moins 95% de ces déviations proviennent directement d’une action juive.  Ces auteurs présentent Calvin comme un Juif de père et mère ; quant à Luther, auteur de la grande Réforme, ils répètent à son sujet le vieil adage :  si Lyrus non lyrasset, Lutherus non saltasset, soulignant que le Nicolas de Lyre en question était un Juif voué à la destruction du christianisme.

English researchers — oddly enough, they are Protestants — have expended themselves to find the true origin of the heresies that have afflicted the Church of Christ from its beginnings, from Simonism to the very recent sect of Jehovah’s Witnesses, by way of Arianism, Manicheism, Nestorianism, the Catharism of the Albigensians, and countless others.  Their statistics reveal that at least 95% of these deviations are the direct result of a Jewish action.  These authors present Calvin as a Jew by both his father and his mother; as for Luther, the author of the great Reformation, they refer to him with the old adage:  si Lyrus non lyrasset, Lutherus non saltasset, emphasizing that the Nicolas of Lyre in question was a Jew dedicated to the destruction of Christianity.

Conclusions

Not only do we see the influence of Pius XI in Arcand’s desire to eliminate political parties, we see it in Arcand’s Miroir  editorials and his Goglu  cartoons of the 1930s.  The attack on corrupt politicians is unrelenting.

It is therefore unlikely that, as Côté said in 1994, Arcand was “more of a missionary who had strayed into politics”.  In the light of Ubi Arcano Dei, Arcand did not “stray” into politics; he strode soldierly, directly into it, determined to “actively spread Catholic values and political ideals” as the 1922 encyclical of Pius XI had summoned him to do.

It increasingly appears that Pierre Trépanier is right when he says of Arcand’s corporatism (translation):

“the single-party regime … would have been subordinated to divine law …. and to the teachings of the social doctrine of the Church.”

Trépanier concludes:

“The French-Canadian version of fascism would have been much closer to a sort of authoritarian and modern Christendom than to the Third Reich.”14

Arcand and the men and women who followed him, and who found themselves in the concentration camps of the “liberals” for doing so, were actively living their Catholic Faith when they formed political movements and local and national parties to preserve “Catholic values and political ideals” for the betterment of Canada.

They were also defending their constitutional right to a Christian Canada and a Catholic Quebec.  These rights were recognized first in the Treaty of Paris of February 10, 1763 at Article 4 (properly today called “Section 4”):

“His Britannick Majesty, on his side, agrees to grant the liberty of the Catholick religion to the inhabitants of Canada:  he will, in consequence, give the most precise and most effectual orders, that his new Roman Catholic subjects may profess the worship of their religion according to the rites of the Romish church, as far as the laws of Great Britain permit.”

The British North America Act of 1867 perfected and secured these religious rights by enacting for Quebec a separate Legislature for the local self-government of the Catholic French-Canadians.

Honorable Solicitor General Hector-Louis Langevin, 1865

Honorable Solicitor General Hector-Louis Langevin, 1865

On that score, the words of Solicitor-General Hector-Louis Langevin in the Debates on Confederation of 186515 make the purpose of Confederation clear, as viewed by the French-Canadians:

“We are considering the establishment of a Confederacy — with a Central Parliament and local parliaments.  The Central or Federal Parliament will have the control of all measures of a general character …, but all matters of local interest, all that relates to the affairs and rights of the different sections of the Confederacy [by sections, he means the Provinces] will be reserved for the control of the local parliaments ….  It will be the duty of the Central Government to see that the country prospers, but it will not be its duty to attack our religion, our institutions, or our nationality, which will be amply protected.”

These rights of the French-Canadians, as of all the Founders, are both religious and political.  Confederation would be worthless if the guarantee were not enforceable; which is the whole point of a constitution.  However, there is a catch.  You must learn your Constitution.  If Arcand had learned his Constitution, he might have enforced it on more than one occasion.
_______________
1.  Jean Côté, Adrien Arcand : une grande figure de notre temps, 1994.  ISBN 2-9801677-3-8.
2.  Forging the Link between Faith and Development The History of the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace 1967-1982 by Peter Ernest Baltutis, doctoral thesis, Faculty of Theology, University of Saint Michael’s College and Historical Department, Toronto School of Theology (2012), p. 33.
3.  Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, the first encyclical of his pontificate, delivered by Pope Pius Xi at Rome at St. Peter’s on 23 December 1922.  Read the English:  Encyclical Of Pope Pius XI On The Peace Of Christ in The Kingdom Of Christ, to Our Venerable Brethren The Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops, And Other Ordinaries. In Peace And Communion With The Apostolic See.  Read the French:  Lettre Encyclique, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio du Souverain Pontife Pie XI de La Paix Du Christ Dans Le Règne De Dieu.
4.  From “Synopsis of Facts and Events” in a draft dated 1957 of a “Memorandum and Request Re: Claims of Canadian Nationalists Against the Government of Canada for Unjust Internments Submitted by Adrien Arcand” to the federal government of Canada.
5.  “The Jewish Schools Affair (1928-1931),” an exclusive English translation for Adrien Arcand Books of “L’affaire des écoles juives (1928-1931)” by Robert Rumilly, published in the Revue d’histoire de l’Amérique française  102 (1956):  222-233 by the Institut d’histoire de l’Amérique française.  The translation is part of an upcoming historical compendium.
6.  Jean Côté, Adrien Arcand : une grande figure de notre temps, 1994.  ISBN 2-9801677-3-8.
7.  Ibid.
8.  Reference re Manitoba Language Rights, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 721.
9.  Re:  Resolution to amend the Constitution, [1981] 1 S.C.R. 753.
10.  “Patriation and Legitimacy of the Canadian Constitution,” the Dean Emeritus F.C. Cronkite, Q.C., Memorial Lectures, Third Series, October 1982, delivered at the College of Law, University of Saskatchewan by Barry Lee Strayer, Q.C., Assistant Deputy Minister (Public Law) Department of Justice (Canada) barely six months after the so-called “patriation” of Canada’s constitution from United Kingdom.  In these lectures, Mr. Strayer admits the 1982 patriation was in fact a coup d’état.
11.  Defence of the Realm, A Summary of Evidence to Justify a Petition to The Queen, and Other Matters Regarding the Purported Imposition of Foreign Laws by the European Union on the United Kingdom,” Published by the Magna Carta Society.  First Edition, April 6, 2000; second reprinting June, 2000.  UPDATE 4 DEC 2019:  A scan of the original copy of DEFENCE OF THE REALM has now been placed online for the convenience of readers:  https://www.scribd.com/document/438304144/DEFENCE-OF-THE-REALM-A-Summary-of-Evidence-to-Justify-a-Petition-to-the-Queen.
12.  I think this may be what Price had in mind when referring to Blackstone:  “In all tyrannical governments the supreme magistracy, or the right of both making and of enforcing the laws, is vested in one and the same man, or one and the same body of men; and whenever these two powers are united together, there can be no public liberty. / The magistrate may enact tyrannical laws, and execute them in a tyrannical manner, since he is possessed, in quality of dispenser of justice, with all the power he as legislator thinks proper to give himself.”  (Emphases added.)  Commentaries on the Laws of England, an influential 18th Century treatise on the common law of England, originally published by the Clarendon Press at Oxford, 1765-1769.  (Quote is from the 1916 edition, Book One, pp. 146-147.  I may have modernized the English myself; I can’t find my copy of Blackstone right now to check.)
13.  La Clé du Mystère, F. de Boisjolin, Publisher.  Imprimerie Commerciale Yvetot. 1939.
14.  Trépanier, P. (1991). La religion dans la pensée d’Adrien ArcandLes Cahiers des dix, (46), 207–247. https://doi.org/10.7202/1015587ar
15.  Solicitor General Hector-Louis Langevin, Parliamentary Debates on the Subject Of The Confederation of the British North American Provinces, 3rd Session, 8th Provincial Parliament of Canada, pages 367-68 (bottom right) and elsewhere.  Also see Page 372 et seq.  While you’re at it, grab a free lesson on the Constitution for Dummies:  The Constitution 101:  Canadian Federalism and Self-Government for Dummies<; and in French:  La Constitution 101:  Le Fédéralisme canadien et l’autonomie pour les Nuls.

New eBook: The Inevitability of a Social Reconstruction (1950; 1967), Adrien Arcand

This eBook, along with Canadian Corporatism and other materials to come, marks the 74th Anniversary of the release of Adrien Arcand on July 3rd 1945 from the “longest internment of its kind in the whole British Empire”.  The elements of the celebration are going up one at a time.  Please come back on July 3rd to enjoy them all, and make sure you get your free downloads.
The Inevitability of a Social Reconstruction, Adrien Arcand (1950, 1967) Flash flipbook

The Inevitability of a Social Reconstruction by Adrien Arcand was drafted at least as early as 1950, and marked for publication in 1967.  Download the new free eBook:  Flash flipbook, PDF and ePub, all in one zip file.

The Inevitability of a Social Reconstruction by Adrien Arcand was drafted at least as early as 1950, and marked for publication in 1967.  Download the new free eBook:  a Flash flipbook, PDF and ePub, all in one zip file.

These Two Must be Read Together!

In finalizing an ebook text for The Inevitability of a Social Reconstruction, 1967, my research has allowed me to date the original text to at least 1950, the year when Arcand wrote The Universal Republic.  My research also brought to light a Papal Encyclical of Leo XIII from 1891 which appears to be a foundation for Arcand’s notion of Canadian Corporatism.  All has been explained in my Foreword to the new free eBook, which must be read together with Canadian Corporatism to understand what Arcand was doing, and why he was doing it.  In other words, he wasn’t copying Hitler; he was trying to fulfill the social recommendations of the Catholic Church, in the fight against Communism.

In summary, Arcand seems to have been trying to reestablish the old “abolished” trade guilds on a new footing within a new “protective” structure, his Christian corporate state.  You will see in the eBook that my Foreword and footnotes underscore Arcand’s resort to Catholic doctrine.

I already gave you the French and new English text of “Inevitability” on December 16th, 2018.  I will give you the new Foreword, below.  And you will have to read the eBook to get the footnotes.


TRANSLATOR’S FOREWORD FROM

THE INEVITABILITY OF A SOCIAL RECONSTRUCTION 

BY ADRIEN ARCAND 1950, 1967

EXCLUSIVE ENGLISH REPUBLISHED AS AN EBOOK ON 28 JUNE 2019


ORIGIN AND DATE OF “INEVITABILITY”

L’inévitabilité d’une Reconstruction Sociale by Adrien Arcand was translated by turns in January, September and December of 2018 using a non-official transcript offered in a zip folder online at Balder Ex Libris.1  The transcript looks like an “Aaargh” document, captured and reproduced by somebody else.  The document is dated and signed at the end of the publication:  “février 1967 Adrien ARCAND”.

A catalogue entry at the Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec for a published version of “L’inévitabilité”—described as a 7-page printed book (call number 302.3 A668i 1970, “for consultation only”)—attributes the publication to Adrien Arcand’s Parti de l’Unité nationale du Canada, Service de Librairie.  Date of publication is guessed at in the catalogue entry as somewhere in the 1970s.

<i>Inévitabilité</i>, brouillon (draft) 1950.  Special Collections, Adrien Arcand Collection

Inévitabilité, brouillon (draft) 1950.  Special Collections, Adrien Arcand Collection, Vanier Campus, Concordia University, Montreal.

However, a typed draft of “L’inévitabilité” on long paper with a handwritten date of “—1950—” (in dashes) on the first page above the title, was found among Arcand’s papers in Special Collections at Concordia University.  A copy was purchased on June 4th, 2019.  The fifth and last page of the typed draft bears Arcand’s handwritten initials, “A.A.” at the bottom.  The first writing of “L’inévitabilité” may thus have been closer to the known date of The Universal Republic, also from 1950.

The English translation of “L’inévitabilité” was first published online in blog-post format on 16 December 2018 by Adrien Arcand Books using the Balder transcript.

Dated February 1967, “L’inévitabilité” seems to cap Arcand’s two short essays published in 1966, Communism Installed Here and The Revolt of Materialism.  Extremely important, “Inevitability” makes plain and comprehensible the Catholic nature of Adrien Arcand’s political program for Canada, his Canadian Corporatism.  The two should be read together.

The present English eBook has been re-paragraphed to match the 1950 typed draft.  Slight differences between Arcand’s typed version and the Balder version are accounted for in the footnotes to the present English edition, online as a Flash flipbook, PDF, and ePub.  A change made to the English text since December 2018 has been footnoted.

A major difference between the 1950 typed draft and the Balder document dated February 1967 is the addition in the latter of two extracts attributed to Pope Leo XIII.  On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 10:59 a.m., a reference librarian at the Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec advised by email that the 7-page printed book in their collection indeed begins with the two-part quote of Pope Leo XIII.

The source of the papal quote is not given, but it can be traced to an Encyclical at the Vatican web site.  The precise identification of the quote is important to understanding Arcand, as I realized on tracking down the Encyclical.  Arcand had a prodigious memory and apparently typed non-stop for hours without consulting documents.  Elsewhere, he quotes a long extract from an article by Churchill, almost verbatim, with small changes that indicate he was quoting from memory.  In like style, as we will see, he quoted Leo XIII from memory, with a few substitutions of words, while maintaining the meaning of the original statement from which the quote derives.

ARCAND’S USE OF CATHOLIC DOCTRINE:
PAPAL ENCYCLICALS & THOMAS AQUINAS

RERUM NOVARUM

Arcand’s two-part quote is from the Papal Encyclical of May 15th, 1891 entitled “Rerum Novarum, Lettre Encyclique de Sa Sainteté Pape Léon XIII” in French and “Rerum Novarum, Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on Capital and Labor”—a slightly different English title for the same Encyclical.  Both are online at the Vatican.  An author by the name of Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu presents the Encyclical under the rubric “socialism and democracy”.  In other words, the Church under Leo XIII is trying to deal with the rise of Communism.  Likewise Arcand, in his day.

We can see that Arcand was quoting from Rerum Novarum by comparing his rendering of the French with the Vatican’s official text.  There is only one slight difference in the first excerpt:  Arcand said “une solution efficace”; the Church said:  “jamais une solution”.

Arcand, February 1967

Vatican, 2019

“La question qui s’agite, est
d’une nature telle qu’à moins
de faire appel à la religion et à
l’Église, il est impossible de lui
trouver une solution efficace.”

“La question qui s’agite est
d’une nature telle, qu’à moins
de faire appel à la religion et à
l’Eglise, il est impossible de lui
trouver jamais une solution.

Arcand, February 1967

Vatican, 2019

“Assurément, une cause de
cette gravité demande encore à
d’autres agents leur part
d’activité et d’efforts; nous
voulons parler des gouvernants,
des maîtres et des riches, des
ouvriers eux-mêmes dont le
sort est ici en jeu.”

“Assurément, une question de
cette gravité demande encore à
d’autres agents leur part
d’activité et d’efforts. Nous
voulons parler des chefs d’État,
des patrons et des riches, des
ouvriers eux-mêmes dont le
sort est ici en jeu.”

For the second part of the quote, Arcand is obviously writing from memory.  He says “cause” instead of “question,” he says “gouvernants” instead of “chefs d’État” and “maîtres” instead of “patrons”.  He frequently uses “gouvernants” in his work, and I usually translate that as “rulers”.  But the fact he recalls a good approximation of the original Encyclical is significant.  It proves he knows at least parts of them, if not whole Encyclicals, by heart.  Which would be no surprise for a priestly Catholic who had managed to convert a Protestant minister while interned in a concentration camp in WWII.  (For the anecdote, see page 14, A Short Study of the Life of Adrien Arcand, free ebook.)

We now turn to the topic of the Encyclical from which Arcand is quoting, “Capital and Labor”.

In the English version of the Encyclical, subtitled “Rights and Duties of Capital and Labor,” we have the purpose of the Church:  “to speak on the condition of the working classes” “to define the relative rights and mutual duties of the rich and of the poor, of capital and of labor” because (and I’m piecing this together from different parts of the opening paragraphs) “the spirit of revolutionary change, which has long been disturbing the nations of the world,” has “passed beyond the sphere of politics and made its influence felt in the cognate sphere of practical economics”.  How does Arcand begin his Canadian Corporatism?  He calls it “A formula for economic and social reorganization”.  In Inevitability, he critiques “political liberalism” as the cause of “economic liberalism”.  And, he says, “Economic liberalism causes social harm through its contempt for the human being…”. (Italics added.)

Then, says the Pope, “the responsibility of the apostolic office urges us to treat the question of set purpose and in detail, in order that no misapprehension may exist as to the principles which truth and justice dictate for its settlement.”  The question being treated is what are the “rights and duties of capital and labor”.  The Pope says:  “Public institutions and the laws set aside the ancient religion.”  (A possible reference to the French Revolution.)  The Pope continues:  “Hence, by degrees it has come to pass that working men have been surrendered, isolated and helpless, to the hardheartedness of employers and the greed of unchecked competition.” (Italics added.)

Says Arcand in Canadian Corporatism:  “Under financial democracy a very large number of our workers after thirty or forty years of honest labour find themselves to-day less advanced than they were when they began their career, having been constantly exploited as employees and as consumers, left without defence at the mercy of middlemen or cunning swindlers; their lives have been ruined.”  Arcand’s “left without defence” echoes the Pope stating “isolated and helpless”. And, Arcand says: “No longer will the great international monopolies fix the prices. It is the national corporation itself, under the supervision of the government which must prevent all and any abuse.” And again: “The producer can live, can devote himself to his specialty without fear of ruin. He can count on the stability of business and the consumer is protected against any exploitation.”

I’m not going to go into a full analysis here of the relevance of Rerum Novarum to Arcand’s views, and to his design of Corporatism for Canada.  But note that in Canadian Corporatism Arcand refers to the “guilds”, and in the Encyclical (Rerum Novarum) the Pope says:  “some opportune remedy must be found quickly for the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class:  for the ancient workingmen’s guilds were abolished in the last century, and no other protective organization took their place.”   (Italics added.)

This is the kind of sentence I would want to use as a point of departure in analyzing Adrien Arcand’s motives for advancing Canadian Corporatism, in which he says:  “Corporatism also is totalitarian, exacting discipline, rules, structures, in everything and everywhere.  It is not the State which fixes these rules and these structures, it is the guilds of National activities which give them to themselves, the State approves.”  (See page 12 in the free eBook.) (Italics added.)

Is Arcand not re-establishing the abolished “guilds” within a new “protective organization” (the State) whose job is to protect, to prevent abuse?  In his Canadian Corporatism, does he not include everyone, all the social classes, to achieve that “settlement,” the “remedy” the Pope said necessary for the new industrial society, to protect and render justice to every social class, most of whom would be liquidated in an orgy of bloodshed by the Communists, on the rise at the time of Leo XIII, and costing millions of lives in Arcand’s time.  Israeli commentator, Sever Plocker, in his article “Stalin’s Jews,” remarks:  “We cannot know with certainty the number of deaths Cheka was responsible for in its various manifestations, but the number is surely at least 20 million, including victims of the forced collectivization, the hunger, large purges, expulsions, banishments, executions, and mass death at Gulags.”  And further on, “Whole population strata were eliminated:  Independent farmers, ethnic minorities, members of the bourgeoisie, senior officers, intellectuals, artists, labor movement activists, ‘opposition members’ who were defined completely randomly, and countless members of the Communist party itself.”  “And us, the Jews?  An Israeli student finishes high school without ever hearing the name “Genrikh Yagoda,” the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU’s deputy commander and the founder and commander of the NKVD.  Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin’s collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people.  His Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system.  After Stalin no longer viewed him favorably, Yagoda was demoted and executed, and was replaced as chief hangman in 1936 by Yezhov, the “bloodthirsty dwarf.”  “Yezhov was not Jewish but was blessed with an active Jewish wife.  In his Book “Stalin:  Court of the Red Star”, Jewish historian Sebag Montefiore writes that during the darkest period of terror, when the Communist killing machine worked in full force, Stalin was surrounded by beautiful, young Jewish women.”2

Oddly, Arcand’s critics are all opposed not to the communist butchers and the Jewish killing machine, but to Adrien Arcand, who feared that what happened there would happen here.  To-day, as then, pink and red pick-aparts call Arcand “far right,” “anti-Semitic,” “intolerant,” and an anticommunist “bigot”.  But where are the epithets for Stalin’s Jews?  And all the others?

As to Arcand’s unitary corporate State, I leave it to you, the researcher, to deepen the questions.   To do so, you will have to be or become familiar with Papal Encyclicals, Catholic doctrine, Thomas Aquinas, historical context.  All these play into Arcand’s motives.  I think it obvious that Arcand was a devout Catholic trying to restructure society in light of statements by the Popes, to save us from Communism.  As will be seen in the footnotes to Inevitability, Arcand cites Aquinas to support his own reestablishment of a unitary parliament for Canada, free of political parties, free of partisan politics through undivided leadership.

The researcher will have to distinguish Arcand’s abolition of political parties from that of Hitler.  And also ask why an RCMP report on Arcand’s National Social Christian Party stated that it was “undoubtedly organized along the lines of Hitlerism”.  (See the first paragraph of the section “L’avant-guerre” in David Rajotte, “L’État canadien contre le Parti de l’unité nationale et Adrien Arcand”.  Bulletin d’histoire politique, 26(3), 189–211. doi:10.7202/1046920ar.)

Arcand’s inspiration for his military-style organization might be Catholic, it might be from Hitler, who was widely admired prior to WWII.  Whatever Arcand’s military-type of organization, it ought to be distinguished from the apparently Catholic-inspired reorganization of society and of the State proposed by Arcand in Canadian Corporatism.  Self-labeling for “success” by copying a patriotic brand that was popular elsewhere at the time should be placed in perspective, in context on a timeline, beside Arcand’s obviously Church-inspired Corporatism.  Arcand’s early borrowing of symbols (swastika) and titles (Führer) may have misled non-Catholics not steeped in Biblical roots, Encyclicals, or Thomas Aquinas into believing that everything about Arcand was merely a matter of duplicating the German package, or whatever simplistic views were thought to be the package.

This is tricky work, but intellectual integrity and dignity, for Arcand, for the men and women of his Legions, for his disciples and followers, and for the researcher, require that it be done. Said Arcand, in his Inevitability:  “[L]ife is vibrant reality, influencing and influenced”.  For the sake of History, the researcher must clarify Arcand’s own “vibrant reality” rather than impose upon him, after-the-fact, a backhanded and subjective one, whether individual or collective.

In addition to Encyclicals and Aquinas, I recommend the annotated, beautifully embellished, multi-volume Latin and French-language King James version of the Catholic Bible, the “Crampon” Bible, scans of which are online at French Catholic web sites.  Arcand quotes from the Crampon from time to time.
____________________

1.  I am using the Balder  version and Arcand’s own draft from Special Collections at Concordia for this eBook because a price of $35 per page was quoted to me by email by the BAnQ to scan the 7-page published booklet, plus covers.  That is several times what it cost me in June 2019 to get a couple of hundred pages out of Arcand’s papers at Concordia University.  It just isn’t within my budget, so I am using whatever is reasonable that I can get my hands on.

2.  “Stalin’s Jews / We mustn’t forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish,” By Sever Plocker  |Published:  12.21.06, 23:35
https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3342999,00.html


The Inevitability of a Social Reconstruction, Adrien Arcand (front cover)

The Inevitability of a Social Reconstruction, back cover

FOOTNOTES FROM THE NEW eBOOK

(Above, front cover, back cover.)  These are important footnotes.  I’m giving them here so they will be picked up by the search engines, for researchers.

Footnote 1:  The mission of the translator, as I conceive it, is to put into English what Adrien Arcand wrote.  He quotes Pope Leo XIII, obviously from memory, as will be shown below.  I will therefore translate Arcand (above), and also give you the official French and English of the Vatican.  First quotation, official Vatican French:  “La question qui s’agite est d’une nature telle, qu’à moins de faire appel à la religion et à l’Eglise, il est impossible de lui trouver jamais une solution.” — Rerum Novarum (15 mai 1891).  Official Vatican English:  “… for no practical solution of this question will be found apart from the intervention of religion and of the Church.”  Second quotation, official Vatican French:  “Assurément, une question de cette gravité demande encore à d’autres agents leur part d’activité et d’efforts.  Nous voulons parler des chefs d’État, des patrons et des riches, des ouvriers eux-mêmes dont le sort est ici en jeu.”; and official Vatican English:  “Doubtless, this most serious question demands the attention and the efforts of others besides ourselves – to wit, of the rulers of States, of employers of labor, of the wealthy, aye, of the working classes themselves, for whom We are pleading.” — Rerum Novarum (May 15, 1891)

Footnote 2:  Arcand spelled the word “ex-équer” in French, with a deliberate hyphen.

Footnote 3:  In paragraph 2 of a one-page letter dated 13 June 1963 to Hon. Daniel Johnson, Q.C., Leader of the Opposition, Arcand said (translation):  “What caused the rapid and sad destruction of Social Credit recently was the simultaneous existence of two heads, a titular head and an assistant head, one saying white, the other saying black.  Double “leadership” can be the most toxic and deadly imaginable in any organization.  Do we see an assistant Pope in the Church, an assistant Colonel in a regiment, an assistant Commander aboard a ship, etc.?  Authority, in principle, must be (according to Saint Thomas Aquinas) personal, single, continual and not divided.” French original:  “Ce qui a fait la rapide et triste destruction du Crédit Social dernièrement, c’est l’existence de deux têtes simultanées, un chef en titre et un chef adjoint, l’un disant blanc quand l’autre disait noir.  Le double “chefferie” est ce qu’il peut y avoir de plus nocif et funeste en toute organisation imaginable.  Voyons-nous un pape adjoint dans l’Église, un colonel adjoint dans un régiment, un commandant adjoint à bord d’un navire, etc.?  L’autorité, en principe, doit être (suivant s. Thomas d’Aquin) personnelle, une, constante et sans partage.”  Source:  Arcand, Adrien.  Letter from Lanoraie, P.Q., [13 June 1963], (C004).  Box number 002, Item number 1123.  Adrien Arcand Collection.  Concordia University Library, Special Collections, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.  Arcand’s idea of a unitary, “undivided” Parliament, and his basic notion of authority appear to come from the Italian Catholic theologian and Doctor of the Church, Thomas Aquinas, and not from Hitler.  Pierre Trépanier was evidently right in 1991 when he said (translation):   “One of these possibilities would be that the single-party regime—corporatism and anti-Semitism in the actualization that Arcand would have given them—would have been subordinated to divine law, the control of the Hierarchy, and to the teachings of the social doctrine of the Church.  The French-Canadian version of fascism would have been much closer to a sort of authoritarian and modern Christendom than to the Third Reich.”  Source:  “La religion dans la pensée d’Adrien Arcand,” Les Cahiers dex dix (46), 207–247.  (https://doi.org/ 10.7202/1015587ar) (Religion in the thought of Adrien Arcand)  A tiny French booklet that I happen to have, Saint Thomas et Nous, by the Fondation St. Thomas d’Aquin du Canada in Montreal (1966), at page 10 informs us (translation:) “In any case, the facts are there:  the Encyclical Aeterni Patris, dated 4 August 1879, ordered all Christian schools to restore the wisdom of Saint Thomas and to propagate it as widely as possible.  On 4 August 1880, while establishing Saint Thomas as the patron of studies, the same Pope recalled his Encyclical of 1879:  Sur la restauration dans les écoles catholiques de la philosophie chrétienne selon l’esprit du Docteur Angélique, saint Thomas d’Aquin.  [Vatican’s English:  “Aeterni Patris, Encyclical Of Pope Leo XIII, On The Restoration Of Christian Philosophy”]  Says the booklet:  “No doubt is thus possible, Thomism is absolutely the ‘official’ philosophy of the Church.  We add that no Pope has revoked this decree of Leo XIII.”  It also would be hard to doubt that Adrien Arcand’s Corporatism for Canada is a Christian system.

Footnote 4:  In the Balder document, the phrase “qu’il y a l’anti-christianisme messianique,” replaces the phrase “qu’il y a la Juiverie mondiale” in the typed manuscript hand-dated “1950“.  In other words, the phrase “that there is messianic anti-Christianity” in the known public version replaced the phrase “that there is world Jewry” in the 1950 typed draft.  The change clarifies what Arcand means when he says “world Jewry”, while maintaining and accentuating the contrasting of opposites, i.e., “universal Freemasonry or the Counter-Church” contrasted, by implication, with the universal Catholic church.

Footnote 5:  In the typed draft dated 1950, the phrase given was:  “Nos sociologues catholiques attaquent avec beaucoup de vigueur” (our Catholic sociologists vigourously attack”.

Footnote 6:  It is obvious that Adrien Arcand’s Corporatism is Christian in character.  Reading his manuscript, Canadian Corporatism, we can see what he is aiming at in the last days of his life while publishing “Inevitability”.  The “great Chris-tian,” Arcand, “desires its triumph”.

Footnote 7:  The phrase “de leurs successeurs socialistes, communistes et marxistes” in the Balder version replaces the phrase “de leurs successeurs socialistes et communistes” in the 1950 typed draft.

Footnote 8:  In the 1950 manuscript, Arcand says:  “En attendant, ce sont encore les poisons des Encyclopédistes, de leurs successeurs socialistes et communistes, qui se partagent la direction politique du monde, sauf dans quelques rares pays comme le Portugal et l’Espagne, et justement bafoués par les deux côtés du “rideau de fer” parce qu’ils sont chrétiens.”  Translating the italics:  “except in those few rare countries like Portugal and Spain, precisely treated with con-tempt by both sides of the ‘iron curtain’ because they are Christian.”   The Balder version, apparently based on the published version, says:  “En attendant, ce sont encore les poisons des Encyclopédistes, de leurs successeurs socialistes, communistes et marxistes, qui se partagent la direction politique du monde tant en Occident que dans les pays situés derrière les ‘rideau de fer’ et de ‘bambou’.”  In italics:  “as much in the West as in countries behind the “Iron” and “Bamboo” Curtains”.  In the Balder version, Arcand clarifies the two main communist areas, but omits any mention of Portugal and Spain.

Footnote 9:  This is an echo of Arcand’s 1954 talk, Le Christianisme a-t-il fait faillite?  (Is Christianity Bankrupt?).

Footnote 10:  Pay close attention:  Arcand’s Corporatism is a Christian system.  In proposing it—obviously—he is countering “anti-Christian messianism”.

Footnote 11:  A change has been made to the English translation since it first went online in December 2018.  The phrase “who will not blush to glory in” replaces the phrase “who do not blush to exalt themselves in”.


Citation, Chicago style, for the 5-page draft text that I used to slightly revise and then to footnote my English translation of “Inevitability”:

Document source:  Author (Arcand, Adrien).  (Draft) “L’inevitabilite d’une reconstruction sociale”  -1950.- Initials A.A. in lower right corner of page, identifier (C004).  Box number 002, folder number or item number 1672-1676. Adrien Arcand Collection. Concordia University Library, Special Collections, location of repository (Montreal, Quebec, Canada.)


Subscribe and check back!  The big 74th is coming with more free downloads!

Abonnez-vous et revenez!  Le grand 74ème arrive avec plus de téléchargements gratuits!