| |
The New Generation of Organised Racialism in Canada
| |
|
by Matthew Lauder
Canada is, however, experiencing a dramatic increase in a new form of organised racism that represents a greater threat to the maintenance of democracy and multiculturalism because of it subtle approach and pervasive nature. This new generation of racialist groups strategically conceals or camouflages a racialist agenda behind a moderate and politicised message while associating with radical organisations that are openly racist and have a history of violent activity. The concern is that this new generation of organised racialism, by publicly denouncing violence and camouflaging racist language while maintaining connections to the radical right, are marketing a seemingly less-extreme white supremacist ideology to mainstream society that result in mass acceptance of racist beliefs. In his analysis on racism in Canada, Anthony Richmond argues: "Canadians appear to reject explicit racism," but that many subscribe to "implicitly racist attitudes and practices," indicating that many Canadians are open to moderate racist themes.1 Moreover, Peter Li argues that an "extreme position [i.e. blatant white supremacists], which many people have little difficulty condemning, only makes milder versions more reasonable and thus more tolerable," and may led to the promotion of an undercurrent of accepted racism. 2 In other words, by only denouncing extreme forms of racism, society creates an environment that condones (through toleration) moderate forms of racism that serve to undermine the foundations of democracy, inclusiveness, and multiculturalism.
This paper examines the new generation of organised racialism in Canada by outlining the growing use of camouflaged language and surrogate issues to advance racialism and identifying the connections of the seemingly moderate far right with overtly racist radical organisations. In addition, this paper will examine the trend of involvement by the new generation of organised racialism with mainstream political parties and will restructure the system of categorisation of the far right that takes into consideration the subtle shift towards radicalism.
Redefining the Organised Far Right Movement
The far right movement is highly complex, being comprised of several different classes of organisations, ranging from the more politicised anti-immigration and New World Order conspiracy groups to aggressively anti-Semitic and violence-prone neo-National Socialist groups and Christian Identity organisations. Although most far right groups share a common worldview, in particular the idea that western, Christian society is under attack by formidable and antithetical global forces, there are a number of inherent differences in structure, ideology, and sanctioned behaviour. Michi Ebata argues that "not all right-wing extremists are the same; some, particularly at the political end, have moderated their positions to achieve other objectives." 3 It is therefore necessary to accurately identify the various categories or classes that comprise the far right movement.
At its most basic, the far right movement refers to the position of the political spectrum beyond that of mainstream conservative political thought and action, and is comprised of groups that adhere to an ideology based on concepts such as racial superiority, anti-communism, anti big-government, anti-immigration, and anti-Semitism, and are commonly identified as racial supremacist organisations or hate groups. 4 Li furthers the definition, noting racial supremacist groups are organized social groups that operate with the "objective of dehumanising their target victims and excluding them from equal participation in society as steps to advance the cause of building a political and social system based on white supremacy." 5 In order to achieve these goals, white supremacist groups engage in highly structured, group-oriented activities that may include near criminal acts or the use of violence. 6
In his analysis of the far right movement in Canada, Stanley Barrett provides a more definitive account of the far right movement by dividing it into two general categories, the 'fringe' and 'radical' right. 7 Barrett's categories are primarily based on two aspects: (1) the approach and tactics used by the groups to advance the cause of white supremacy (including that of violence and subversive tactics) and, (2) whether a group publicly supports an ideology of racialism or the goal of racial separation (i.e. the forced separation of the races and the establishment of a white nationalist state). 8 For Barrett, the fringe right is largely comprised of single-issue groups (such as freedom of speech, anti-immigration, or foreign aid reform), which seek to establish a populist movement and influence mainstream political parties through non-violent means. Moreover, the fringe right publicly denounces racialist objectives, noting that the "mode of operation" is to "establish definite organisations but to leave the line between members, potential members, and the rest of society blurred and fluid." 9 Groups within the fringe right, therefore, attempt to operate within the mainstream, identifying themselves as legitimate political lobby groups, but are far enough removed from the mainstream that they identify themselves as being fundamentally different from established conservative political parties (in fact, the members normally recognise themselves as being 'true conservatives'). 10 In contrast, radical right groups are openly racist, often use violence, and operate as a closed social group. 11 Barrett notes the thematic differences between the fringe and radical right:
Although a precise account of the rightwing at the time, Barrett's analysis now falls short of accurately identifying the complex nature of the contemporary far right movement in Canada. Stephen Scheinberg points out that Barrett's analysis "does not appear to be too useful" because many (seemingly) non-violent fringe leaders, such as Fromm, could easily fit in the categories reserved for violent skinheads and other extremists and that racialist groups, in particular the racist skinhead movement, has become a force throughout Canada, including Quebec. 14 The problem with the applicability of Barrett's analysis to the contemporary far right movement is that, prior to the creation of the Heritage Front in 1989, co-operation between fringe and radical organisations was practically non-existent. Barrett argues: "[It] is a gigantic leap from the fringe to the extreme right. And once it has been made, very few people ever climb back down and march to a more moderate tune." 15 In other words, there was a clear demarcation between the fringe and radical right.
Today, the separation between the traditional fringe and radical right is not clear, as many groups belonging to the fringe right category (as identified by Barrett) have developed a close working relationship with radical groups. For example, many ultra-conservative, pro-European heritage lobby groups, such as CAFE and the Canadian Heritage Alliance (CHA), have formed concrete ties with more radical organisations (such as the Heritage Front or the National Alliance) that publicly promote racial separation. In fact, Paul Fromm, the director of CAFE, stood next to a Nazi flag at a 1990 Heritage Front meeting and spoke to a room full of racist skinheads, stating: "We're all on the same side. We're up against an enemy, as I see it, the equivalent of an army of occupation� and the only way we are going to regain out country is through unity, unity, unity." 16 More recently, Fromm spoke at a meeting in the United States, along with former KKK leaders David Duke and Don Black, about racial problems and a lack of free speech and was touted as "Canada's leading Nationalist." The groups that comprised Barrett's fringe right, therefore, have become increasingly radicalised, effectively contributing to overt forms of racialism by camouflaging a radical message behind a seemingly moderate façade and working with extremist groups behind the scenes. Ebata argues:
Similar to Barrett's original analysis, violence alone does not make a determination in this new system, but rather the placement of a group into a specific category is dependent upon a number of variables including the openness of adherence to (and public support of) a racialist ideology, the tendency or willingness to use violence to achieve organisational goals, and the level of hostility shown towards target groups. 19 Ebata uses similar themes in his analysis of the far right, arguing: "The most outstanding features of the extreme right are, then, the centrality of hatred towards outsiders, nationalism, anti-Semitism, and violence. Selecting these themes provides a point of departure for contrasting the variety of manifestations of the extreme right." 20 Therefore, far right groups, such as CAFE and the Canadian Heritage Alliance (that would qualify as fringe right in Barrett's analysis) fall into the crypto-radical category (because of efforts to camouflage racialism and links to radical groups) while organisations with a pattern of violence and racist behaviour (such as the Heritage Front, Aryan Nations, and the World Church of the Creator) are considered radical or extreme rightwing groups. Moreover, groups belonging to the sovereign citizen's movement (i.e. the anti-tax and anti-government movement) and world conspiracy movement (i.e. the anti-UN or anti-New World Order movement), qualify as the new fringe right.
The New Generation: Concealed and Surrogate Racism
One of the most significant fringe right groups in Canada was the Edmunde Burke Society (EBS), a group established in 1967 by Paul Fromm, Leigh Smith, and Don Andrews to oppose communism, abortion, immigration, and big government. Fromm, however, left the group in 1972 after it was renamed the Western Guard and appeared to be moving towards a more radical mandate. Fromm's decision to leave the group was based on the idea that the use of violence and overt connections to racism (i.e. anti-Semitism) were self-defeating to the goal of establishing a populist movement; that is, the Canadian majority would not support a far right group that relied upon violence to achieve social or political goals. 21 Barrett noted: "Towards the end of the 1970s, a new sophistication could be detected in the organisations with which Fromm was associated�. No doubt Fromm and the people surrounding him by the late 1970s and early 1980s had become more polished [and] more professional." 22
Fromm, however, did not leave the far right movement after resigning from the Western Guard. In 1973, he established a university-based fringe right organisation, the Campus Alternative, which "provided an opportunity for conservative students to exchange views." 23 By 1975, the Campus Alternative had affiliates at York University and the University of Waterloo. Fromm then established the Citizens for Foreign Aid Reform (C-FAR), a single-issue special interest group dedicated to criticising the government's foreign aid and immigration policy, in 1979 and the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) in 1981. According to Fromm, "CAFE came into existence because of the very real efforts by both the establishment and the far-leftist forces to stifle conservative discussion especially of race and immigration." 24 In 1997, Fromm established the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee (C-FIRC), an organisation dedicated to lobbying mainstream politicians on immigration issues and to build a mass European cultural and heritage reformist movement built on the notion of 'Canada first.'
The basic ideological belief guiding CAFE, C-FAR, and CFIRC holds that there is a trend of social decay and racial replacement occurring in western society. In response to this perceived crisis, these groups capitalise on latent fears and anxieties in order to encourage a socially acceptable form of xenophobia by reinforcing the perception that white, European-Christians are being replaced by third-world immigrants and that this 're-settlement' is part of a massive conspiracy constructed by the forces of the New World Order. An editorial in the Times Colonist argues: "Groups like the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee are taking valid questions and concerns about immigration policy and dragging them across the line using them to legitimate weak-minded xenophobia, pandering to our basest emotions and fear." 25 Christopher Flood notes that similar far right organisations in Europe, in particular the National Front in France, have made immigration the "centrepiece of their political platforms" and have linked immigration with a range of social and economic problems. 26 In addition, Li argues: "In reality, these groups are effective in providing the means and the rationale for disgruntled and marginalized individuals to divert their hostilities and blames to racial minorities for what they see as a 'paradise lost.'" 27
One of the most significant anti-immigration campaigns co-ordinated by CFIRC was in 1999, after a number of Chinese migrants sought refugee status in Canada. Harry Abrams, a B.C. representative of the B'nai Brith who monitors the activities of Fromm and CFIRC, noted that the issue of illegal immigrants is being used to "piggyback" a broader xenophobic campaign. 28 The theory of replacement is identified in a C-FAR newsletter:
There are two other groups, Straight-pride Incorporated and the Canadian Heritage Alliance, currently advancing racialism through a non-direct platform. Straight-pride protests started in London, Ontario, in 1998 and were organised by Raphael Bergmann, in conjunction with several members from a racist skinhead group called the Northern Alliance, to protest the annual gay pride parade. Bergmann, however, publicly denies any connection to organised racism and argues that his anti-gay protests are a forum to fight political correctness, not to promote racism. Bergmann argues: "Our event [Straight-pride] was less about local contentions over gay/straight relations than about the much broader aspect of greater government interference in our lives, whether it be from human rights commissions or non-elected judges who make rulings on issues far too important not to take to a national plebiscite." 31
However, Bergmann's connection to radical groups runs counter to his claims of innocence. From 1995 through 1996, Bergmann was highly involved in the Heritage Front and the World Church of the Creator, a US-base neo-Nazi group, and had organised a number of neo-Nazi rock concerts in the London area that drew more than 250 people. In 1997 and 1998, Bergmann spoke at two Ku Klux Klan rallies in the United States - one in Erie, Pennsylvania, the other in Ann Arbor, Michigan - at which he repeatedly yelled "white power." In addition, Bergmann is the former leader of the Northern Alliance, which the police have labelled "urban terrorists," 32 and has expressed interest in re-starting the Northern Alliance, given the proper political climate. 33 In early 2000, Bergmann mentioned that organised racism was not marketable in Canada, and that an alternative forum was necessary. 34 To this end, Bergmann identified that the Straight-pride protests were an effective method to achieving mainstream respectability and that it is an issue that can be sold to the majority of Canadians. Furthermore, Bergmann noted that the protests were effective in gaining media attention, and that his plan to run for city council was dependent upon building a large anti-political correctness and free speech movement in the area. 35 Further indicating that racial issues play a fundamental role in his worldview, Bergmann shouted, "multiculturalism is the worst kind of racism," at anti-racist protestors during a meeting co-sponsored by CAFE and CHA in Kitchener on March 23, 2001. The meeting was well attended and included several racist skinheads from a local group called the Tri-City Skins.
Established in 2000, the Canadian Heritage Alliance (CHA) is the newest progressive far right organisation in Canada and has quickly gained a nationwide membership. On the CHA website, the group identifies itself as a "collection of dissident writers and concerned Canadians who have united to act as a political lobby group" to "urge politicians to take a more active 'Canada for Canadians' approach to dealing with Canadian issues and to stabilize immigration." 36 Denying any connection to organised racism, the group asserts that it is seeking to return Canada to a more "traditional European way of life." Law enforcement agencies disagree and have publicly identified the group as a white supremacist organization with ties to established hate groups. 37 Melissa Guille, one of the leaders of the group, rejects the label, preferring to call the CHA a 'nationalist organisation' rather than a 'hate group.' Guille argues: "We're trying to remove the anti-white sentiment in society" and "fix a country that has really been in decline for our children." 38 Although Guille denies that the CHA is a racist organisation, she does admit that it "appeals to those who believe in white supremacy and said they are welcome to join." 39
The history of the CHA, and the individuals involved in its creation, indicates that the group has significant connections to formal racialist organisations and attempts to promote a subtle and pervasive form racism. During the organisation's formation, the leaders of the group sought advice regarding organisational structure and policies from a number of well-known far right extremists including Paul Fromm and Marc Lemire (the director of the Heritage Front). 40 Regarding immigration, Lemire suggested:
Lemire had a significant impact on the formation of the group's ideological structure, and many of his suggestions regarding policy were implemented. For example, CHA policy states that, "immigration will only be permitted on the basis of skill and academic qualification." Moreover, the policy argues: "All immigrants and refugees must apply from abroad and will be vetted abroad� [and] Canada's 'occupational' needs list will be eliminated and funding to "immigrant aid" groups will be reduced." Lastly, the policy declares that Canada is to pull out of the UN and NATO and will only participate in foreign affairs if it is in Canada's interests and that only "Canadian citizens will be allowed to access social programs such as Social Services, Legal Aid, etc." 42
The CHA has also established links with a number of other radical groups, including the Kitchener-based Tri-City Skins and the Canadian Ethnic Cleansing Team, to organise recruitment campaigns and public protests.
The Far Right and Mainstream Politics
One of Fromm's primary objectives is to lobby mainstream politicians in order to influence policies on health, crime, and immigration reform, and it appears that he has had some success. In June 2001, it was revealed by Jonathan Gatehouse that Leon Benoit, the former immigration critic for the Canadian Alliance, had "face to face meetings" with Fromm dating back to 1999. 43 In the article, Benoit admitted to meeting with Fromm at his office in Ottawa and in Toronto, stating: "[S]ome of the things he said made a lot of sense. I think he offered some good suggestions for changing the immigration system." 44 Fromm's attempt to influence the political mainstream via immigration reform is not a new. According to Barrett, Fromm considered immigration to be a more "volatile issue to raise with MPs than foreign aid." 45 In 1999, Fromm booked a hospitality suite at a conservative political conference in Ottawa at which he invited "young tories and reformers" to join him to discuss immigration and free speech issues. 46
Leon Benoit is not the only Canadian Alliance member to have contact with the far right; apparently, Raphael Bergmann contacted Rob Anders, the Canadian Alliance member who voted against granting Nelson Mandela honorary Canadian citizenship, regarding his Straight-pride protests. 47
The connection to the Canadian Alliance by the far right is much deeper than merely advising on policy. In a conversation with Fromm, it was suggested that his group was contacted by members of the Canadian Alliance to collect information that would publicly damage Warran Kinsella, a Liberal Party advisor and author, in retaliation for articles critical of the Canadian Alliance. 48 Indicating that contact may have occurred between the Canadian Alliance and the far right, Lemire (who also acts as Fromm's web-master) notes, "As for if we were approached by people in the Canadian Alliance to them information on Kinsella� Well that's between us and them." 49 Lemire further states, "Yes it is true we are building a file on him through our website�. We expose his lies, half-truths, and other shenanigans he is up to." 50
It was revealed in late 2000 that several far right members and extremist were also members of the Canadian Alliance, including Doug Christie, Marc Lemire, Paul Fromm, and Doug Collins. 51 However, the Canadian Alliance quickly expelled the far right extremists just prior to the federal election in 2000. Lemire was furious with the decision and in a letter to the Canadian Alliance, states:
Certainly, involvement in Canadian Alliance by the far right is not new. In a detailed report by the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC) in 1994, it was revealed that several members of the far right, in particular the Heritage Front, had become members of the Reform Party, the predecessor to the Canadian Alliance, and many even served as part of a security team for Reform meetings in Ontario. 53 In fact, Fromm permitted a local representative of the Reform Party to set up a table at a 1991 C-FAR meeting in order to recruit new members. The SIRC also indicates that, in 1989, Fromm asked a Reform Party member "to organize a centennial party in celebration of Adolf Hitler's birthday" and that the gathering was to "involve as many local skinheads as cared to attend." 54
The Canadian Alliance is not the only mainstream political party to be involved with the far right movement. In late 1999, the Freedom Party of Ontario, a civil libertarian political party, came to the aid of Raphael Bergmann and another former member of the Northern Alliance, a London-based racist organisation, after representatives of the London Police Service requested they attend a meeting at police headquarters. Robert Metz, the president of the Freedom Party wrote several letters on Bergmann's behalf, criticising the police service. In addition, Paul Blair, the Executive Officer of the Freedom Party, handed out business cards and party brochures to Straight-pride protestors, including racist skinheads, in Toronto in June 2000.
Summary
Unlike the far right movement in the 1970s and 1980s in which two separate forms of organised racism existed, the contemporary far right is marked by the emergence of the new generation of subtle racism, a movement that strategically manipulates legitimate issues to market racism to a mass audience while maintaining links with violence-prone extremist groups. In order to accommodate for the shift towards radicalism, it is necessary to re-structure our understanding of the far right movement and introduce a new conceptual category, the crypto-radical right, to Barrett's original analysis. While overt racist organisations are the most recognisable, they do not represent a threat to the maintenance of democracy and multiculturalism in Canada; rather the real threat emanates from this new generation of racialists, the crypto-radical rightwing, that strategically engage in the subtle manipulation of legitimate political and social concerns that promotes a moderate form of racism. In essence, the new generation of far right groups recognise that overt racism is rejected by most Canadians and attempt to establish a populist racist movement by exploiting fears and insecurities (in particular immigration issues) that encourage a tolerated form of racism. Li argues that, when placed next to radical or extremist groups, moderate or concealed racist groups are more likely to be tolerated. The concern is that the crypto-radical rightwing has the potential to market an extreme form of racism to a mass audience and mainstream politicians in a seemingly moderate package that will undermine a policy of multiculturalism and democracy in Canada.
1 Anthony H. Richmond, "Refugees and Racism in Canada," Refuge 6 (2001): 12-20.
Matthew Lauder is a PhD student conducting research in Canada. 
comments about this article? give us feedback
|
or much of the 20th century, openly racist organisations, such as the Ku Klux Klan, National Unity Party, Canadian Nazi Party, Edmunde Burke Society, Western Guard, Nationalist Party of Canada, Aryan Nations, and the Heritage Front, have dominated the far right movement in Canada. When most Canadians think of organised racism (i.e. hate groups), they automatically envision the violent neo-Nazi skinhead; and the mainstream media, through superficial and sensationalistic analyses of racism in Canada, reinforces this image. In reality, neo-Nazi skinhead groups make up a very small portion of the overall far right movement and do not achieve widespread growth because they normally function as closed organisations outside of the purview of mainstream society.