Jewish Dissent in Canada:
The United Jewish People's Order
This paper will focus on the United Jewish
People's Order (UJPO) to examine how the
organized Jewish Community has handled dissent.
We will explore the rationale and actions of the
Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) in the 1951
expulsion of " left-leaning" organizations,
namely the United Jewish People's Order, at the
time the largest fraternal Jewish organization in
Canada, and related institutions such as the
Yiddish schools. Examples will be included of the
contributions that such a dissenting organization
can make to the Jewish community.
The principle linking democracy with dissent was
basic to the formation of the Canadian Jewish
Congress in 1919. This was participatory
democracy in action, for it encompassed a
diversity of political, religious and ideological
viewpoints as well as a broad social class
representation in Canadian Jewish society. For
the first time, newly arrived immigrant Jews
experienced the potential and the possibilities
of a democratic society.
The CJC was dissolved soon after, but was revived
in 1934 as the Jewish community became
increasingly alarmed by Hitler's rise to power.
This time, however, "left" organizations were not
invited to participate.
In December 1943, the left was invited to join
the Canadian Jewish Congress after the Soviet
Union became Canada's ally, and pro-Soviet
sympathies became "kosher." Jewish Communists
held elected public office in three
provinces-Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba.
In analyzing the CJC today, Harold M. Waller"1
finds that "It is no secret that the present
system is not well equipped to cope with
dissent." Rather, it seeks accommodation and
consensus. Waller examines several factors that
"constitute a check on democratic forms" in the
present structure of the CJC. These include: an
affluent, elite leadership that perpetuates
itself; behind- the-scenes negotiations;
dependence on and influence of "a few wealthy
families," and the process of decentralization
whereby power in the Jewish community resides
with local Federations rather than with the CJC.
Judah Shapiro, writing in the Labour Zionist
magazine Viewpoints, argues that the Jewish
future is endangered by an organization in which
"power lies in the hands of those who give the
money, and by far the largest portion of the
total funds available to the Jewish community is
provided by the small minority of contributors."
Lewis Coser points out that2 "A large group that
permits expression of dissent, and hence
conflict, within its ranks draws its strength and
cohesion from its flexibility." At times of great
external pressure, a community rather than being
flexible will become a closed group, and dissent
then becomes dysfunctional. In the Cold War
atmosphere UJPO became the scapegoat, the
"enemy," and had to be excommunicated to
strengthen the inner solidarity of Congress.
The groundwork for UJPO dates back to the 1920s.
The predecessors were the Labour League in
Toronto and the Canadian Workmen's Circle in
Montreal and Winnipeg. In 1945, the
organizations in different provinces united to
form the United Jewish People's Order (UJPO).
Imbued with a socialist ideology, these groups
were organizations of Jewish immigrant workers
that provided mutual fraternal assistance,
medical help, and financial aid to their Jewish
working-class members. They also supported a
rich cultural and political milieu with shules
(schools), choirs, mandolin orchestras and wind
orchestras, sports groups, dance and theatre
groups, lectures, symposia and panels on social
and political events. These organizations grew
rapidly.
Politically, these organizations were pro-Soviet
and internationalist in outlook, but at their
core, they were concerned with maintaining and
strengthening their identity as Jews, as
radicals, and as secularists. Many radical Jews
celebrated the emergence of the new Soviet Union
in 1917 because they saw Czarist anti-Semitic
laws limiting the lives of Jews rescinded,
Yiddish given official status as a minority
language, and public support for Yiddish culture
extended.
But not all Jews of the left were sympathetic to
the creation of the Soviet Union, and they
fiercely opposed the pro-communist left influence
in the Jewish community. Essentially, this was a
battle between the communists, the non-communists
(primarily the Labour Zionists), and the Jewish
elites for the loyalties of the Jewish working
class. The debates were passionate and were
carried on not only within the community but
within families.
Very early on, the Labour Zionists came to
dominate the Canadian Jewish Congress. The
ideological differences were irreconcilable, and
in their insecurity as new Canadians, they were
anxious to prove that Jews were good Canadians.
Militant activity challenging the government was
therefore unacceptable. Only polite
representation by the few Jewish elected
politicians was acceptable. Critics referred to
this as the "sha shtil" (hush hush) policy of
Congress.
By the late 1940s, Canada was immersed in Cold
War politics. In explaining Cold War Canada,
Whitaker and Marcuse argue3 that the prevailing
atmosphere was not caused by Soviet duplicity or
Gouzenko's defection but rather the striking
continuity of anti-Communism throughout the era.
The first major instance of the Cold War that the
Canadian Jewish community had to contend with was
the Padlock law in Quebec. Enacted by Quebec
Premier Maurice Duplessis in 1937, the law
allowed the Attorney General to close-to
"padlock"-any house for a year that officials
deemed was used "to propagate communism or
bolshevism by any means whatsoever."
On January 27, 1950, 21 officers descended on the
Morris Winchevsky Cultural Centre of the UJPO in
Montreal and padlocked it, carting away several
truckloads of office machines, organizational
records, files, correspondence and library books.
Protest resolutions from across Canada indicated
a strong reaction amongst the Canadian public.
Saturday Night magazine, for example, was
outraged at the use of a law that made Duplessis
" policeman, prosecutor, judge, sheriff and
hangman."
The silence from the Canadian Jewish Congress was
deafening, although some Jewish organizations
within Congress passed formal resolutions
protesting the use of the Padlock Law. Given the
history of anti-Semitism in Canada, the CJC's
position in defense of civil liberties was
generally strong. However, dealing with
pro-Communist groups in their midst was quite a
different matter, and Congress officers decided
that they "do not believe that the closing of the
United Jewish People's Order is a Jewish issue."
Morris Biderman, secretary of the United Jewish
People's Order at the time challenged Congress
leaders inaction. "Surely the reactionary
anti-Semitic record of Premier Duplessis is too
well known to be hidden under a cloak of
red-baiting and the cry of "Communist."
UJPO's campaign against German rearmament was
both a challenge and an embarrassment to the
Congress leadership with its strong Liberal ties.
This campaign was part of a broad international
protest movement and was supported by all
branches of Congress.
The CJC sent a delegation to meet with Lester
Pearson, the Minister of External Affairs. For
the United States, however, German rearmament was
integral to their Cold War policy. Pearson
informed the delegation that the Canadian
government supported rearming Germany "to contain
the expansion of communism." Following this
meeting, Saul Hayes recommended that the campaign
be abandoned. However, UJPO was convinced that
German rearmament constituted a critical danger
to world Jewry and was determined to continue
their campaign. UJPO members have consistently
maintained that the campaign against German
rearmament was the real reason for Congress'
drastic action in the expulsion of UJPO.
Two other world issues at that time were reasons
used by the CJC in expelling UJPO: the Korean War
and the Stockholm Peace Petition. UJPO
wholeheartedly supported the petition, while
vigorously opposing the Korean War. The CJC,
following Canada's position on both issues,
supported the Korean War and opposed the
Stockholm Peace Petition. On April 29, 1951, in
a meeting chaired by CJC President Sam Bronfman,
the decision was made to expel UJPO.
The CJC leadership was outraged at its inability
to control the leftists who continued their
campaigns, and called upon the Executive
Committee of the CJC to take disciplinary action.
The minutes of the above meeting state that,
"views and actions of the left-wing oriented
group [UJPO] stems out of an ideology rooted
outside of Canadian Jewish life" and "no
constructive purpose can be served by left-wing
elements in their further association with
Congress."
Decisions made by the Executive Committee
normally require the approval of the entire
Congress plenary. In this instance, however, the
Executive was concerned that this was too risky.
It seemed a better strategy for each of the four
councils to meet separately.
The decision at this point was not about varying
positions on current world issues. Rather,
there was but one concern. Jewish "left-leaning
organizations" were henceforth not to be
considered part of the Jewish community. Three
out of the four regions were required for
ratification. This was accomplished through
limiting the vote to members of the regional
councils only. In the Pacific region, where all
delegates were allowed to vote, the resolution
was turned down.
The East and Central regions did not present a
problem. Winnipeg (Western region) and Vancouver
(Pacific) proved to be more difficult to
convince. Several influential Winnipeg Jews had
reservations about the implications of such a
move, as it changed the nature of the CJC. Now
it was to exclude, not include.
The Jewish left-wing organizations stressed in
their statements and rallies that "The
[Canadian] Jewish Congress is built on the
principles of democracy in Jewish life and all
groups and shades of the Jewish community have
the right to freedom of thought in Congress."
They asked, "Will you permit that tolerance and
democracy be abolished in Congress and that
Congress should be transformed into an instrument
of a few individuals who want to rule over Jewish
life?"
A letter from Sam Lipshitz, then chair of the
Council of Progressive Jewish Organizations, to
Samuel Bronfman and Saul Hayes argued that "the
National Executive decision was unconstitutional,
the procedure undemocratic and the vote in favor
at the various regional Council meetings
unrepresentative .... Only 67 members of the 300
Dominion council members, actually voted in
favour of the recommendation."
A memo from Saul Hayes to the Pacific Regional
Council explained why expulsion was necessary.
"When Congress issued a statement patriotically
supporting our government and the United Nations
on the Korea questions Š these groups opposed the
Congress, attacked its politics and chose to
pursue a contrary policy." Similarly, when the
CJC warned against the "fake 'peace' movement"
organized around the Stockholm petition, the
group strongly condemned Congress. "Clearly the
leaders of the Congress in each division have
come freely to recognize that there is not-and
never properly was-any room in the Congress or in
the organized Jewish community for any group that
is so clearly disinterested in Congress
objectives and is so clearly unable to act freely
on Jewish questions except by foreign direction."
The memo spells out very clearly that the
community must speak with one voice, and that
voice must be in harmony with Canadian government
policy. The Canadian Jewish Congress leadership
gives itself the right to dictate what
constitutes Jewish interests. Dissenting voices
must be silenced because they do not care about
"Jewish survival or Jewish values." Thus
dissenting voices that will not accept Congress
discipline because they express their Jewish
interests from within an alternate vision are
deemed damaging to Jewish interests and unworthy
to be part of the established Jewish community.
Within the context of Cold War Canada, the
situation within the Jewish Community was not
unlike that of other institutions throughout the
country. Similar processes of ousting
pro-Communist elements were found in the union
movement (United Electrical Workers, Canadian
Seaman's Union, Mine-Mill, Needle Trades) as well
as in other ethnic communities. The parallels to
these even within the Jewish community and what
was happening in other organizations is
unmistakable. Any position that challenged
Canadian government policies was deemed to be
disloyal and un-Canadian.
The expulsion created a divided Jewish community.
A good illustration of this division can be seen
in Holocaust commemorations and UJPO's campaign
for Holocaust education in the Winnipeg public
school system. The association of these
campaigns with UJPO became more important to the
organized Jewish community than the merits of
the campaign which was subsequently adopted.
This is also an example of the contributions of a
dissenting group to the larger community.
Winnipeg Jewry learned about the fate of the
Warsaw Ghetto uprising two weeks after its final
liquidation, and reacted quicky to the news. The
first "Haskore' (Memorial) Meeting was planned
for Tuesday, July 20, 1943 at the Talmud Torah
Hall. The evening was organized by the Congress
Council, the local wing of the Canadian Jewish
Congress. The Council in Winnipeg incorporated
many organizations with diverse interests and
ideologies. For many years thereafter, the
community united in a twofold mission, to
remember that Jews resisted in the face of
tremendous odds, and to remember the six million
who had perished.
The unity that had brought the Winnipeg Jewish
community together to commemorate the Annual
Warsaw Ghetto Memorial Evenings lasted ten years.
In 1953, after UJPO and other left-wing
organizations across the country were expelled
from the CJC, two separate Memorial evenings in
Winnipeg were held. In 1978, the Winnipeg
section of UJPO decided that yearly Memorial
evenings dedicated to recounting the heroism of
the Warsaw Ghetto fighters were important but
insufficient They decided to mount a campaign to
have Holocaust education included in the public
school curriculum. During the next year, UJPO
presented its brief to ten school boards in the
metropolitan Winnipeg area. At the outset, a UJPO
letter of July 28th 1978 was sent to the Winnipeg
Jewish Community Council inviting the Council to
join in a campaign to promote this issue. This
invitation was rejected. The response from the
Council explained that, "Šsince our Community
Relations Department has already dealt with the
issues raised in your brief we will not be
participating with you in this presentation." The
School Boards that UJPO visited never indicated
in any way that they had received representation
from any other group on this matter.
On Friday February 23, 1979, the Winnipeg Free
Press reported that the Jewish Community Council
had circulated a letter to the various school
boards in the greater Winnipeg area advising them
that the United Jewish People's Order does not
speak for the Jewish community and that UJPO is a
pro-communist organization. In response UJPO
stated that it "never claimed at anytime...that
it speaks for the whole Jewish community .... It
is regrettable that the Jewish Community Council
would stoop to the level of McCarthyism to attack
our organization."
Several years later, Morry Zeilig, UJPO's
Winnipeg National Vice-President, reflected on
this period: "We were the first Jewish
organization to formally request that the School
Board of Winnipeg include in its curriculum the
teaching of the Holocaust. We are happy that
Congress subsequently supported our position. The
Holocaust is now taught in the Winnipeg School
Division's Social Studies on a regular basis."
In 1995, with the re-admission of UJPO into CJC,
UJPO in Winnipeg was invited to hold its annual
Warsaw Ghetto evening as part of Shoah Week. This
has been the pattern ever since, and the Warsaw
Ghetto commemoration continues as a UJPO
tradition.
In 1995, under Irving Abella's presidency, UJPO
was once again invited to officially become part
of the community. With the fall of the Soviet
Union, the "Let My People Go" campaigns of the
CJC for emigration of Soviet Jews were no longer
relevant. At the time, peace in the Middle East
seemed a distinct possibility, and the
anti-communist Cold War hysteria was over. UJPO
was asked to support the general aims of
Congress, which it readily did.
In evaluating this period of history and its
consequences, we recognize the insecurities of
the Canadian Jewish Congress with respect to the
larger Canadian establishment. The Jewish
community was a fairly new immigrant community,
faced with the tragedy of the Holocaust, and
Canadian immigration policies that were
indifferent to the plight of desperate Jewish
survivors. All of these fears became paramount
in the community's decision-making policies with
respect to dissenting voices.
However, given a tradition that purports to value
human rights and civil liberties, Congress'
inability to challenge the violations of free
speech pervasive in this period is not a record
to be proud of. Through its abrogation of
democratic procedures, Congress came to represent
not the community in its entirety, but the
"establishment." Expulsion facilitated the
construction of a fiction of a homogenized
community, one in which all Jews share one
political, social and economic outlook. This is a
distortion, and does not accurately reflect the
reality of Canadian Jewish life. The "right" kind
of association (non- Communist) became the focus,
rather than a concern with the issues facing the
community. This meant that the agenda of the
Jewish left at the time-civil liberties,
denazification, German rearmament, banning the
use of nuclear weapons-were dismissed.
We offer this paper in the hope that this does
not serve merely as ancient history Today we
see that there are new dissenting groups of
idealistic, energetic young Jewish Canadians
committed to a variety of social justice issues,
including local, global, and Middle East
concerns. Often these young people grow up
feeling that their choices are either to be Jews
or progressive social activists; in the Jewish
community it is not easy for the two to be
combined. UJPO offered a model for the successful
blending of the two.
The struggle for greater democracy in the Canadian Jewish community
continues.