Anti-fascism

The Gunnies and the Far Right

Comments Off

Dec 022017

The following is the complete text from a flier antifascists were planning to distribute at a counterdemonstration against a group that had planned to hold a pro-gun rally at the Place du 6 décembre (the memorial to victims of the 1989 antifeminist Polytechnique massacre, in which 14 women were killed) on Saturday, December 2nd. This rally has now been moved outside of Montreal, and as a result the planned counterdemonstrations have been canceled. We still feel it is worthwhile to share this text, which explains the connections between this rally – and the « gunnies » — with the Quebec far right. A more in-depth text on this subject will be coming soon.

Today some self-styled “gunnies” were planning to hold a rally at the memorial for the victims of the Polytechnique massacre, in which 14 women were killed in 1989 by antifeminist gunman Marc Lépine.

We are here to share our solidarity and outrage over this misogynist provocation.

Over the past year we have witnessed a sickening increase in hate crimes, and far-right organizing, across Quebec. This was sparked by a mass shooting at the Islamic Cultural Center in Quebec City, on January 29. The current far-right wave, while focused on Muslims, is hostile to anything that threatens their imaginary “traditional” Quebec society, made up of white, francophone, heterosexual Catholics, with men “protecting” women and laying down the law.

The so-called “gunnies” protest was organized by the collectif Tous contre un registre québécois des armes à feu, and specifically by Conservative Party officials Guy Morin and Jessie McNicoll. It is no surprise that both McNicoll and Morin, along with several people who indicated they would attend the event, are also supporters of various far right groups, such as Storm Alliance, La Meute, and the Three Percenters.

The Three Percenters is a group that many who planned to attend this event, including Guy Morin himself, are also associated with. “Threepers,” as they are called, are a paramilitary group that was started in the United States in 2008, pledging armed resistance against attempts to restrict private gun ownership. However, their political agenda goes far beyond simply supporting gun rights. In the United States, Three Percenters have been actively involved in vigilante patrols along the Mexican border, blocking buses of immigrants who have already been detained, and holding anti-refugee rallies. Threepers have held protests outside mosques, and have been involved in a number of cases of violence, including in November 2015 when one of their supporters shot five people at a Black Lives Matter protest in Minneapolis. In Canada, Threepers have “staked out” mosques and tried to intimidate counterprotesters at anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant demonstrations.

There is clear overlap between Tous contre un registre québécois des armes à feu, the Threepers, and other far-right groups, including the Storm Alliance and La Meute. Several Threepers armed with clubs and wearing the group’s insignia were identified providing security at the recent racist demonstration organized by those two groups on November 25 in Quebec City, and before the facebook event for the December 2 “gunny” rally was taken down, a number of Storm Alliance and La Meute members as well as Threepers had indicated they would attend. At the same time, one of the “gunnies” who made an insulting video accusing the victims of Lepine’s massacre of being “polypleurniches” (“polycrybabies”), Martin Leger, is a former member of the neo-nazi Quebec Stomper scene from which the group Atalante (who were also present on November 25) emerged.

The plan to hold a “gunny” rally at the memorial to the Polytechnique victims is a clear antifeminist provocation. While groups like Storm Alliance and La Meute claim to favor equality between men and women, they routinely deride feminism for having “ruined” women in Quebec, or for being part of a leftist conspiracy to weaken the Quebec nation. These racist groups are mainly interested in positioning white francophone Québécois men as protectors of white women against the threat they feel “other” men pose. And yet, since December 6, 1989, over 1500 women and girls have been murdered in Quebec, generally by white men, often by men they knew. The racism of Storm Alliance, La Meute, and the Threepers will do nothing to protect anyone, but on the contrary will simply lead to heightened violence against women, including and especially women in the communities they target.

We are determined to resist by any means necessary the rise of the extreme right and its racist, sexist, homophobic and transphobic agenda.

Montréal Antifasciste: United against racism, patriarchy and colonialism

Maxime Fiset and His Centre Do Not Speak for Us!

Comments Off

Nov 282017

From Montréal-Antifasciste

As antifascist and anti-racist militants, some of whom have been active for decades in the struggle against the far right in Montréal, in Québec, and elsewhere in Canada, we wish to absolutely disassociate ourselves from the recent statements made in the media by Maxime Fiset, spokesman for the Centre de prévention de la radicalisation menant à la violence (CPRMV), as well as from the overall position he has staked out.

We are well aware of the mainstream media’s taste for simplistic narratives, and of their particular attachment to recognized specialists (always the same ones), who are called upon give their stamp of approval to these one-sided fables. But the issue we are addressing is too important for us to allow the media and its alleged experts the leeway to peddle in falsehoods at the service of a simplistic and counterproductive doctrine that we do not and never will share.

It is worth noting that Monsieur Fiset was an active member of the fascist network, both as a founding member of the Fédération des Québécois de souche and as the local moderator of the white supremacist Stormfront forum, when some of us were quite literally fighting with his little neo-Nazi friends in the streets of our city, and even getting knifed by them is Québec City.

While we have no specific reason to doubt the authenticity of his ideological recantation, you can nonetheless understand the discomfort some of us feel seeing him jump up to speakon our behalf whenever the opportunity arises.

While Monsieur Fiset was once a committed neo-Nazi, his current discourse would be better described as “extreme centrist,” rather than leftist. He sees himself floating above the melee and imagines a certain symmetry between the far right and the far left, even going as far as to minimize the danger of violence posed by the far right compared to the far left. His discourse shares nothing with the political positions held by the greater part of the anti-racist and antifascist opposition, which both historically was and currently is communist, anarchist, and explicitly radical.

The State Anti-racists Have the Left in Their Sights

This isn’t a contradiction that should shock anyone; Fiset has never hidden the fact that he is effectively acting as a representative of a para-police organization, le Centre de prévention de la radicalisation menant à la violence (CPRMV). The government formed the CPRMV in 2015 to counter “radicalisation”among a handful of young Muslims attending certain Montreal CEGEPS.

Fiset has clarified that the CPRMV conducts research in four areas: the right, the left, religious activists, and individuals who radicalize around a personal vendetta. Let’s be perfectly clear: the left (particularly the far left) are not allies of the CPRMV; we are one of its targets.

The CPRMV defines “violent radicalisation” as necessarily involving the intention to use or promote violence in a way that threatens the “social well-being.” It is a given that the application of this formula depends on the ideological criteria of those applying it. It’s also based on a perspective that entirely overlooks the radicalization and militarization of states, as if the state was a neutral body that inevitably provided society’s political ballast. In addition, the CPRMV includes within its purview groups that don’t even fit into its already fuzzy categorization, but which could serve as “incubators” for individuals or sectors that might radicalize in the future. So, what we’re talking about is an extremely broad area of research.

Organizations like the CPRMV are predictable parts of the landscape for those involved in the antifascist struggle. Anti-fascism isn’t simply a struggle between two adversaries: us against the Nazis. It’s a three-way fight, with us not only in a battle with the far right but also against state and para-state organizations, which are just as hostile (if not more so) to the radical left as they are to the far right. Generally speaking, these state and para-state entities have a privileged relationship with the media and with other state bodies, as well as generous funding, all of which allows them to take up a great deal of space in the debate about the far right.

Given that radical antifascists have their historic roots in the revolutionary left, the actions of the state antifascists present us with challenges and with risks. With the resources at their disposal, these groups often release information on the far right that is useful to us. For example, groups like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center in the U.S.remain key sources of information on far-right individuals and organizations. Even when those close to us produce reports on our far-right adversaries, they frequently (but not always) rely on dossiers released by these para-state entities. However, we want to avoid increasing the profile of these groups, because it is more than likely that they will eventually use their position not only to undermine our efforts but also to aid in the repression of radical antifascists and their allies.

The nature of their contribution to this repression takes a number of forms: conflating the far left and the far right; treating oppressive violence and violence against oppression as equivalent; calling for more far-reaching repressive state powers. Of course, these organizations often include well-intentioned people who under different circumstances could be doing valuable work.

But these groups can also act forcibly against us. The best known example is the Anti-Defamation League, which during the eighties went as far as engaging in espionage operations with the South African apartheid regime to collect information on dozens of far-left and anti-imperialist organizations. In some cases, ADL spies even worked to nurture links between neo-Nazis and pro-Palestinian organizations, to open the way for a subsequent hue and cry about the pro-Palestinian groups’ “anti-Semitism.”A scandal exploded when this operation was uncovered in 1993, and after several years in court the ADL was obliged to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages to the militants it had targeted. It’s impossible to know whether the ADL has ever again sunk to this level again since this ignominious episode.

Closer to home, the so-called Ligue antifasciste mondiale (LAM) was active in Montreal during the nineties. The product of street fighting with neo-Nazi boneheads but under growing police pressure, LAM turned primarily to gathering information and specializing in statements to the media. One of LAM’s key priorities was to criticize other antifascist organizations, particularly the Centre canadien sur le racisme et les préjugés. In 1993, when the largest antifascist demonstrations in Montreal in many years were organized against the presence of representatives of Toronto’s neo-Nazi Heritage Front and France’s Front National, LAM acted primarily to sabotage the militant mobilizations. They even went as far as denouncing the anarchists behind the magazine Démanarchie to the police, and then publicly in the media following the Saint-Jean riots in Quebec City, in 1996. Shorty thereafter, it was learned that LAM had been sharing information on the left with the police for years.

We note with some amusement that LAM always worked very closely with Yves Claudé, alias Yves Alix, a “researcher” who has gravitated from the left to the far right over the years. We still have no idea who Claudé actually works for, but he “conducts research”and takes photos of both friends and enemies wherever he goes. His recent “exposé”on antiracists in the pages of l’Aut’journal is little more than a phantasmagorical updating of the sort of disinformation that he has been producing for twenty years now.

The preferred practice of the state antifascist organizations is to play the good cop, to be invited into our spaces, to have a role in our networks, to play the “critical ally” card, all to better understand us and eventually target and effectively destabilize us at the opportune time. How else is one to understand the actions and statements of Monsieur Fiset and the CPRMV?

Maxime Fiset and the CPMVR Actively Undermine the Antifascist Struggle

Until very recently, Monsieur Fiset’s omnipresence was just one more aggravation in the sociopolitical and media landscape. In a recent interview with the community newspaper Droit de parole, he went beyond what common decency permits by describing a group active in the Montreal antifascist scene in hostile and condescending terms, which, as well as fueling discord and providing grist for the police and far-right mills, exposes yet more of our comrades to repression and reprisals.

Last August 20, Monsieur Fiset was everywhere in the media declaring La Meute victorious, following a showdown in Québec City where La Meute was trapped in an underground parking garage for five hours, encircled by hundreds of anti-racists and antifascists. What leap of logic allows him to portray La Meute as victorious in this humiliating situation? To conclude that a group of antifascists who tipped over some dumpsters, threw a few lawn chairs and some other projectiles in the direction of the police, and physically attacked people identified with the ultra-nationalist movement de facto “lost the public relations battle,” on the one hand, de-legitimizes the greater anti-racist mobilization and, on the other, legitimizes La Meute’s anti-racist discourse. (He repeated himself recently, telling Al Jazeera that the far right was currently enjoying a “growing legitimacy.’) The flaws in his reasoning are obvious, and they serve to indicate the major chasm between Monsieur Fiset’s political understanding and that of the majority of the militant antifascist movement.

Monsieur Fiset is dogmatically attached to so-called “nonviolence,”while the international antifascist movement, from its earliest days in the 1920s until now, adheres to a diversity of tactics, including (but not limited to) the use of violence against organized far-right, fascist, and ultra-nationalist currents. The antifascist movement’s goal is to halt the fascist drift by any means necessary. (On this subject, we strongly recommend that Monsieur Fiset read Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook, which could only help to illuminate some of the blind spots in his analysis.)

As Peter Gelderloos wrote in his indispensable book How Nonviolence Protects the State:

We believe that tactics should be chosen to fit the particular situation, not drawn from a preconceived moral code. We also tend to believe that means are reflected in the ends, and would not want to act in a way that invariably would lead to dictatorship or some other form of society that does not respect life and freedom. As such, we can more accurately be described as proponents of revolutionary or militant activism than as proponents of violence.

As antifascists and anti-racists, we are neither intrinsically for nor against violence. That said, we do support direct action and the strategic use of a broad range of tactical approaches. We are politically “radical” (in the etymological sense of the word, i.e., we want to attack the root—radix—of the problem), which isn’t something we try to hide, and we believe that violence is sometimes necessary to counter the far right and reverse the fascist drift. We don’t accept the authority of the state, and we oppose police repression on the part of a state that establishes socioeconomic conditions that favor the emergence of the far right, and then protects that “right” when it marches in the streets and diffuses its toxic ideology.

This “radical” position of simultaneously opposing the far right and the state makes perfectly clear our differences with Monsieur Fiset, his centre, and his moralizing liberal position. We have never heard Monsieur Fiset comment on police violence and abuse in either Quebec City or Montreal.We have never heard him denounce the state’s excessive physical, economic, and symbolic violence or its armed wing that cultivates the terrain on which the far right sprouts.

The moralizing pacifism of people like Monsieur Fiset is part of an ideological hegemony that serves the state and its repression to the detriment of social movements. We believe that the rise of the far right and increasing police repression of any and all expressions of opposition calls for an equivalent increase in resistance.

Numerous tactics working in concert as part of a common strategy is what we will need when the time comes. There have certainly been excesses open to debate, and we haven’t failed to critically address them (including Quebec City on August 20, 2017). That said, it is not the violence as such that needs to be criticized but its unproductive and nonstrategic use in particular circumstances that must be challenged when necessary.

To sum up, we don’t accept Monsieur Fiset speaking to the media in our name, nor for that matter in the name of all anti-racists in general or as a spokesperson for the anti-racist struggle. For us, Maxime Fiset is an impostor. He only represents himself and his centre, which at the end of the day makes him a mouthpiece for the liberal state we are resisting at the same time we fight the fascist scum in the streets.

Quebec City Police Protect Racists

Comments Off

Nov 282017

From sub.Media

On November 25, the largest far-right demonstration in Quebec since the 1930s took place in the provincial capital, including right-wing militias and the openly Neo-Nazi group Atalante Quebec. Riot police violently repressed anti-fascist counter-protesters in order to allow the far-right to march, and 44 comrades were arrested.

Thousands Attend Anti-fascist Demo in Montreal

Comments Off

Nov 142017

From sub.Media

Anti-racists in Montreal have built a coalition of over 150 groups in the struggle against fascism, and on Sunday they staged their first demonstration—a massive, festive “fuck you” to nazis. The night before the demo, some people redecorated a statue of John A. MacDonald, Canada’s first Prime Minister and an architect of indigenous genocide.

For more info go to Montreal Antifasciste’s website.

November 12th, Against Hate or Just Racism?

Comments Off

Nov 132017

Anonymous submission to MTL Counter-info

On November 12th, 2017 a demonstration of about 5,000 people snaked through Montreal under the banner “large demonstration against hate and racism”. This was a good show of force, and tactically an important step on the part of the organizers in a context where far-right groups have been able to match or out-mobilize anti-racists at times in recent months. The demonstration was clearly organized under a left coalition type of model, and as a result, suffered from some rather questionable populist language in their mobilizing call-out. Some of us were a bit concerned about a possible drift towards the de-contextualizing and delegitimizing of the concept of “hatred” which could likely come around to bite anarchists and other radicals in the ass in the future.

Some of us came to participate in the demonstration with critical solidarity, what follows is the text we handed out to participants in the demo and passers-by:

(some will recognize that the bulk of it is taken from Against the Logic of Submission, by Wolfi Lanstreicher)

Hatred

Many of the people at this demo are incensed by the whole drift towards fascism and other forms of authoritarianism in the current political climate. However, there is a constant tension to be consistent with one’s own values and ethics, for the sake of practicality, and especially in times of mass anxiety. With that in mind, as anarchists, we offer a critical take on the discourse of being “against hate”.

Having made the decision to refuse to simply live as this society demands, to submit to the existence it imposes on us, we have put ourselves into a position of being in permanent conflict with the social order. This conflict will manifest in many different situations, evoking the intense passions of the strong-willed. Just as we demand of our loves and our friendships a fullness and intensity that this society seeks to suppress, we want to bring all of ourselves to our conflicts as well, particularly our conflict with this society aimed at its destruction, so that we struggle with all the strength necessary to accomplishing our aim. It is in this light, as anarchists, that we would best understand the place of hatred.

The present social order seeks to rationalize everything. It finds passion dangerous and destructive since such intensity of feeling is, after all, opposed to the cold logic of power and profit. There is no place in this society for passionate reason or the reasonable focusing of passion. When the efficient functioning of the machine is the highest social value, both passion and living, human reason are detrimental to society. Cold rationality based on a mechanistic view of reality is necessary for upholding such a value.

In this light, the campaigns against “hate” promoted not only by every progressive and reformist, but also by the institutions of power which are the basis of the social inequalities (not referring to “equality of rights” which is a legal abstraction, but to the concrete differences in access to that which is necessary in order to determine the conditions of one’s life) that incorporate bigotry into the very structure of this society, make sense on several levels. By focusing the attempts to battle bigotry onto the passions of individuals, the structures of domination blind many well-meaning people to the bigotry that has been built into the institutions of this society, that is a necessary aspect of its method of exploitation. Thus, the method for fighting bigotry takes a two-fold path: trying to change the hearts of racist, sexist and homophobic individuals and promoting legislation against an undesirable passion. Not only is the necessity for a revolution to destroy a social order founded on institutional bigotry and structural inequality forgotten; the state and the various institutions through which it exercises power are strengthened so that they can suppress “hate”. Furthermore, though bigotry in a rationalized form is useful to the efficient functioning of the social machine, an individual passion of too much intensity, even when funneled into the channels of bigotry, presents a threat to the efficient functioning of the social order. It is unpredictable, a potential point for the breakdown of control. Thus, it must necessarily be suppressed and only permitted to express itself in the channels that have been carefully constructed by the rulers of this society. But one of the aspects of this emphasis on “hate” — an individual passion — rather than on institutional inequalities that is most useful to the state is that it permits those in power — and their media lapdogs — to equate the irrational and bigoted hatred of white supremacists and gay-bashers with the reasonable hatred that the exploited who have risen in revolt feel for the masters of this society and their lackeys. Thus, the suppression of hatred serves the interest of social control and upholds the institutions of power and, hence, the institutional inequality necessary to its functioning.

Those of us who desire the destruction of power, the end of exploitation and domination, cannot let ourselves succumb to the rationalizations of the progressives, which only serve the interests of the rulers of the present. Having chosen to refuse our exploitation and domination, to take our lives as our own in struggle against the miserable reality that has been imposed on us, we inevitably confront an array of individuals, institutions and structures that stand in our way, actively opposing us — the state, capital, the rulers of this order and their loyal guard dogs, the various systems and institutions of control and exploitation. These are our enemies and it is only reasonable that we would hate them. It is the hatred of the slave for the master — or, more accurately, the hatred of the escaped slave for the laws, the cops, the “good citizens”, the courts and the institutions that seek to hunt her down and return him to the master. And as with the passions of our loves and friendships, this passionate hatred is also to be cultivated and made our own, its energy focused and directed into the development of our projects of revolt and destruction.

Desiring to be the creators of our own lives and relations, to live in a world in which all that imprisons our desires and suppresses our dreams has disappeared, we have an immense task before us: the destruction of the present social order. Hatred of the enemy — of the ruling order and all who willfully uphold it — is a tempestuous passion that can provide an energy for this task that we would do well to embrace. Anarchist insurrectionaries have a way of viewing life and a revolutionary project through which to focus this energy, so as to aim it with intelligence and strength. The logic of submission demands the suppression of all passions and their channeling into sentimentalized consumerism or rationalized ideologies of bigotry. The intelligence of revolt embraces all passions, finding in them not only mighty weapons for the battle against this order, but also the wonder and joy of a life lived to the full.

Whether you call yourself an anarchist or not, to cling to this ruthless political system at a time when, in most peoples’ eyes, it’s legitimacy is in severe decline is to put the ball completely in the court of reactionaries like Trump, La Meute and Storm Alliance or alternatively, progressives like Trudeau, Zuckerberg, and the NDP. The open and outright white-nationalists and the liberal progressives are simply two sides of the same coin, based in the same progression of the same western civilization. Hence the same discourse around law, order, civility and rights.

While the right takes the mistakes of the anti-globalization movement and turns it into a racist “rebellion” against neoliberalism, towards economic nationalism, we must begin to articulate our own rebellion against this society. A rebellion that takes this as the battle of life against death that it is, one that acknowledges a complete break with the present order as the only realistic solution to our problems. Not only must we organize for self-defense against racists, and respond to the attacks of the powerful against the poor and marginalized. But we must also organize to create our own power and resources for ourselves, build relationships that chip away at whiteness and patriarchy, and launch attacks against the institutions of white-supremacist, colonial, Canadian society.

For a healthy hatred of white-supremacy, capitalism, authority and all social hierarchies!

Some anarchists

Not our website, but good for staying aware of local anarchist initiatives: mtlcounter-info.org

Critical Report on Bill 62, Adopted by the Québec National Assembly on October 18, 2017

Comments Off

Oct 262017

From Montreal-Antifasciste

Over the last few days, you’ve surely become aware of the controversial bill proposed in Québec. Bill 62 seeks to protect the state’s much vaunted “religious neutrality” and is the latest move in a long standing political debate about secularism and religious accommodations—a debate that particularly impacts Muslim women.

On October 18, 2017, the nightmare became reality: Bill 62 on religious neutrality was adopted by the National Assembly by 66 to 51 margin.¹This report provides a critical overview of the law and its implications, as well as its historical roots and its place in a larger social context, specifically focussing on the Islamophobic discourse advanced by the mainstream political parties in Québec, as well as placing it within the framework of the increasing normalization of the rhetoric and mobilizing of far-right Islamophobic and anti-immigrant groups across North America since early 2017. We also think it essential that the issue be approached from a feminist viewpoint—as an example among many others of the restrictions and controls women are subjected to by the state, particularly racialized and Muslim women.

Implications of Bill 62

First, the obvious questions: What exactly does this storied law actually mean? How will it affect our lives? Should we be concerned? It’s true that we often exaggerate the impact of new laws and regulations, adopting a sensationalist and catastrophizing tone. Unfortunately, this isn’t one of those times—we really ought to be concerned. Here’s a far from complete list of particularly unsettling constraints introduced by Bill 62:

Bill 62: MAJOR OBLIGATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS²

OBLIGATIONS
(new legal obligations) RESTRICTIONS
(new legal constraints)

Have your face uncovered if you are receiving or providing a public service;

All municipalities, transportation corporations, and city boroughs, as well as the National Assembly, must conform with the law.

Full veils (niqab, burqa), balaclavas, bandanas, and any other clothing that covers the face are banned from public transit and public libraries;

Ban on receiving or providing services with your face covered in a hospital, unless the face covering is necessary for security or the smooth functioning of the service.

Amended from its initial forme,³ the bill now specifies that requests for “reasonable accommodations” (in exceptional circumstances) can be met if they respect the following conditions :⁴

The request must be serious.

The request must respect the principle of equality between men and women (at least the state’s definition of the concept).

The request must respect the principle of the state’s religious neutrality.

Meeting the demand does not impose “excessive constraints” on the rights of others, the functioning of the service in question, or public health and safety.

Note that some opposition parties, including the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) and the Parti Québécois opposed the bill because it did not go far enough.⁵ Both parties support the complete elimination of reasonable accommodations,⁶ even when requested for religious reasons. Even without the support of the opposition parties the bill was adopted on the simple basis of the Liberal majority. Any opposition came from parties that found it too lenient but agreed with its basic principles.

It is important to stress that the law is not yet in effect. It has been adopted by the National Assembly, but under the Canadian political system the bill must first receive the final approval of the Lieutenant Governor (representative of the British Monarchy) before finally passing into law. We await the final decision of the Lieutenant Governor imminently.⁷

Historical Context

Although there’s been a lot of buzz about Bill 62 recently, it’s not really all that new. It was first presented to the National Assembly in June 2015 (more than two years ago) by StéphanieVallée, Procureure Générale du Québec and ministre responsable de la Condition féminine.⁸ At that point the stated objective of the bill was to “promote the religious neutrality of the [Québec] state.” Vallée offered a more detailed explanation of this objective when introducing the bill:⁹

“We hope this bill will be greeted by unity, given that it represents a position on which we have consensus. We intend to reaffirm that services offered by the Québec state can in no way be influenced by the religious beliefs of its employees or the people receiving the services. Beyond that, we will rely on clear criteria and the conclusions of the courts to address any request for religious accommodation in the public service.”

Initially, the bill’s raison d’être was to create a framework for addressing requests for “reasonable accommodations” of a religious nature; this would impose a number of restrictions and obligations on Québec’s population, particularly:¹⁰

Employees of public services or institutions would be required to “provide evidence of religious neutrality” at work;
Everyone would be obliged to have their face uncovered when providing or receiving public services, unless the professional role required covering the face (e.g., a doctor caring for a patient with an infectious disease);
A “reasonable accommodation” could be considered, but only in very specific circumstances.

Most of these proposals remained intact in the Bill as it was adopted on October 18. The main modifications introduced by Minister Vallée were primarily meant to extend the reach of the law, which now also applies to municipalities and public transit services, as well as the National Assembly, hospitals, and all other public services.¹¹ Alongside religious symbols, the bill also specifically applies to masked militants.¹² Really!?! Not only is this a transparent effort to distance the bill from its stated objectives and its anti-Islamic basis, it’s also silly. How do they think that’s going to work? Do they think that militants regularly go to the post office, the clinic, or the SAAQ masked and ready for a demonstration? Obviously not. This is nothing more than a staged use of militants to shift the focus and deflect criticism, to make it look like the law isn’t actually sexist or racist.

It’s essential to understand that Bill 62 is part of a larger political context—the debate on “reasonable accommodations” and religious neutrality that has been raging for ten years in Québec. This “debate”—in reality, a protracted campaign of racist rabble-rousing—can be traced back to late 2006, when a number of very different requests from people of different faiths were all sewn together into a narrative about members of racialized and non-Christian religious communities making unreasonable demands on a generous and long-suffering Québécois majority.¹³Various forces worked in tandem to construct this narrative. The Quebecor media empire, of which future PQ leader Pierre-Karl Peladeau was at the time president and CEO, specialized in finding mundane examples of someone asking for some accommodation and turning it into the next day’s front-page newspaper story. With the media setting the stage, Mario Dumont, leader of the Action démocratique du Québec political party, declared Quebec a European society with values based on its religious past, attacked the Liberal government for “being on its knees” before immigrant communities, and called for measures to reinforce Quebec’s “national identity” and protect its “traditional values.”

Next, the city council of the small town of Herouxville made a decisive intervention, passing a racist “code of conduct for immigrants” that played on stereotypes of ethnic and religious minorities, particularly Muslims, implying that they needed to be told not to engage in misogynistic practices such as stoning women and genital mutilation. Among other things, the Herouxville code explained, “The only time you may mask or cover your face is during Halloween, this is a religious traditional custom at the end of October celebrating all Saints Day,” and that “the lifestyle that [immigrants] left behind in their birth country cannot be brought here with them and they would have to adapt to their new social identity.”

Herouxville made headlines around the world. Fearmongers had succeeded in whipping up a generalized atmosphere of racist xenophobia, framed also as a criticism of the provincial Liberal government, accused of being “soft” on immigrants, which would reverberate for years to come. (It might be noted that the man behind the Herouxville resolution, André Drouin, was later active in the Canadian far-right group RISE Canada, led by Ron Banerjee, and for a while associated with the openly fascist Fédération des Québécois de Souche, which, following his death earlier this year, eulogized him as a “courageuxcombattant” in the pages of its magazine Le Harfang.)¹⁴

The Liberals under Jean Charest tried to deflate this upsurge by setting up a roaming commission led by intellectuals Gérard Bouchard and Charles Taylor, to hear people’s concerns and table recommendations on how to deal with the “crisis” of requests for reasonable accommodations. The Bouchard-Taylor Commission became a platform for racists across Québec to come out and complain about Muslims and Jews and Sikhs (but especially Muslims), while at the same time legitimizing the initial fiction that growing immigrant populations represented some kind of crisis that needed responding to.

In late summer of 2007, the Parti Québécois proposed a “Quebec Identity Act” which would have removed the right to vote in certain elections from people who failed to pass a French exam and / or would not pledge allegiance to the Québec nation. Then former Liberal MLA Christine Pelchat, as head of the Quebec Council on the Status of Women (a government body), asked the provincial government to pass regulations forbidding public sector employees from wearing “religious clothing,” a call that was echoed by leaders of the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec (FTQ) and the Syndicat de la fonctionpublique du Québec (SFPQ), two of Quebec’s largest trade unions, in their statements to the Bouchard-Taylor Commission in December of that year.

Indeed, sadly, much of the institutional left at the time found itself unable or unwilling to intervene against the rise of racism, as significant sections of not only the trade union movement but also Québec Solidaire, and many whom we would normally assume to be “on the left,” were invested in a white fantasy about a progressive Québécois nation besieged by hostile and right-wing alien forces, and as such either remained silent or actually voiced support for restrictions on minority rights. It was largely outside of the institutional left, in a loose coalition of groups around the organization No One Is Illegal, the Reject Intolerance in Quebec network, that opposition to this racist wave manifested itself.¹⁵ While no new legislation came out of all this, the 2006–2007 “reasonable accommodation” drama served to establish a certain narrative and framework, in which Islamophobia, and most especially a fascination with Muslim women’s clothing choices, became central reference points. Although the media attention abated somewhat, racist myths and fears about Muslims continued to advance just under the surface, throughout Quebec society—most especially, it should be noted, in those areas with the smallest numbers of Muslims.

Fast forward six years, to 2013, a few months after the Liberals lost power following the largest student strike in Quebec history. 2012 had been a massive advance for the radical left, and a potential setback for the neoliberal agenda in Quebec, as hundreds of thousands of people had taken to the streets, tens of thousands repeatedly facing off against police, defying the law, risking arrest, all in the context of a strike against university fee increases, framed by the student leadership in terms of class and anti-capitalism.

Following the Liberals’ defeat due to the strike in 2012, the Parti Québécois, under Pauline Marois, took power. Wasting no time, the themes and narratives from 2006–2007 were dusted off and put to new use, as a so-called “Charter of Québec Values¹⁰” was proposed, which would bar public sector employees from wearing “ostentation religious symbols” at work. Turbans, yamulkes, and most especially hijabs, burqas, and niqabs were to be forbidden.

The “Charter debate” in 2013–2014 renewed all the racist energies of 2006–2007. Pro- Charter forces held demonstrations of tens of thousands of people mixing secularist, feminist, anti-Muslim, and anti-immigrant themes. While Québec Solidaire objected to it in the form proposed, it insisted that it too was in favour of a modified Charter. Important sections of the Québec feminist movement—historically, the strongest feminist movement in Canada—rallied in favour of the Charter, as conspiracy theories were spread accusing the Québec Women’s Federation (which was anti-Charter) of being funded by Saudi Arabia or Iran to advance the “Islamist” agenda. (Meanwhile, less than two years after the 2012 strike, not much attention was paid as the PQ enacted its own series of austerity measures.)¹⁶

While the Charter was not passed, as the PQ lost power to the Liberals in April 2014, something had been set in motion and would not be easily stopped. The years following saw a steady increase in Islamophobic organizing online and the establishment of actual organizations like PEGIDA, les Insoumis, La Meute, and the Soldiers of Odin, many of which had opposition to “radical Islam” as their sole raison d’être. The growth “from below” of such organizations and the nature of their racist fixations were an inevitable result of the racist fearmongering and manoeuvring “from above” that significant sections of the media and political establishment had been engaging in for years.

The impact went beyond the growth of far-right organizations. Each of the mobilizations around racist legislation mentioned above was accompanied by widespread harassment of Muslim women wearing head coverings, ranging from being insulted, yelled at, threatened, spat at, slapped, having their head coverings forcibly removed, etc. Horrifically, following the passing of Bill 62, one white man from Trois Rivières felt empowered to post online about how he had exposed himself and urinated at two Muslim women and was prepared to beat them or anyone who would intervene,¹⁷ as activist groups began receiving reports of women being harassed while taking public transportation. An informal online survey of Muslim women in the province in December 2014 had found that of 338 respondents, 300 had suffered verbal abuse during the period of the “Charter debate.” Muslim women daycare workers in Montreal’s St-Henri neighbourhood had also received death threats and threats of rape after a photograph of them wearing niqabs went viral on Facebook. Halal butcher shops were vandalized, as were mosques. The day after the PQ was defeated in 2014, an axe was thrown through a window at the Centre communautaire islamique Assahaba in Montreal with the words “Fuck Liberals” and “we will exterminate Muslims” written on it; later that same day, someone rode up on their bicycle, took out a baseball bat, and smashed the windows of three cars in front of another Montréal mosque while their owners were inside saying their evening prayers. Violence against Muslims culminated this year in the massacre at the Islamic Cultural Center in Ste-Foy on January 29, where six men were killed and nineteen wounded; an attack that also, obscenely, served as a signal to Islamophobic far-right groups like La Meute to start taking to the streets in unprecedented numbers.

While Bill 62 may be struck down by the courts, just as the Quebec Charter of Values was bound to be had it passed, the real point of these manoeuvres is to send a message about who belongs and who doesn’t, whose culture is legitimate and whose is “foreign.” In a situation where many Québécois feel under pressure from neoliberalism and also feel threatened by demographic changes here, these laws are an attempt to establish who will be in charge, who will be maitre and who will be maitrisée, who will be allowed to feel they are chez nous and who won’t. The true goal is not a whites-only society, or a society where everyone has the same religion, but rather a society in which everyone who is not a white Québécois is made to feel insecure, at risk, a potential target—and as a result, the racists and misogynists hope, will be subservient and won’t step out of line.

Opposition to Bill 62: A Fundamentally Feminist, Anti-Racist, and Anti-Fascist Issue

It’s clear that the text of Bill 62 objectively reflects the previous failed Québec Charter in what it imposes—the difference being that Bill 62 has been adopted and has far greater reach. This is a problematic and troubling law for a variety of reasons. To begin with, it does not itself respect the equality of men and women! As it primarily targets veiled Muslim women, it imposes restrictions, obligations, and controls that disproportionately affect women. More generally, it is one example among many of a government—one made up largely of white men to boot—that is imposing on women rules and regulations about how they choose to dress, for the most part racialized women. Of course, while they are insistent that the law “applies to everyone,” the fact is that it is a law meant to legally enforce the state’s “religious neutrality.” As such, it’s clear that the main target will be those who cover their faces for religious reasons. Regardless of the specifics of the text or the law’s “greater reach,” in practice, it explicitly targets and sanctions veiled Muslim women.

Which brings us to our next point. Does not the liberal concept of “neutrality of the state” presuppose that that our beliefs will not be imposed on others? Without getting into all of the philosophical and ethical principles, is it not clear that this law violates the essential logic of its own core principle? We can only conclude that the government ceases to adhere to its own principle of “neutrality” when it takes measures to impose the beliefs and values of a standardized Québécois society on Muslim and / or racialized women. It’s hypocritical, transparently so.

From an anti-fascist point of view, this law is very dangerous, especially in the current political climate, most particularly since the election of Donald Trump to the American presidency and the killings at the Ste-Foy mosque in January 2017. In effect, since the beginning of 2017, there has been a noticeable and worrisome increase in mobilizing on the part of a number of far-right groups in Québec—notably La Meute, Storm Alliance, and the Soldiers of Odin. Islamophobic, racist, and anti-immigrant groups obviously feel encouraged and validated by the adoption of Bill 62, which normalizes the rhetoric and discourse we are hearing from groups of this sort in Québec and elsewhere. In Québec, this normalisation, and the growth of the far right in general, takes a particular form—specifically, an anti-Islamic form—rendering an Islamophobic, racist, and sexist discourse ubiquitous not only among far-right groups but also, and perhaps more disturbingly, in our political institutions and our mass media. We can see clearly the concrete outcome of the spread of this discourse and the normalization of this increasingly extreme rhetoric when we consider the recent increase in hate crimes committed against Muslims, when we reflect on the spectacular murderous violence committed at the Ste-Foy mosque in January, and when we fail to call Alexandre Bissonnette a terrorist, knowing full well that were he a Muslim we wouldn’t hesitate to do so.

This law poses dangers that go far beyond what it itself imposes; it represents an acceptance and systemic buttressing of hateful ideas and an increasingly grave Islamophobia. As feminists, anti-racists, and anti-fascists, we must take a firm position against this law and denounce it at any cost. We must also show—not only verbally but in action—our solidarity with Muslim women for whom this law may soon be a daily reality.

References

[i] http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/510664/adoption-du-projet-de-loi-62 ; http://www.assnat.qc.ca/fr/travaux-parlementaires/projets-loi/projet-loi-62-41-1.html

[ii] Idem. ; http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/politique-quebecoise/201710/18/01-5140396-le-projet-de-loi-62-adopte-fini-le-voile-integral-dans-les-autobus.php

[iii] http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/510664/adoption-du-projet-de-loi-62

[iv] Idem.

[v] Idem. ; http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/510664/adoption-du-projet-de-loi-62

[vi] http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/politique-quebecoise/201710/18/01-5140396-le-projet-de-loi-62-adopte-fini-le-voile-integral-dans-les-autobus.php ; https://coalitionavenirquebec.org/fr/presse/neutralite-religieuse-la-caq-abrogera-la-loi-62-et-fera-adopter-une-veritable-charte-de-la-laicite/

[vii] http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/politique-quebecoise/201710/18/01-5140396-le-projet-de-loi-62-adopte-fini-le-voile-integral-dans-les-autobus.php

[viii] http://www.fil-information.gouv.qc.ca/Pages/Article.aspx?idArticle=2306104597

[ix] Idem.

[x] Idem.

^[xi] http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/quebec/510664/adoption-du-projet-de-loi-62 ; http://www.assnat.qc.ca/fr/travaux-parlementaires/projets-loi/projet-loi-62-41-1.html

[xii] http://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2017/10/18/le-projet-de-loi-sur-la-neutralite-religieuse-adopte

[xiii] http://bit.ly/2xVVDLe

[xiv] Le Harfang Vol. 5, #5, juin/juillet 2017. It is worth quoting the FQS’ Rémi Tremblay, accurately describing the impact Drouin had had: « Le génie du Code de vie d’Hérouxville ne fut pas d’interdire certaines pratiques liées à l’islam, comme la lapidation, mais bien de faire réaliser à l’ensemble de la province le genre de pratiques qui pourraient fort bien arriver avec ces nouveaux venus provenant de pays où ces pratiques barbares sont us et coutumes. Le but de Drouin ne fut pas l’interdiction dans ce petit village perdu de ces actes barbares, mais bien de réveiller le Québec. Ses détracteurs les moins hostiles parlèrent d’un geste maladroit alors qu’au contraire, ce fut du génie politique. Un petit conseiller municipal sans pouvoir ou influence parvint à faire des pratiques musulmanes le sujet de l’actualité durant des mois. Il ne s’agit pas de maladresse, mais de grand art! »

[xv] http://www.dominionpaper.ca/articles/1589 ; http://solidarityacrossborders.blogspot.ca/2007/02/no-one-is-illegal-montreal-statement-on.html

[xvi] See Partisan #49, « Austérité, racisme, islamophobie : bâtissons notre opposition de classe ! ». http://www.pcr-rcp.ca/fr/3589 « Hausses régressives de divers tarifs (frais de scolarité universitaires, services de garde, électricité) jumelées au maintien des importantes baisses d’impôt consenties aux entreprises par les gouvernements précédents ; coupes systématiques à l’aide sociale, dans la santé et le système d’éducation ; promotion d’un modèle de développement tous bénéfices pour les grandes sociétés minières et pétrolières, au détriment des droits territoriaux des nations autochtones et de l’environnement : la liste est longue et il n’est pas besoin d’en ajouter plus. »

Racist Robert Proulx Store’s Targeted For a Second Time

Comments Off

Oct 242017

Anonymous submission to MTL Counter-info

Hey Robert Proulx,

We broke the windows of your storefront. We guess you don’t have to clean any more paint or posters off of them now. We’ve hated you and your involvement in “La Meute” for a while, and thanks for the communique from when your store was attacked on the 30th of September, we finally got your address.

On October 16th, we rolled up to your store at 6117 rue Belanger and broke your windows. We were happy to see that someone else had spray-painted “RACISTE” in red on the sidewalk directly in the front of your store. Apparently, lots of people hate you, Proulx.

We want to make sure your neighbors understood that this wasn’t random vandalism, so we hand-delivered 40 flyers (from the 30th September attack) explaining your racist and xenophobic bullshit, to the mailboxes of all the surrounding businesses on the street.

Solidarity with refugees and all those targeted by “La Meute”.

Solidarity with everyone who fight fascists – whether in the streets or at their home or jobs.

Nowhere in Montreal is safe for racist scum.

See you next time Proulx.

-The “Fuck Robert Proulx Committee”

ANTI-RACIST ALERT! November, 25 — National Assembly, Québec City

Comments Off

Oct 192017

From Montreal-Antifasciste

Mark your calendars: Montreal mobilization to Quebec City on November 25

Oppose racism and Islamophobia! Support migrants and people of colour!

(please share this callout widely with Montreal-area networks)

Two far-right, anti-immigrant groups — the Storm Alliance and La Meute — are co-organizing a rally in Quebec City on Saturday, November 25 at 2pm at the National Assembly. Since the Ste-Foy mosque massacre in January, these Islamophobic groups have escalated their public presence and activities.Their upcoming rally in Quebec City represents a crucial and necessary moment for anti-racists to come together to oppose racism, Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and growing fascism.

While these far-right groups continue to deny their racism, the Storm Alliance and La Meute have unabashedly allowed the presence of open Muslim-haters, anti-Semites, misogynists, transphobes, neo-Nazis and racist boneheads at their recent protests.

Their planned demonstration in Quebec City on November 25 is part of their continued attempt to mainstream their hatred and scapegoating of targeted and marginalized groups in Quebec society, particularly Muslims and migrants.

Local Montreal-area anti-racists organizations will be mobilizing to travel to Quebec City on the morning of November 25, in support of the anti-racist protests and events to be planned by local allies and organizers.

We encourage the widespread participation of all who care about opposing racism in all its forms, and we will work to make space for people who want to participate in relatively safe and secure ways. Visit the website of Montreal Antifasciste or this facebook event in the coming weeks for more detailed information about Quebec City protests, as well as forthcoming information about travel to Quebec City (and back) from Montreal on November 25.

In the mean time, we encourage you to do the following:

Mark your calendars for November 25, so that you can make time to attend the soon-to-be-announced anti-racist, pro-immigrant demonstration to take place in Quebec City, or to support others who would like to attend.
Share this event widely in your networks.
Attend the Montreal Demonstration Against Hate and Racism that will take place on Sunday,November 12 (2pm, rendez-vous at Parc Émilie-Gamelin, métroBerri-UQAM). This demonstration has been endorsed by more than 85 organizations (and counting).

Info/Contact :
Web: https://Montreal-Antifasciste.info
Fb: www.facebook.com/MontrealAntifasciste/
Courriel: alerta-mtl @ antifa.zone

Together, in solidarity and support, let’s oppose racism in all its forms!

– A callout by local anti-racists and anti-fascists in Montreal

Background Information on the far-right, anti-immigrant, racist organizations Storm Alliance and La Meute:

– Storm Alliance at the Border: “We’re not racists but …”:
https://montreal-antifasciste.info/en/2017/10/10/storm-alliance-at-the-border-were-not-racists-but/

– Storm Alliance Factsheet:
https://montreal-antifasciste.info/en/2017/09/13/storm-alliance-factsheet/

– Neo-Nazi Member of La Meute:
https://montreal-antifasciste.info/en/2017/08/25/neo-nazi-member-of-la-meute-supposedly-suspended-present-at-quebec-city-demonstration/

– Islamophobic panic surrounding “Safarigate”:
https://montreal-antifasciste.info/en/2017/07/05/a-few-things-to-ponder-regarding-the-racist-panic-surrounding-safarigate/

Vandalism of the store of Robert Proulx, member of La Meute

Comments Off

Oct 112017

Anonymous submission to MTL Counter-info

In the early morning of September 30, with the help of a fire extinguisher filled with paint, we repainted brown the exterior façade of JS RP Tech Informatique, owned by Robert Proulx, located at 6117 Bélanger. Robert Proulx is an active member of La Meute, involved with security.

Contrary to what they chant in the media, La Meute is an Islamophobic and racist group, using a media strategy to spread far-right, anti-immigrant, conservative ideologies, and which promotes white supremacy. Almost all public personalities of the right-wing in Quebec are members. Its idols being politicians like Marine le Pen and, Donald Trump. La Meute, with populist discourses that democratically demand the “freedom of expression”, revives the currents of the far-right in a frightening way. Several members are inspired by figures advocating for racist murder and the return of slavery, such as the KKK or Adolf Hitler.

Against the re-emergence of the far-right, there is no mercy. We will do anything to discourage them. We are extremely aware that these ideas have the capacity to wreak havoc, especially in the current context, while every day the media propagandizes against Islam, awakening the Western patriotism that justifies the war against the Islamic State and the military occupation of the Middle East. The spreading of racist ideas contributes to reinforcing the national identity and maintaining an exploited class of proud whites.

We chose to vandalize this store the morning of a right-wing anti-immigration demonstration at the border post of Lacolle, organized by Storm Alliance, another far-right group. Interestingly, Robert Proulx was present. It appears that, on Facebook, he accuses Jaggi Singh as responsible for the vandalism. Well, we don’t know Jaggi Singh. We self-organize, autonomously and informally. Everybody hates racists and Robert Proulx.

We won’t let a racist discourse take more space. We hope that the message is clear.

Welcome to all immigrants, refugees, and people without status. Fuck the borders. Fuck Quebec, fuck Canada, fuck white supremacy. Solidarity with indigenous people in struggle for their autonomy and dignity.

Here’s a poster to put on the walls.

Some anarchists

Storm Alliance at the border: “We’re not racists, but …”

Comments Off

Oct 112017

From Montreal Antifasciste

Is a racist who knows they’re a racist more, or less, racist than a racist who doesn’t know that they’re a racist? It’s a pertinent question, since it seems that a trait almost universally widespread among racists is to energetically deny their racism, a posture epitomized by the classic phrase “I’m not a racist, but …”

The participants in the anti-fascist demo at Lacolle on September 30 were a bit taken aback by the cheerful response of the Storm Alliance demonstrators to the slogan [♫ Tout le monde… déteste les racistes! ♫] (tr: “everyone hates racists!”). The several dozen older folks, white as the snow, who had come from the four corners of Québec to protest “illegal immigration” and “Trudeau government policies,” began to chant the same slogan back at the anti-racist protesters with remarkable enthusiasm.

https://vimeo.com/236340043

This is far from being the only contradiction among the “Stormers” and their associates, but it’s nonetheless impressive to see the level of denial that some people are capable of expressing, unless of course it’s an intentional strategy to give their racist movement a veneer of legitimacy. It’s a hypothesis supported by the messages below, sent by the administrators of the Storm Alliance Facebook page after September 30 in an effort to “clean up” the more obvious of the many disgraceful expressions of hatred and racism on their social media.

Be that as it may, it’s time to set the record straight. It’s all well and good to repeat “everybody hates racists!” like a like a bunch of zombies, but it’s time to draw to the attention among the more naive Stormers that a bunch of unabashed racists and Nazi sympathizers were in their midst that day. Let’s get to it …

///

Let’s start with the subtle reference in the name Storm Alliance (SA) to the Nazi paramilitary organization: the Sturmabteilung (SA). As well as the shared SA acronym, there is a resemblance between the Storm Alliance logo and the Nazi Sturmabteilung logo. Dave Tregget, the group’s leader, insists that any resemblance is coincidental … Ach so, jawohl Herr Führer. [tr: “Oh, yes, yes, mister Leader.”]

Consider also that the Storm Alliance demo was to take place at the Lacolle border crossing, immediately in front of the makeshift camp set up to receive the recent wave of refugees. It was by taking over the space at the main entry for the camp that anti-fascists and anti-racists were able to block the Storm Alliance’s access and prevent them from intimidating refugees—entirely symbolically, in this case, given that the camp is empty. No matter, the Stormers had no choice if they were to save face other than to convince themselves that they had won the battle, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. And then, bizarrely, Dave Tregget insisted in the media that their demo “had nothing to do with immigration.” It’s worth asking why they chose the border and a refugee camp as the exact location for their protest, but anyway …

It’s more difficult, however, to ignore the fact that the other demos organized across Canada on September 30, IN RESPONSE TO A CALLOUT BY THE STORM ALLIANCE, were specifically anti-immigration and were organized by an assortment of far-right individuals and organizations (including the Northern Guard, CCCC, the Proud Boys, the III%, etc.), among them the Führer of the Canadian Nationalist Front, the Peterborough-based neo-Nazi Kevin Goudreau. Read the overviews and reports prepared by the Groupe de recherche sur l’extrême droite (GREDA) and Anti-Racist Canada.

With all of that that in mind, let’s get to the heart of the matter and name a few of the notorious racists identified in the crowd of the Sturmers. . . .

///

Let’s start with the low-key neo-Nazi, Shawn Beauvais MacDonald, who appears to attend all of the far-right racist gatherings. He is now notorious as the former administrator of La Meute’s Facebook page who participated in the white supremacist mobilization in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August. Shortly thereafter he was spotted at La Meute’s August 20 demo in Quebec City, despite assurances from the organization’s leaders that he had been suspended. Beauvais-MacDonald popped up again at Lacolle on September 30, sporting his red baseball helmet, which he also wore on March 4, April 23, July 1, and in Charlottesville!

Shawn Beauvais-MacDonald at the La Meute protest, March 4, 2017, Montréal

Shawn Beauvais-MacDonald at a Front patriotique du Québec protest, April 23, 2017, Montréal

Shawn Beauvais-MacDonald trolling an anti-colonial demonstration, July 1st, 2017, Montréal

Shawn Beauvais-MacDonald, July 1st, 2017, Montréal

Shawn Beauvais-MacDonald in a white supremacist rally, August 12, 2017, Charlottesville, Virginia

Since his trip to Virginia, and in spite of his sudden notoriety, Beauvais-MacDonald hasn’t been discreet; in fact he upped the ante in the subsequent days by sharing the “14 words,” a code phrase inspired by Mein Kampf and universally recognized as a white supremacist slogan.

In a Gazette interview , Beauvais-MacDonald asserted that “There is nothing inherently wrong with (the slogan),” and that by sharing the “14 words,” he hoped to “expose the anti-white sentimentality that has been programmed into [his] friends and family.” At Lacolle, he explained to a Vice reporter that he came to “counter the antifa, who are against whites.”

More recently he has publicly proclaimed his attachment to a “fascist platform” by posting a documentary about English fascist Oswald Mosley on Facebook.

Shawn Beauvais-MacDonald, September 30, 2017, Lacolle

Shawn Beauvais-MacDonald’s unambiguous reputation as a neo-Nazi was apparently not enough to convince Tregget, Éric Trudel, and the other leaders of Storm Alliance to exclude him from their gathering.

The day after the faceoff at Lacolle, Beauvais-MacDonald published a message on Facebook that leaves no room for interpretation, featuring the hashtag #makefascismgreatagain. Note the “likes” of Robert Proulx (more below), John Hex (a member of the SA security team for September 30), Rachel Child (who acted as a medic, photographed here in the company of Éric “Corvus” Venne and other individuals addressed in this article:

[♫ Tout le monde… déteste les racistes! ♫]

///

At Lacolle, as was the case during his trip to Charlottesville, Beauvais-MacDonald was accompanied by Vincent Mercure Bélanger, who was wearing the same ignorantly ironic t-shirt that he was spotted wearing in Virginia.

Vincent Mercure Bélanger, August 11, 2017, Charlottesville, Virginia

Vincent Mercure Bélanger, August 12, 2017, Charlottesville, Virginia

Vincent Mercure Bélanger, September 30, 2017, Lacolle

[♫ Tout le monde… déteste les racistes! ♫]

///

Another casual admirer of Hitler (who certainly doesn’t want to be confused with a racist) was at Lacolle: the aptly named René Blaireau (“blaireau” can translate as “dork” in English). He doesn’t hide his hatred for Muslims, but he particularly expresses his overriding anti-Semitism:

René Blaireau at the Storm Alliance protest, September 30, 2017, Lacolle

[♫ Tout le monde… déteste les racistes! ♫]

///

That brings us to one of our preferred protagonists in this little band of (not) racists: Robert Proulx. This self-proclaimed “head of security” at La Meute, Front patriotique du Québec, and now Storm Alliance demos (we hear rumours that La Meute was cavalier enough to toss him out during the recent putsch) claims whenever possible that he can’t be a racist because he’s an “Amerindian” (sic). Proulx often asserts an “Iroquois” identity (sic) and his “Warrior” status, and has used the Warrior/Unity flag ostentatiously at numerous racist demos in 2017. On Radio-Canada he himself acknowledged his ignorance as to what the Warrior/Unity flag signifies (he calls it “the flag with the sun on it”) and has wisely decided to no longer carry it at demos. He seems to have roughly the same understanding of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy flag, judging by the following post:

Whatever identity claimed by Proulx, it’s clear that he is an active accomplice in racism. Take, for example, his proximity to practically all the (not) racists examined in the article, including the Hitler groupie René Blaireau mentioned above.

And then there’s his enthusiastic participation as the head of intimidation at events organized by racist anti-immigrant groups[1], the many and far-ranging Islamophobic or out and out fascist commentaries that he “likes” (for example, Shawn Beauvais-MacDonald’s “14 words” and #makefascismgreatagain), and his sharing of the xenophobic #remigration hashtag created by neo-fascist groupuscule Atalante.

In his interview with Stu Pitt, Proulx claims to “not understand why” he is “considered a target” by the antifas. He insists that he “protects” the “demos against racism,” but not for the “neo-Nazis or anything like that,” because that’s “not his bag.”

Please, Robert, read this article carefully. It might help you to understand …

Robert Proulx at a La Meute protest, March 4, 2017, Montréal

Robert Proulx at a Front patriotique du Québec protest, April 23, 2017, Montréal

Robert Proulx doing “security” at the Storm Alliance protest, September 30, 2017, Lacolle

[♫ Tout le monde… déteste les racistes! ♫]

///

Now, back to Hitler and the Nazis. Another participant at the SA demo at Lacolle was the comic Chantal Duchesneau, who on her Facebook page posted, “as a joke” of course, the words “How many illegals could be housed here” accompanied by a photo of a gas chamber at the Dachau concentration camp. Do we actually need to explain the entirely horrifying and grotesque nature of this remark?

Chantal Duchesneau at the Storm Alliance protest, September 30, 2017, Lacolle

[♫ Tout le monde… déteste les racistes! ♫]

///

To finish this sweep of the horizon of (not) racists who were with the SA at Lacolle, the animator of the Anti-Antifa Québec webpage deserves a special mention, the dazzling Stéphanie Godbout/Langevin/X and her boyfriend Vincent Gariépy/Bergeron/X, another regular on the security team at racist demo such as the La Meute demo in Québec City on August 20. This (not) racist couple are close to the Soldiers of Odin, the local section of anti-immigrant organisation founded by a n neo-Nazi in Finland. Under the leadership of Katy Latulippe, the group has remained faithful to the white supremacist credo of its founders.

Stéphanie Godbout/Langevin/X in good terms with Sébastien Poirier, the dude from Pegida Québec (Islamophobic organization) and the newly formed Mouvement traditionaliste du Québec. She admits being the person behind the Anti-Antifa Québec page.

Stéphanie Godbout/Langevin/X and Vincent Gariépy/Bergeron/X in a rally bringing together Soldiers of Odin and the Insoumis, May 2017, Estrie. Center back, with sunglasses, racist skinhead David Leblanc (more below). Center, form the back with the anti-antifa t-shirt, racist skinhead Philippe Gendron (for more on Gendron, see this article).

Stéphanie Godbout/Langevin/X and Vincent Gariépy/Bergeron/X n a rally bringing together Soldiers of Odin and the Insoumis, May 2017, Estrie. Center, taking a knee, Katy Latulippe, SOO leader in Québec.

Vincent Gariépy/Bergeron/X in the security service of a Front patriotique du Québec protest, May 28, 2017, Montréal

Vincent Gariépy/Bergeron/X in Lacolle, September 30, 2017

Stéphanie Godbout/Langevin/X and Vincent Gariépy/Bergeron/X in Lacolle, September 30,2017

As a recent example of her (not) racism,[2] Stéphanie Godbout / Anti-Antifa Québec warmly applauded the torchlight march in Charlottesville, sharing a post by Jason Kessler, the main organizer of the white supremacist Unite the Right rally.

[♫ Tout le monde… déteste les racistes! ♫]

///

BONUS!

Little known fact, on the morning of September 30, a valiant Soldier of Odin attempted to disrupt the buses chartered by Solidarity Across Borders to transport anti-racist demonstrators to Lacolle. He threw eggs filled with bright-coloured poster paint at the windshield of the first bus in the convoy. Unfortunately for the assailant, comrades already on site quickly chased him down. Fortunately for him, the police were also there and quickly arrested him. (For the record, poster paint is notoriously water soluble, and it only took a few comrades about ten minutes to clean up the mess. The famous neo-Nazi poster paint attack that the Soldiers of Odin crow about affected nothing—it didn’t even delay the anti-racists’ departure.)

The guy with the Dollorama poster paint was none other than David Leblanc, a racist skinhead and member of the Soldiers of Odin, who those familiar with this site have already met, interestingly, in the company of (not) racist Robert Proulx.

“Soldier of Odin” David Leblanc with two National Socialist Balck Metal (NSBM) enthusiasts, executing a Nazi salute right before a raid in Montréal to purge Jean-Talon street of communist posters.

At Lacolle, Proulx complained adamantly to the media about his business being vandalized by anti-fascists (with no proof, it should be noted), while ironically his acolyte Leblanc was doing the exact same thing at that very moment. Unfortunately for them, we have proof that Leblanc’s gesture was premeditated and prepared with the consent of a number of Soldiers of Odin, including their leaders Norm SOO and Katy Latulippe.

///

In short, friends, we don’t know for sure whether the members of Storm Alliance who shouted “everybody hates racists!” really believe what they’re saying. But, we can certainly say that whatever it is that they think, at their demo on September 30 there’s no denying that the racists and fascists were on their side of the barricade.

– Montréal Antifasciste

[1]

As far as this goes, the former “professional” boxer Proulx makes clear that he thinks of himself as a tough guy. In a recent interview with the alt-right vlogger Stu Pitt, he asserts that it is only since he’s provided “security” that people come out to the demos, because they know there’s nothing to fear. He references an incident that occurred on March 4, 2017 as the catalyst that spontaneously led to him becoming the ultimate head of security at identity-based demos. There is an unquestionable patina of exaggeration to his version. To listen to Proulx ramble on is to hear a systematic stretching of the truth. You have to ask if he might not be a bit of a pathological liar to boot. . . . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODnrH4ZTYnI.

[2]

This page was closed by Facebook a while ago, eliminating innumerable xenophobic, Islamophobic, and racist comments, along with all of the visceral hatred for the anti-facists that the page’s name suggests.

Older Entries Newer Entries

Bill 62: MAJOR OBLIGATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS²
OBLIGATIONS (new legal obligations)	RESTRICTIONS (new legal constraints)
Have your face uncovered if you are receiving or providing a public service; All municipalities, transportation corporations, and city boroughs, as well as the National Assembly, must conform with the law.	Full veils (niqab, burqa), balaclavas, bandanas, and any other clothing that covers the face are banned from public transit and public libraries; Ban on receiving or providing services with your face covered in a hospital, unless the face covering is necessary for security or the smooth functioning of the service.