Category: Enemy Sightings
Source: “Bourgeois Leftism in the Student Movement”, McGill Daily, by Edward Goldenberg and Julus Grey. (Stanley Gray is on the Editorial committee; and Soviet-agent Mark Starowicz is the Daily’s Editor)
Date: McGill Daily, Vol. 58, Np. 067. Thursday, February 6, 1969, Page 5.
“Bourgeois Leftism in the Student Movement” by Edward Goldenberg and Julus Grey, McGill Daily, 6 February 1969
At the time of publication of this piece co-authored by “Red Eddie” Goldenberg, there is a Communist front protest organized against English-language McGill University by Marxist professor Stan Gray and Oswald look-alike, François Mario Bachand. McGill wants to fire Gray. Instead, they all go to arbitration.
One of the agreed-upon arbitrators will be Walter Tarnopolsky. “Red Walter” will show up again at the 1982 Marxist coup on Canada hidden behind an alleged patriation of the Constitution. Tarnopolsky is a student of Soviet political institutions at Columbia University in the 1950s; and ever after spends his career issuing seditious speeches promoting the Soviet “human rights” system …for Canada … to Canadian groups and institutions.
During the Special Joint Committee of the House of Commons and Senate in Ottawa on the upcoming coup — disguised as patriation — Tarnopolsky is a privileged lobbyist.&nbps; In his presentation to the Joint Committee, he recommends re-drafting the “guarantee and limitation” clause, today known as Section 1 of the Charter. The Charter will soon be imposed by Trudeau in a move designed to eradicate the lawful Parliament and Legislatures of Confederation.
Also on the McGill in ’69 scene are man-on-the-Soviet-payroll, Mark Starowicz and his colleague Bob Chodos. The following year in Toronto, Starowicz and Chodos will publish a purloined copy of the “Poverty Report” sponsored by Canada’s “Liberal” Senator from Moscow, David (Davud) Croll. The Poverty Report, written by a crew of far-leftists from the Marxist New Democratic Party’s Waffle, recommends Basic Guaranteed Income (BGI) for Canada. In 1972, the manifesto of the Parti Québécois, produced in French only, will recommend the same thing, while declaring that to implement a BGI, there must be full-scale socialist (Communist) planning. For this reason, the manifesto reveals, Quebec needs all the powers, and must secede to get them.
Anti-white racist and red smear artist who wrote for the Communist (um — “Canadian“) Broadcasting Corporation, Maxwell Cohen (see Ron Gostick’s 1956 Brief on Communist line at the CBC) is Dean of Law involved in McGill administration during the 1969 Red front led by Stan Grey. In 1964, Cohen unilaterally (or, who appointed him?) was generous enough to offer Canada to the Americans (he was obviously trying early to capture the USA which indeed will be lassoed to Canada under a future post-9/11 military perimeter). In 1968, Cohen is penning anti-white racist material for the Canadian Bar Review and the McGill Law Journal, and other attendant demagoguery to turn the French Canadians against the “English”. Cohen is working on the big Canadians pushover for the incoming planned flood of foreigners to restructure Canada for “new men” (as Cohen calls them) and to Sovietize the country under Trudeau’s “Just Society”.
In the coming decades after his piece in the Daily, Eddie Goldenberg will succeed his father Carl Hyman Goldenberg as an adviser to prime ministers. In Eddie’s case, adviser to Marxist prime minister Jean Chrétien, after Trudeau has carried off phase one of the Canadian overthrow: his 1982 coup d’état.
Eddie is described as the “unelected prime minister of Canada” in his book, How It Works (in Ottawa). See the clip of Eddie, above, spit glistening on his lips, leering while recalling his task of writing Marxist Jean Chrétien’s acceptance speech anticipating a “Yes” in the probably highly rigged 1995 Communist near-miss.
Eddie’s father Hyman will officiate in the Senate in the 1980-82 overthrow of the Parliament and Legislatures of Canada (the phony “patriation”). Hyman was also a central figure in the Canada-USA joint war effort in WWII, at which time he no doubt kept his socialist world-planning nose well into American war affairs for the Soviets.
This is also the time when Pearson-Trudeau will be financing “student activists” (like the FLQ terrorists) to work in local slum communities, developing leftism and demands for socialist solutions. What a coincidence that Red Eddie & al are busy encouraging student mobilization to this end in the 1969 McGill Daily during the big Red Front attack on “English” institutions in Quebec.
As well, the pair of authors (Red Eddie and Julius Grey) demand urgent action for conditions among Eskimos and Indians! Our man Walter Rudnicki of the federal Privy Council Office (PCO) will soon show up with solutions (can’t wait to find out what they are) and I expect they will be to herd the aboriginals into municipalities in order to annex them to the future Moscow-style city-states.
Bourgeois Leftism in the Student Movement
By Edward Goldenberg and Julus Grey
The student movement at McGill as elsewhere has undergone a profound and remarkable transformation in the past few years. If the focus of interest was once centres on winter carnivals, it is now irrevocably fixed on the problems of society. The social consciousness of a whole generation has been awakened; the “Silent Generation” of the ‘fifties can be relegated to the scrapheap of history.
But the new student movement is not moving as smoothly or as surely as it should. It should be a vehicle for social progress and should propagate the true ideals of democracy and progress. Instead it seems to have taken a wrong turn and is in grave danger of losing sight of its original goals. We are writing this article because we are concerned about the loss of direction of the student movement, and we feel that it is high time that serious debate takes place on some of the main principles involved.
We fear that the revolution talked about by our leaders is nothing more than a bourgeous coup d’état. Power would shift from one elite to another, and it would be plain for everyone to see that “plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.” Students do not need a new class of professional politicians to take care of their affairs.
We do not like the intolerance that is shown towards opinions that are different from those of the power elite (witness the McGill Daily). A rigid dogmatism is no more welcome in student political thought than in any other political thought. To us part of the meaning of freedom and democracy is the right to express and have heard any — not just one — opinion no matter how outrageous it may be to some. Rational solutions to problems come from the expression of all ideas on the subject and not from the forced imposition of one idea. The suppression of ideas is tyrannical even when it comes to the “Left.”
We believe that the university should be the vanguard of society: it is not a microcosm of society. The tearing down of the university cannot be the prelude to the tearing down of the whole social order and would be no more than an isolated act. To think differently is to be the victim of illusions and self deceptions.
We believe as strongly as anyone else that the university is in great need of reform to make it more relevant to the problems of society; we do not believe that the university is run by evil men intent on imposing the evils of the military-industrial complex upon us. Some of those in positions of authority are undoubtedly very reactionary, others are plainly and simply incompetent, others may even be progressive. It is evident that a good many should be replaced by men who are in tune with the times. But we reject the blind accusations of evilness; we would prefer to see the use of logical and rational arguments. We would also like to remind our leaders that it has been said with justification that “after Clark Kerr comes not the millennium, but Ronald Reagan.”
We are worried that the student movement is becoming more and more bourgeois and is concerning itself almost exclusively with its own small problems to the detriment of the greater and more important problems of society as a whole.”
We want to see university reform, but we feel that it is impeded and much needed time is wasted when false enemies are created in order to bring about false confrontation situations. To construct barriers (of paper) in order to smash through them and cry victory for the forces of progress is childish and immature. And it is a waste of time when there are much more important things to accomplish.
For McGill’s student leaders to take stands in favour of unilingualism and independence for Quebec is not being progressive. Nationalism is essentially retrograde especially in a society whose basic historical conditions are objectively right-wing. An independent Quebec will not be a socialist paradise. The solutions for the problems of a society that is almost in the post-industrial stage are not to be found in the nationalist slogans of the nineteenth century. It is only the bourgeoisie that has time to debate the merits and demerits of a retrograde solution for the problems of the Quebec of 1969. There is too much to be done to meet the real interests and needs of the people of Quebec for our leaders to waste our time talking about “independence” in a world of interdependence.
We believe that the student movement must regain its momentum as a force for social change. First, an atmosphere of freedom of thought must be recreated in the university. Logical and rational discussion should replace the intolerance that has been created by excessive emotionalism. The real problems of society must be debated and exposed and dramatized.
Students should concern themselves with the intolerable slum conditions in which people are forced to live. Student activists should encourage community organizations to fight for decent and sufficient urban renewal programmes as a top priority of Government.
Rather than demonstrate in favor of free education at the university level as the first priority for government, it might be more just to demonstrate for under-privileged sectors of society. Universal accessibility begins at the primary level, and unless there can be equality of opportunity at the whole pre-university level, there can never be true universal accessibility to the university.
The war in Viet Nam has brought out the fact that secret war research is being carried out for the Pentagon in our universities. We believe that it is very important that all research projects be made public so that it will be possible to gather public opinion to protest the carrying out of projects that aid causes that are repulsive to humanity.
The student movement should expose and demonstrate against the intolerable conditions in which Canadian Indians and Eskimos live. The Government must be forced to correct these injustices, and the student movement has a constructive role to play in this area.
There is far too much poverty in a country that considers itself to be affluent. Students have a duty to expose the shamefulness of the situation in a clear enough way that governments will be forced to rearrange their priorities to put the elimination of poverty at the top of the list.
We believe that the student movement has a vital role to play in creating a climate of opinion in Canada that will demand a reform and revamping of a woefully inadequate external aid program. Egalitanianism must be practised abroad as well as at home.
These are but a few of the areas in which the student movement has a constructive role to play. The student movement must become the conscience of our society, and must spend its time and energy in attempting to create the conditions necessary for the elimination of injustices and misery. Therefore, the reforms that we seek within the university must be those that will facilitate the role of the student movement. In other words, out courses should, in as much as possible, be given in such a manner that they will aid in the development of a social consciousness that will help us try to find rational solutions to the problems of society.
We believe that a student movement with the goals that we have outlined would be more progressive, more democratic, and definitely more constructive than one that spends its time engaged in sterile theoretical discussions of what can only be called bourgeois leftism.
The student movement cannot remain the prisoner of a small clique playing insignificant and irrelevant games of power politics. There is too much to accomplish!
– 30 –