In Which a Gaggle of Bankers and Oil Execs Try to Put Children in Their Place

In 1922, a political group was formed called the Sentinels of the Republic, whose aim was to stop federal encroachment on big business.  Of course that's not really how they sold it, but instead vowed to "stop the growth of socialism" and "prevent the concentration of power in Washington through the multiplication of administrative bureaus under a perverted interpretation of the general welfare clause". 

Quite a mouthful.

The Sentinels was actually a right-wing front group for the corporate sector, formed to handle the PR against any government legislation that might impede their ability to become filthy rich.  Or should I say filthier?

One of their first campaigns was to oppose Child Labour Laws, framing it as concern for poor families whose children must work to keep them fed, and stating among other things that they "would prevent children from doing chores at home", and was "socialistic, communistic and Bolshevistic."  A "Commie plot"

Those advocating for children knew what they were up against.  According to Time Magazine in January of 1925:

Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, Honorary Chairman of the League of Women Voters, told her pro-Amendment following: "The amendment is as good as dead and buried and the obsequies performed, unless something is done about it and done quickly." Experienced observers were inclined to confirm her prediction. The opponents of the Amendment have succeeded to a marked degree in generating a real fear of its consequences. Fear is a tremendously important political asset ... In pushing the idea of the evil consequences of the Child Labor Amendment to the fore, its opponents have placed its proponents entirely on the defensive. (1) 

A classic strategy of the Right.  The Sentinels were part of the noise and their efforts resulted in squashing the Amendment, meaning that companies could continue to exploit children. 

One of the financiers of the Sentinels of the Republic, was J. Howard Pew, the man who helped Ernest Manning with the conservative takeover of the Social Credit Party in Alberta, and who had become a close personal friend of the Premier's.  Pew is also the man, through his Sun Oil (Suncor), to give Canada the tarsands.  A gift that keeps on giving.

The Sentinels would continue to challenge everything from the New Deal to the creation of the Department of Education, until it was determined that they also had a dark side.

According to Our Magazine "The Sentinels of the Republic were a fascist front group funded largely by the du Ponts, the Pitcairn family and J. Howard Pew."  Gerald Colby says in his book: Du Pont Dynasty: Behind the Nylon Curtain (Lyle Stewart, 1984) that:

... the Sentinels of the Republic [were] an anti-Semitic organization which constantly warned the country of "the Jewish-Communist" menace. In 1936 the Senate Lobbying Committee  released Sentinels' files revealing fascist sympathies. "The Jewish threat is a real one…. I believe our real opportunity lies in accomplishing the defeat of Roosevelt." wrote its president, Boston banker Alexander Lincoln to Cleveland Runyon, who replied that the people were crying for leadership: "The Sentinels should really lead on the outstanding issue. The old line Americans of $1,000 a year want a Hitler."

Those Missing Links

Historian Peter Viereck, in a 1955 essay, attempted to piece together the elements of the radical right, and determined that the missing link was Father Charles Couglin, the controversial priest who was a supporter of Adolf Hitler and a sworn enemy of FDR and the New Deal. 

When on a tour of the United States in 1935, to help spread the gospel of Social Credit, Alberta premier William Aberhart, met with Coughlin, coming away with a favourable impression. "He has a keen intellect and is absolutely fearless. He has a correct appraisal of world conditions."  (2)

We have to remember that Social Credit was the only political party to be based almost entirely on the notion of a Jewish Conspiracy (3), and while Aberhart himself claimed not to be anti-Semitic, his sermons suggested otherwise.

"The JEWISH RACE must yet acknowledge that the CHRIST who was crucified to the CROSS of Calvary was the SON of GOD, their MESSIAH. Until they will acknowledge that they must expect the curses of the world and can not expect the Blessings of GOD." (4)

and

Personally, I have little doubt that in working through Jews, the Jewish financial group has sacrificed its own people on the altar of its greed for power and this group is preeminently responsible for the poisonous anti-Semitism which is rampant in the world today. (5)

Aberhart also published three articles written by Father Coughlin in his Social Credit Chronicle, a paper he created to counter what he deemed to be bias against him from the mainstream press.

However, while Viereck saw Coughlin as the missing link that tied the radical right together in the United States, it was actually John Howard Pew, who began the link that tied American Conservatism to the new Canadian Conservatism.

A close friend and confidant of Aberhart's successor, Ernest Manning, Pew had a huge influence on Manning's political theories, and according to the Anti-Defamation League, Pew himself was anti-Semitic, helping to finance not only the Sentinels of the Republic, but several other "conservative" and anti-Jewish causes. (6)  Many of these operated as part of the Christian anti-Communist Crusade.

However, Pew also strengthened the idea of a right-wing infrastructure.  A myriad of think tanks and advocacy groups whose purpose was to promote conservatism while tearing down liberal ideas.

He has been called a philanthropist; a heavy contributor to non-profit groups.  However, following is a list of some of the those groups who benefited from Pew's generosity. 

America First Committee - An isolationist group that lobbied the U.S. government to stay out of WWII, and leave Hitler alone to do his job, which was to destroy Communism.

National Association of Manufacturers: A fascist-linked network of industrialists who were at the heart of many anti-New Deal campaigns. (7)

Christian Freedom Foundation - Sought to "rally the support of Prostentant clergymen for rugged individualism" and for years was "supported almost entirely by J. Howard Pew of the Sun Oil Company and members of his family.  They have contributed well over a million dollars to its operation." (8)

The Foundation for Economic Education - Formed in 1946, it was described as an extremely conservative organization that issued a "huge volume of material aimed at overcoming state interventionism".  Pew was not only a major contributor but was also on their board of trustees.

Christian Economic Foundation - After failing to move the National Council of Churches to the far right, Pew helped create the CEF. In the 1960s, it sowed the seeds of the Christian Right by sending its free magazine, Christian Economics, to clergy across the U.S.

The John Birch Society - And Anti-communist organization still involved with the conservative movement today.

The National Review - Paper of William F. Buckley Jr.

American Opinion magazine - described by the ADL as a radical right, extreme conservative publication, it was the official magazine of the John Birch Society.

Young Americans For Freedom - Activist group that helped to create the Leadership Institute, on which Preston Manning's Democracy centre was fashioned.

Intercollegiate Society of Individualists - A Paleoconservative group that keeps book lists.  Those young conservatives should read and those they must avoid.

Though J. Howard Pew died in 1971, his Pew Foundation continues to support right-wing causes, including: 

American Enterprise Institute: A conservative think tank founded in 1943, that became a home to arch-conservatives like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, David Frum, Dick Cheney, and more.  Both Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush plucked staff from the AEI

The Heritage Foundation: Created in 1973 by Joseph Coors, and headed by people like Paul Weyrich.

The British-American Project for the Successor Generation: Founded in 1985 by devotees of Reagan and Thatcher, it grooms right-wing U.S. and British youth as leaders.

The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research: Founded in 1978 by William Casey, who later became Reagan’s CIA director, it promotes privatization, deregulation and cuts to social welfare programs.

It has been said that the conservative movement is very linear, and visiting right-wing sites, many associated with the Tea Party, it's hard not to agree.  The goals are almost identical to those of similar groups established decades ago.  Several still exist and others have seen a revival.

The Sentinels of the Republic are back, and Republican Senator Jane Cunningham, wanted to roll back Missouri's child labour laws suggesting that they are infringing on parental rights.  She should meet Kelly Block.

We only began really paying attention to Canada's conservative movement, when Stephen Harper was named prime minister.  However, his victory was the culmination of sixty years of hard work.

American conservatism is not a good fit for the majority of Canadians.  In fact, it's not even a good fit for the majority of Americans, because it's based on fear, anger, deception and just plain nonsense.

There will always be dissident voices heard in the land, expressing opposition without alternatives, finding fault but never favor, perceiving gloom on every side and seeking influence without responsibility. Those voices are inevitable.  But today other voices are heard in the land—voices preaching doctrines wholly unrelated to reality, wholly unsuited ... We cannot expect that everyone, to use the phrase of a decade ago, will "talk sense to the American people." But we can hope that fewer people will listen to nonsense. —Excerpt from text of undelivered speech scheduled for presentation in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963, by the late President John F. Kennedy.

Sources:

1. Labor:  A 20th Amendment, Time magazine, January 25, 1925

2. Bible Bill: A Biography of William Aberhart, By: David R. Elliot and Iris Miller, Edmonton: Reidmore Books, 1987, p. 213

3. Social Discredit: Social Credit and the Jewish Response, Janine Stingel, Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2003, ISBN 0-7735-2010-4, p. 13

4. Stingel, 2003, p. 20

5. A Trust Betrayed: The Keegstra Affair, By: David Bercuson and Douglas Wertheimer, Doubleday Canada, 1985, ISBN: 0-385-25003-7, pp. 34-38

6. The Radical Right, Various Authors, Criterion Books, 1963

7. Pew - Facing the Corporate Roots of American Fascism, J. Howard Pew (1882-1971), By Richard Sanders, Our Magazine

8. Danger on the Right: The Attitudes, Personnel and Influence of the Radical Right and Extreme Conservatives, By Arnold Forster and Benjamin R. Epstein, Random House, 1964

Chapter Thirteen: Canada's Conservative Youth Movement Begins and Ends With Preston Manning

The Canadian Manifesto: How the American Neoconservatives Stole My Country

[Ernest]Manning campaigned actively on behalf of a full slate of Social Credit candidates, one such candidate being his son, Preston Manning, who ran for election in the Constituency of East Edmonton. The Conservative candidate secured 13,596 votes to Mr. Manning's: 6,762. Having spoken on young Mr. Preston Manning's behalf myself, I found the overwhelming vote against him hard to believe. I was one of those many who looked forward to hearing the voice of young Preston Manning on behalf of the Social Credit movement in the House of Commons. (1)

The year was 1965, when Preston Manning ran as the federal Social Credit candidate, losing out to William Skoreyko. Alf Hooke, former Alberta Social Credit MP, may not have heard Preston Manning speak on behalf of the Social Credit movement in the House of Commons, but Manning would go on to become a voice for the

Growing Up With no Through Traffic

Preston Manning was born on June 10, 1942, in Edmonton, Alberta and was raised as a devout Baptist. His godfather was William Aberhart, then premier of Alberta. Within a year, Aberhart would be deceased and Ernest Manning, Preston's father, would become premier, holding that position for 25 years.

While claiming that his father did not bring politics into the home, Preston nonetheless, grew up under the influence of Social Credit, which became a mixture of American conservatism and Christian fundamentalism, under his dad. Time magazine once referred to the Manning government as "the nearest approach to a theocracy in the Western Hemisphere." (2)

With his own brand of Baptist-fundamentalist evangelism, he blended religion and politics throughout his public career. "Religion isn't to be kept on a shelf and only taken down on Sundays" he would suggest. In every public speech, religion, not politics, was the dominant theme.

Throughout most of Ernest Manning's reign in Alberta, the province was run as a one-party state. We don't need an opposition," he once said. "They're just a hindrance to us. You don't hire a man to do a job and then hire another man to hinder him." (3) Yet, the "hindrance" is what helps to define democracy.

Preston Manning would say that his father was often distant and cold. John Barr in his book, The Dynasty, called him "intensely private — and very formal". He rarely made public appearances and never invited familiarity. Only a handful of people ever called him 'Ernest'. He was E.C. Manning, thank you very much.

His constituents would connect with their premier every Sunday on his Back to the Bible Hour, a tactic learned from his mentor "Bible Bill" Aberhart. For the first four years that Aberhart was in power, he never answered a question in the legislature. Instead he would write them down, and then deliver his responses over the airwaves.

Preston was raised in a similar fashion, cut off from all those not connected to school, family and church. Even at university, it was understood that he avoid relationships, except with those who thought as he did, which meant that he was out of step with the times. According to author Murray Dobbin:Conservative Movement in the House, and today trains young activists in the art of political guerrilla warfare.

At university in the early sixties he gave the impression of a rural kid completely isolated from the ways of urban society. He presented an odd image. "He was part of the Youth Parliament's Social Credit caucus at the same time Joe Clark, Grant Notley (the late, former leader of the New Democratic Party in Alberta), Jim Coutts (who became prominent in the Liberal Party under Pierre Trudeau), and others were representing their respective parties. He was a good speaker, but you never saw him on campus. People knew who he was, and the rumour was that his father didn't want him to hang around the university too much because it would be a bad moral influence on him," recalls Fred Walker, a student at that time. "He looked very out of place — odd enough in his mannerisms and physical appearance and dress to be the occasional subject of ridicule. He gave the impression of being a very serious and committed young man — but more an apologist for his father's party and policies. He didn't play a very prominent role." (2)

As Dobbin says, both father and son "had become socially and politically isolated from the changing mainstream of Canadian society." And when they wrote Political Realignment in 1967, it was actually a blueprint for the past.

This kind of semi-isolation, also impacted the views of Stephen Harper. Growing up in what his biographer, William Johnson, referred to as the "quintessential WASP middle-class suburb."  His childhood was spent with mostly white middle-class protestants, in a pre-designed community with little "through traffic".  It must have been quite a culture shock when he arrived at the University of Toronto, a multiculturalist delight.

He lasted two months.

NPARF

When running as a Social Credit candidate, Preston Manning came to know David Wilson, a former fundraiser and strategist for the Social Credit party. Wilson had just been named director of a newly formed group, known as the National Public Affairs Research Foundation (NPARF), and hired young Manning as a 'policy researcher.'

According to Alf Hooke, Ernest Manning had been approached on several occasions, by a group of wealthy individuals, to establish a new conservative party in Canada, based on the principles of the Conservative movement in the United States. Instead Manning suggested that they simply take over Canada's Tory party, in the same way that the U.S. conservatives had taken over the Republican Party. In his book Political Realignment, which was a blueprint for what Manning called 'social conservatism', he states:

"... in the national field, the Social Credit party can make its maximum contribution to the furthering of its own ideals and principles and more importantly to the well being of the country as a whole, by doing everything within its power to encourage and assist in bringing about an effective reorganization of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada. Social Credit supporters, however, must insist that reorganization occur on a basis which will enable them, without sacrificing their convictions, to join with and support such a reconstructed national political movement." (3)

NPARF* would fund the creation of the new policy direction. Columnist Don Sellar in the Calgary Herald on 21 July 1967, described the NPARF as "a somewhat secretive, staunchly right-wing, lobby group funded by several prominent businessmen, including R.A. Brown, president of Home Oil, Cyrus McLean, chairman of B.C. Telephone, Renault St Laurent, lawyer and son of the former prime minister, Ronald Clarke, an Edmonton architect, R.J. Burns, a Calgary lawyer, and A.M. Shoults, president of James Lovick Ltd. of Toronto, all of whom were close friends of the elder Manning." (6)

Preston Manning had become a fan of John Wesley (1703-1791), who had led the Methodists to 'Christian Perfection', tackling many social issues of the day. Those driving the social conservative agenda were concerned that Tommy Douglas, a follower of the social gospel, would lead many Christians into his fold, so they needed to have policy worded in such a way, that it appeared to be a holy endeavour.

Young Manning, a master of calculated ambiguity, drafted policy that looked liked FDR's New Deal, but smelled like a corporate takeover of vital social services.

His star was rising.


The Young Turks or "Whiz Kids"

Besides attempting a national takeover of the PC Party, Manning was also given the task of uniting the aging Social Credit Party of Alberta with the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta, under its new leader, Peter Lougheed. Erick Schmidt, another young man employed by NPARF, and Preston Manning, met with Lougheed's group, represented by Joe Clark and Merv Leitch (later energy minister in the Lougheed cabinet), on several occasions, "and eventually produced a draft plan for amalgamating the two parties under the banner of the Social Conservative party. The idea was quickly rejected, however, by officials both within the Manning government and the Lougheed camp." (6)

Undaunted, Preston and his friend Erick Schmidt, attended the 1967 national Conservative leadership Convention, to present their plans, and even put forward the idea of Ernest Manning as the leader of a new merged party.

However, Ernest Manning had over estimated his importance, and the idea was soundly rejected. Besides, with Stanfield being named the new leader, beating out Diefenbaker 271 votes to 519 on the first ballot (7), they knew the time wasn't right. Robert Stanfield was a Red Tory and the Mannings hated Red Tories as much as they hated Liberals. When Stephen Harper joined the movement decades later, he would call Red Tories 'Pink Liberals' and set about eradicating them from his Reform-Alliance caucus.

Preston Manning's young activists, known as the "Whiz Kids" or "Young Turks", may have failed in the 1960s to bring about the Republican style conservative party they were mandated to create, but he never lost hope.

He would just have to wait for that big wave of anger.

Footnotes*

Many believe that the National Citizens Coalition was a spin-off of NPARF, though former president, David Somerville denied it.  However, given that Ernest Manning was an advisor to the NCC, the two share many of the same ideals. (8)

Sources:

1. 30+5 I know, I was There, A first-hand account of the workings and history of the Social Credit Government in Alberta, Canada 1935-68, by Alfred J Hooke, Douglas Social Credit Secretariat

2. Texas of the North, Time Magazine, September 24, 1951

3. ibid

4. Preston Manning and the Reform Party, By Murray Dobbin Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing 1992 ISBN: 0-88780-161-7, p. 21-22

5. Political Realignment: Challenge to Thoughtful Canadians, By Hon, E. C. Manning, McClelland & Stewart Limited, 1967, Kingston Public Library call no. 320.971 M31

6. Of Passionate Intensity: Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada, By Trevor Harrison, University of Toronto Press, 1995. ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6, p. 33-38

7. Flora MacDonald, By Alvin Armstrong, J.M. Dent & Sons, 1976, ISBN: 0-460-91698-X. p. 102-104

8. Storming Babylon: Preston Manning and the Rise of the Reform Party, By Sydney Sharpe & Don Braid, Key Porter, 1992, ISBN: 1550134124, p. 65　

The Invisible Hand of the National Citizens Coalition

The Canadian Manifesto: How the American Neoconservatives Stole My Country


Ernest Manning always had a fear that Communism would take hold in Canada, and declared war on the perceived evils, with as much determination as the Social Credit had taken up the fight against banks and the notion of a Jewish conspiracy.

It consumed him, and he often spoke of the need to intensify a right-wing front against an attack from the left.

Because of this, a group of people from the corporate world, seeing an ally, approached Manning about creating just such a party. According to one of his cabinet minsters, Alfe Hooke:

"On at least two occasions Mr. Manning told me in his office that he had been approached by several very influential and wealthy Canadians and that they wanted him to head up a party of the right with a view to preventing the onslaught of socialism these men could see developing in Canada. They had apparently indicated to him that money was no object and they were prepared to spend any amount of money to stop the socialist tide ... "Mr. Manning indicated to me that he was also working on a book which he would hope to publish ... In which he would endeavour to outline the views these men represented and recommendations he would make in keeping with their views." (1)

The book he was referring to, was written with Preston, and called Political Realignment. It became the framework for a party of the right-wing, that would be based on pure ideology and the 'will of God'. It spoke of individual freedoms, and the need for a two party system, with clearly laid out and completely opposite, ideologies. Only then would Canadians be given a clear choice at election time. (2)

"The Mannings' free-market ideology was not rooted in any expressed community sentiment or shared vision: it was inspired by an imagined threat of a left-wing conspiracy and supported almost exclusively by corporate interests whose principal goal was less government interference. Their aspiration to govern was not driven by new ideas about how government could be more responsive to its citizens but by a negative view of government; a vision of dismantling government, not reforming it." (3)

The Mannings' little book also caught the attention of another wealthy Canadian, Colin Brown. Brown had read Political Realignment and arranged a meeting with the Mannings. They soon learned that they had a shared enemy: Tommy Douglas.

When Douglas was pushing for free health care, Manning stated that; "Giving to the individual societal benefits such as free medical care ... breeds idleness... causing a break down in his relationship with God ... where the state imposed a monopoly on a service ... the sinful philosophy of state collectivism scored a victory." (4)

Fortunately for Canadians, not everyone saw it that way, and with the collective efforts of Tommy Douglas, John Diefenbaker and Lester Pearson, Canadians were given Medicare in 1966. As founder of London Life, Colin Brown saw this as a direct threat on his business, and took out full page ads to denounce such a measure.

However, what Ernest Manning suggested was something more permanent. Why not establish an organization that could draw in financial support from the corporate world, and act as an advocacy group that would stop the spread of government intervention into 'socialist schemes'. Hence, the National Citizens Coalition* was born, and Ernest would be given a position on their advisory board.

"The connections between the National Citizens Coalition and the Reform party go back a long way. Their political agendas are virtually identical: deficit reduction, restriction of immigration, ending universal social programs, lowering taxes for corporations and high-income earners, and ending national medicare. Colin Brown, the founder of the NCC, began his conservative crusade in 1967with a full page ad in the Globe and Mail, attacking the federal Liberal government's plan for a national medicare scheme.

"At the same time, Ernest Manning and his son were launching Ernest's book, Political Realignment, calling for a social conservative party. According to Norm Ovenden of the Edmonton Journal, Ernest was one of the 'moving forces behind the creation of the NCC ..." (5)

However, despite the fact that they now had a behind the scenes corporate network that would solicit funds and act as a 'grassroots' voice for change, Manning still felt that the idea of a new party was a bit too risky. So instead, he suggested merging the current conservative party with his social credit, thereby establishing a single right-wing offense.

So he showed up at the conservative national convention, hoping to use his influence to create such a merger, but he had overestimated his importance. The people who knew him, knew exactly what the Social Credit Party stood for and wanted none of it. Besides, Robert Stanfield had been named the new federal Conservative leader, and Stanfield was a Red Tory! Just one step away from a communist in Manning's mind.

His next strategy was to have his best man, Robert Thompson, run as a PC for the next election, hoping to influence the Conservative party from the inside. Thompson won, but was unable to do much to sell social credit, even though Manning had just been named senator.

So they put the idea on the back burner, and waited for the next wave.

Footnotes:

*Stephen Harper would join the NCC in 1980, just as they were launching their anti 'Boat People' campaign. He said he liked what they stood for. He would later go on to become their vice-president and then president. In 2004, he was awarded their 'Medal of Freedom', which means freedom from government interference. The medal is given each year to the person who has best been able to tear down Canada's social safety net. The holy grail is scrapping the Canada Health Act.(6)

Sources:

1. 30+5 I know, I was There, A first-hand account of the workings and history of the Social Credit Government in Alberta, Canada 1935-68, by Alfred J Hooke, Douglas Social Credit Secretariat.

2. Political Realignment: Challenge to Thoughtful Canadians, By Hon, E. C. Manning, McClelland & Stewart Limited, 1967, Kingston Public Library call no. 320.971 M31

3. Preston Manning and the Reform Party. Author: Murray Dobbin Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing 1992 ISBN: 0-88780-161-7, Pg. 66

4. Dobbin, 1992, Pg. 9

5. Dobbin, 1992, Pg. 95

6. The National Citizens' Coalition loves you - ha! ha! ha!, 35 years of fighting for fat cats while posing as ordinary citizens, NUPGE: November 8, 2002

The Invisible Hand of the American Enterprise Institute

The Canadian Manifesto: How the American Neoconservatives Stole My Country

On April 3, 1939, Lewis H. Brown, President of  Johns-Manville Corp., made the cover of Time magazine, as the "outstanding public relations success of 1938".

When Brown had taken his job in 1927, things were much simpler for industry.  Business executives were only accountable to their stockholders, and so long as they could make a profit, they were pretty much left alone.

But with the Depression, when government realized that they would have to intervene in the nation's economy, all that changed.  Not only would business have to answer to government, but also now to labour and the  public.

 And they were getting a bad rap.

So they began to hire "consulting" firms to handle PR.  If Ivy Lee, the man known as the "founder of public relations", could turn the most hated man in America, John D. Rockefeller, into the  "great benefactor", anything was possible.

Brown stood out as a leader of corporate PR, not as an adman, but as a corporate executive with a soul, and maybe even a heart.  He promoted the idea of a business selling itself to the public, by developing leaders whose comprehension of public relations was "as mature as their knowledge of their particular trades." (1)

To do this many added public relations experts to their staff, but Lewis Brown handled the task himself.

When he first landed the job as president, he discovered that the company, which produced asbestos insulation, was very unpopular  in most of the 17 towns where it had factories and mines.  So he started a pictorial news sheet for employees, issued a series of booklets such as "This is our policy on the closed shop," and hired Cartoonist Don Herold to do a set of down-to-earth advertisements for local newspapers. Under his direction, J-M plants, were getting known as "good neighbors".

Since much of the insulation went into homes, in 1934 Lewis Brown started the National Housing Guild, to educate local lumber dealers in all the phases of house-building (including insulation) so that a prospective builder could get all his information and all his work at one spot.

When President Brown went to speak at his factory in Asbestos, Quebec, he memorized his entire speech in French (1).  With such attention to detail, Brown not only won over the public, but became the chief spokesman for all Big Business.

Of course there was another side to Brown that the public didn't see.

While befriending his employees in public, in private their welfare was not as important.  In 1984, decades  after Brown's death, Johns-Manville was taken to court for endangering the health and safety of their workers.

In his testimony, Charles H. Roemer, a former employee, described a meeting between Lewis H. Brown and their attorney in the early 1940s, "I’ll never forget, I turned to Mr. Brown, [after he implied that the J-M firm in question, Unarco, "were a bunch of fools for notifying employees who had asbestosis), and I said, ‘Mr. Brown, do you mean to tell me you would let them work until they dropped dead?’ He said, ‘Yes. We save a lot of money that way.'" (2) 

As Lewis Brown became one of the leaders of the Conservative Movement, his goal among other things, was to remove health and safety regulations that would make industry responsible for the safety of their workers or the public.  A goal that continues today.

Lewis Brown and the American Enterprise Association

As a business leader, Brown was often invited to provide input into public policy.  Even FDR sought his counsel.  But all that changed on April 8, 1943, when President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9328, which was implemented in an effort to control wartime inflation. 

The order froze prices nationwide on anything that could affect the cost of living, which was pretty much everything, and while prohibiting wage increases, it also outlawed layoffs, except in special circumstances.

In short, it allowed the federal government to control the price of everything you buy, where you worked, and how much you made.

And while corporate America was outraged, the general public was compliant, choosing national security over loyalty to their employers.

So Lewis Brown decided to use the same kind of public relations and education schemes that had made Johns-Manville such a success, on a larger scale, and created one of the movement's first think tanks:  The American Enterprise Association.

He hired a dozen of the country’s top conservatives to staff it, who were charged with the task of putting as many like-minded  people into powerful positions, to meet Roosevelt on his own turf.  Their main goals were to kill the New Deal (including 9328),  promote free enterprise and a strong national defense, and eliminate all personal and corporate income taxes.

Not restrained by the need to play nice, AEA could denounce FDR as a communist, or at best a socialist, and even call for his impeachment, without the business leaders who provided the funding, losing their own "nice guy" reputations.

Becoming Political

Lewis H. Brown died in 1951, and William Baroody took over AEA, giving it a new direction and a new name, the American Enterprise Institute, implying an educational rather than a political organization.  He applied for tax-exempt status and got it, allowing him to actively fund raise among the moneyed elite.

Baroody was an aggressive, take-no-prisoners, conservative political activist, with the single-minded goal of placing as many far-right conservatives into the U.S. government as possible.  He himself would become a policy advisor to both Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, before his death in 1980.

However, his biggest contribution was in  elevating the status of Barry Goldwater and engineering his nomination as the Republican presidential candidate.  Beginning in 1960, he solicited funds from wealthy conservatives, and the first to open his wallet, was Ernest Manning's friend J. Howard Pew,  founder of Sunoco and then the principle owner of the Alberta tar sands.

Pew wrote out a cheque for $100,000 to AEI, no small sum in 1962, and would continue to promote the institute and their campaigns.  In fact, the Pew Foundation remains one of their prime benefactors.

Infiltration of Government

When Ronald Reagan was elected President in 1980, AEI had five centers of study: Center for the Study of Government Regulation; Economic Policy; Political and Social Processes; Legal Policy; and Religion, Philosophy, and Public Policy.

They helped to draft Reagan's foreign policy, through a forum on "War Powers and the Constitution".  They supported the invasion of Grenada, the dispatch of Marines to Lebanon and the Nicaraguan contra policies, that could have had Reagan impeached.

AEI member Christopher DeMuth,  who had served as a staff assistant to President Nixon, became the "deregulation czar", under Reagan, in his new position as administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. 

James Miller III went from AEI to the Reagan administration as Federal Trade Commission chairman and than administrator of the Office of Management and Budget. 

Michael Novak was appointed by President Reagan to act as chief of the U. S. delegation to the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva.

Novak was also on the board of the Institute on Religion and Democracy (IRD), a neoconservative religious activist group working to undermine progressive movements within the religious community, and has helped to export anti-gay culture.

The board of AEI has included many corporate executives as well as neoconservative leaders including Paul Wolfowitz, Richard M. Perle, Irving Kristol and his son William Kristol.

George W. Bush pulled 20 staffers from AEI, including Canadian David Frum [now an American citizen], who would become a speechwriter for the president.  Frum helped to organize the Winds of Change conference with Ezra Levant, in 1996, in an attempt to unite the Tories with the Reform Party.  However, PC leader Jean Charest, wanted nothing to do with them.  There was absolutely no common ground.

The AEI in Canada

Aside from Howard Pew's and David Frum's obvious connections, the  AEI has also inspired many Canadian think tanks, who often share financial backers.

They heavily influenced one of the first provincial neoconservative governments, that of Grant Devine in Saskatchewan (3).  Michael Novak is a regular speaker at both the Fraser Institute and the Manning Centre for Democracy, and according to Lloyd Mackey, has helped to shape the thinking of Stephen Harper. (4)

Their goals have changed little since the days of Lewis H. Brown.  They are just better organized, have more money, and have gained legitimacy thanks to the media, who often quote from their many reports.

Sources:

1. PUBLIC RELATIONS: Corporate Soul, Time Magazine, April 03, 1939

2. Testimony of Charles H. Roemer, Deposition taken April 25, 1984, Johns-Manville Corp., et al. v. the United States of America, U.S. Claims Court Civ. No. 465-83C, cited in Barry I. Castleman, Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects, 4th edition, Aspen Law and Business, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1996, p.581

3. Privatizing a Province: The New Right in Saskatchewan, By: James M. Pitsula and Ken Rasmussen, New Star Books, 1990, ISBN: 0-921586-10-8, p. 7

4. The Pilgramage of Stephen Harper, By: Lloyd Mackey, ECW Press, 2005, ISBN: 10-1-55022-713-0 , p. 94 & 209

Chapter Five: The Sacrament of Politics

The Canadian Manifesto: How the American Neoconservatives Stole My Country

Enthusiastic oilmen envision the Alberta of the future as a northern Texas whose oil and gas pipelines will fan out over the top half of the continent, driving the expanding industries of Canada and the northern U.S. as the oil and gas of Texas now power the South and East.  (CANADA: Texas of the North, Time Magazine, September 24, 1951)

As all that oil flowed out of Alberta, something else flowed in.  A new conservatism, then being thrust upon the Grand Old Party in the United States.

Premier Ernest Manning's close friend and confidante, J. Howard Pew, was a major player in the new Trinity of "God, Republicanism and the USA". 

Pew was a wealthy American oil tycoon and co-founder of Sun Oil (now Sunoco).  A Christian fundamentalist like Manning, he envisioned a North America run by the business elite, for the business elite, and based on the Supremacy of God.

We tend to dismiss this portion of our history, except as it relates to Alberta.  After all, the Social Credit Party is gone.  But in fact, it is now more important than ever, to study Ernest Manning's contribution to history, since it speaks to the time when Movement Conservatism first began in Canada.  Manning had abandoned the populism of Social Credit for the corporatism of the new American Right, and formulated his plans for a new Canadian Right, in the boardrooms of "enthusiastic oilmen", and financiers.

What was remarkable, was that they were able to turn a corporate takeover into a religious crusade.

Billy Graham and his Magical Kingdom

In 1964, Evangelical leader, Billy Graham, toured university campuses, speaking to students about God.  When appearing at Harvard, a young reporter for the school's newspaper, noticed that something was a bit off.  Or perhaps a bit too "on".

A question was presented to Graham from an audience member.  'How can I keep my intellectual integrity and believe in God?'  A good question, I suppose.  So good that someone else had made the same query at a press conference, held earlier that day.

In fact, it was identical to a question asked of Graham when he was speaking at Wellesley, Rindge Tech, Princeton and Michigan State.  The answers were also exactly the same, delivered with the same passion, and sense of revelation at such an obvious wringer.

The astute reporter for the Harvard Crimson, also noticed something else.  Graham's presentation reminded him of that of a Republican hopeful, who was also on a speaking engagement.  Said he:  "Billy Graham and Barry Goldwater have more in common than the initials they use." (1)

This would not have been such a surprise if the author had understood that both Graham and Goldwater were players in the movement conservatism that would soon be taking over right-wing politics.   Heavily scripted and rehearsed, nothing was left to chance.

When Billy Graham claimed to " believe every word of the Bible . . .", it was difficult for many in the audience to imagine how an ancient text could help solve the problems of the day.  Graham refused to address the Civil Rights Movement, only criticizing the demonstrations.

Harvard pastor, Rev. James R. Blanning, had been looking forward to Graham's appearance, but was disappointed.

Billy Graham was with us last week and it was a pleasure to have him in the Harvard community. Yet I think it should be clearly understood that he does not represent Protestant thinking and speaks only for himself. I say this because personally I have always felt that Dr. Graham combines a most appealing sincerity with an incredible understanding of Christian thought and theology. I say incredible because I don't know of any reputable Protestant seminary that teaches the kind of theology that he represented here last week.
 
For one thing, I am troubled by his insistence that the Bible was a kind of magical authority. His oft-repeated statement, "The Bible says," leaves the impression that a simple reading of the scriptures will provide all the answers to life. Never a word is said about biblical criticism or the contemporary understanding of textual material. In the matter of authority, the teachings of the Church or the development of theology are never mentioned. Billy Graham gives to the Bible a kind of authority that would make even Martin Luther uncomfortable. (2)

Other critics of Graham, suggested that he had taken religion back a century, something he would gladly claim to be true and intentional, though a century wasn't nearly enough.

Movement conservatism is a doctrine and their political actions a sacrament.  The infallibility of the Bible was necessary if they were going to build a set of principles around it.

But did Graham really believe it himself?  Perhaps not.

The late Charles Templeton (1915-2001), evangelical turned agnostic; wrote a book Farewell to God: My Reasons for Rejecting the Christian Faith. In it he describes his journey from a popular Christian crusader, and colleague of Billy Graham, to his eventual abandonment of organized religion.

At a stage in his life when he was beginning to have doubts about his faith, he went to his friend Graham, expecting some spiritual guidance.  He asked him how he could accept creationism as 'fact' when there was irrefutable evidence that the world had evolved over millions of years. Graham, an intelligent man, told him "I've discovered something in my ministry: when I take the Bible literally, when I proclaim it as the word of God, my preaching has power." (3)

It wasn't about what he believed but what he could sell.  He has built a  $100 million dollar empire and his own personal net worth is pegged at $25 million.  Former President Bush called Graham "America's pastor." Harry Truman called him a "counterfeit" and publicity seeker.

They were both right.

1964 was a pivotal year for movement conservatives.  They had taken over the Republican National Convention, bringing forth their own presidential candidate, Barry Goldwater.  Howard Pew had contributed to Goldwater's victory and financed Billy Graham's crusades.

When some in the mainstream media refused to run Goldwater's ads because they were too radical, they took down names.  When Harvard criticized both Graham and Goldwater, they dismissed them as "dupes, stupes and traitors".  And when Lyndon Johnson gave Goldwater a trouncing, they smiled. 

The battle lines were now drawn.  They had God and country on their side.  Let the crusades begin.

Perhaps the controversial Christian Crusader, Billy James Hargis said it best: 

In the wake of the tragic events of November 3 [1964], and their fearful consequences on the course of human events in the years to come, Crusaders must most assuredly don their armor of Christian responsibility and face the rigors of the battle ahead. With the cross of Christ and the American Flag as our only standards, we must reconsecrate our efforts, regardless of the cost, to right the terrible wrong which has been done. (4)

Canada Begins Her own Crusade

While Billy Graham was crusading for Howard Pew and his "Oil Tycoons" in the U.S., there was an opening for a crusader in Canada, and they saw promise in Preston Manning, the young son of Alberta Premier Ernest Manning.

He had studied the Reformation and was ready to apply what he learned to Canadian politics.  According to biographer Frank Dabbs:

Preston Manning's first major research project after his convocation was to assemble a body of literature on the Protestant Reformation and the history of English evangelical "awakenings" and American revival movements. He studied this material intensively for several weeks, created his own synthesis, then wrote a paper and developed some speeches about spiritual awakening in the 1960s. (5)

He then tested his theories on his father's Back to Bible radio program.  The elder Manning was hoping to return to the reforming passion that had first brought Social Credit to power in the province, instilling a sense of mission that could spread to a federal government.

It would take forty years and three failed parties, but eventually his dream came true, though he wouldn't live to see it.

Sources:

1. Billy Graham Silhouette, By Donald E. Graham, The Harvard Crimson, February 20, 1964

2. Billy Graham, The Mail, Harvard Crimson, February 26, 1964

3. Farewell to God: My Reasons for Rejecting the Christian Faith, By Charles Templeton, McClelland & Stewart, 1996, ISBN: 0-7710-8422-6, p. 7-8

4. The American Far Right:  A Case Study of Billy James Hargis and Christian Crusade, By John Harold Redekop, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1968, Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 67-28375, p. 201

5. Preston Manning: Roots of Reform, By: Frank Dabbs, Greystone, 2000, ISBN -13-97815-50547504, p. 59

The Canadian Manifesto: Chapter Two: Anointed With Oil

The Canadian Manifesto: How the American Neoconservatives Stole My Country

According to Paul Krugman in The Conscience of a Liberal, "movement conservatism" began in the 1940's, when a group of Republicans, bitterly opposed to FDR's "New Deal", created what they referred to as "New Conservatism".

These "new conservatives" would join forces with the Neoconservatives, who provided the scholarly backup required for legitimacy, and eventually, on the advice of the man who calls himself the Godfather of Neoconservatism, Irving Kristol, they merged with the Religious Right.

The first bold act for the movement took place in 1964, when a large group of new conservative activists seized control of the Republican National Convention, nominating Barry Goldwater to run for the presidency.

Goldwater, dubbed the "merchant prince", came from a wealthy business-class family, and was thought a good choice, by like-minded souls, to push back against not only the "welfare state", but the Civil Rights Movement and the growing influence of unions.

He was well funded in his bid, by monied Americans, including Texas oil tycoon, H.L. Hunt, a vocal opponent of FDR.

But there was another Goldwater financial backer, who is of interest to Canadians.  His name was Joseph Howard Pew, and he would be responsible for not only creating the tar sands environmental mess, but for bringing Republican style politics to Canada.

Ernest and Howard

On February 13, 1947, Leduc Alberta struck liquid gold and the world took notice, especially the American oilmen.

Since 1947, when Imperial Oil, Ltd.'s Leduc No. 1 gushed from a snow-covered Alberta plain, 45 new oilfields have been spudded in across the province. Portable derricks, lumbering over the land like giant steel giraffes, have drilled more than two new wells a day. More than 300 million U.S. dollars, one of the freest and fastest streams of American private capital ever sluiced into a foreign country, have been invested in Alberta oil. Reserves of 2 billion bbls. are already proved, and experts say that that is only the first tide from a great oily sea buried deep under the province's fields, lakes and mountains. (1)

Time Magazine began referring to Alberta as "Texas North", but with all of that U.S. money, came a unique U.S. culture.

Oil company owners, many of them American themselves, identified strongly with their U.S. cousins, and Alberta was often described as a sort of second-string Texas. The American free-enterprise spirit and the cult of the individual is strongly embodied in the oil-patch culture. (2)

Ernest Manning couldn't be happier.  Before the Leduc gusher, he was scrambling for solutions to the province's economic woes.  He  had inherited the Social Credit Party from William Aberhart, but would have to prove himself capable in his own right, or risk losing his job.

Now he was being courted by some of the biggest names in the American oil industry, including J. Howard Pew.  The two formed a business and personal relationship, beginning in 1949.  Both were fundamentalist Christians who believed in the inerrancy of the Bible.

Their wives also became friends, and for one week every year, the two couples vacationed together at Lake Louise. (3)

A Profitable Friendship

Howard Pew's Sun Oil Company, owed much of its success to two world wars.   They had supplied most of the lubricating oils used by the Allies in WWI and were a leading supplier of aviation fuel in WWII. 

However, with no new war on the horizon, it became necessary to search for profits elsewhere, and where better than Canada, with crude just begging to be tapped into, and with a potential ban on the export of oil from the U.S., (4) the situation became even more critical.

So in 1954, the Pews bought into the Great Canadian Oil Sands consortium, acquiring a 75 percent interest from Abasand Oils. But not everyone was on board with their plans.  According to Alastair Sweeny in his book, Black Bonanza:

The project ran into a major roadblock in November 1960, when the Alberta Oil and Gas Conservation Board rejected the project on technical and economic grounds. As feared, conventional oilmen were mounting a ferocious lobby against bitumen extraction because of a continuing oil glut in Alberta, and they were afraid that prices would drop even further. For a time, the Alberta government stalled all oil sands development for the same reason. To show the depth of rage felt by conventional oil people, Suncor veteran Joe Fitzgerald tells of being accosted in the Petroleum Club in Calgary where an angry and over-refreshed oil executive threatened to have him expelled because he was not a "real oilman". (5)

So Howard Pew went to his old friend Manning and poured on the charm.  Consequently the following headline appeared on April 13, 1964:

ALBERTA GOVERNMENT GIVES FORMAL APPROVAL TO GREAT CANADIAN OIL SANDS FOR $190 MILLION OIL SANDS PROJECT

In return, Pew began to channel $10,000 a year into Manning's radio program, Back to the Bible Hour. (6)

I believe this is what they refer to as Divine Intervention.

On September 30, 1967,  the Great Canadian Oil Sands at Fort McMurray, now controlled by Pew's Suncor (Sunoco), was officially opened for business, with Manning addressing  the adoring throng of oil soaked  revellers.

"This is a red-letter day," said Ernest Manning, "not only for Canada but for all North America. No other event in Canada's centennial year is more important or significant. It is fitting," he said, taking the goals of the site to the higher plane of the lay preacher that he was, "that we are gathered here today to dedicate this plant not merely to the production of oil but to the continual progress and enrichment of mankind". (5)

I would hardly call the tar sands "the enrichment of mankind", but they certainly did a great deal to enrich Howard Pew.

The Gift That Keeps on Giving

According to his bio, Pew (d. 1971) was a philanthropist, guided by his deep Christian faith.  After all, he did finance Billy Graham's crusades, and invested heavily into several Christian magazines.

But there is another side to Pew, that is far more revealing and relative to the political climate in Canada today. 

Throughout his lifetime, he supported many extreme-right organizations, campaigns and publications.

In the 1930's, along with the DuPont family, he backed the American Liberty League, a pro-active group opposing the New Deal.  It was believed that they were simply a front for the Republican National Committee.

In 1946, he help to fund the Foundation for Economic Education , a  “think tank” with  a get-government-off-people’s-backs philosophy. 'By 1950, it was under investigation for illegal lobbying activities. A radio commentator then called it “one of the biggest and best financed, pressure outfits in America.... the fountainhead for half-truths and distortions, designed to deceive the American public” and “a vicious anti-labor propaganda outfit [that] spreads its venom…to crush organized labor.” The CIO News sarcastically said the FEE’s goal was to “convince the average American that the country is going socialist…and that…social security, unemployment compensation, public housing, rent and other price controls are depriving him of his freedom to go hungry and unsheltered.” '(7)

Christian Freedom Foundation was started as a tax-exempt outfit in 1950, and before his death he had contributed $2.3 million, some of it being channeled into Third Century Publishers to fuel ultra-right Christian politics. In 1976, the CFF’s goal was to make America a “Christian Republic” by electing Christian conservatives to Congress.

Christian Economic Foundation (CEF):  'In the 1950s, after failing to move the National Council of Churches to the far right, Pew helped create the CEF. In the 1960s, it sowed the seeds of the Christian Right by sending its free magazine, Christian Economics, to clergy across the U.S.' (7)

John Birch Society (JBS): J.H. Pew was a longtime supporter and close friend of Robert Welch, who founded the JBS in 1959. For many years, it led America’s far-right, rabidly anti-communist pack. By 1963, funded largely by J.H. Pew and other oil and military corporations, the JBS had 1,000 chapters and 80,000 members.  Though pushed to the sidelines after calling Eisenhower a Communist, the John Birch Society is now one of the sponsors of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).

The Pew Family foundations continue to support several right-wing organizations, associated with the Republican Party in the U.S. and the Conservative Party in Canada, including:

The American Enterprise Institute: an arch-conservative lobby group with ties to Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle,  Dick Cheney and his wife Lynn. 

George Bush pulled 20 staffers from AEI, to join his administration, including David Frum, the person who organized the Winds of Change, dedicated to uniting the right (aka: the hostile takeover of the Tory Party by the Reform-Alliance), and is now a voice in our own neoconservative government.  Frum was a speechwriter for Bush, and coined the term "axis of evil".

AEI's ties to Canada go back further than Frum, however, as they also influenced the Saskatchewan government of Grant Devine.  In Privatizing a Province: The New Right in Saskatchewan, James M. Pitsula and Ken Rasmussen, write:

The new right's attack on the welfare state included a moral component contributed by the new Christian right, which claims to find sanction for private enterprise economics in the Bible. A good example of this approach comes from Michael Novak of the American Enterprise Institute: "I advise intelligent, ambitious, and morally serious young Christians and Jews to awaken to the growing dangers of statism. They will better save their souls and serve the cause of the Kingdom of God all around the world by restoring the liberty and power of the private sector than by working for the state."' The private sector would not only make you rich, it would save your soul. (8)

Michael Novak is also a regular speaker at the Manning Centre and the Fraser Institute, and according to Lloyd Mackey, has influenced the thinking of Stephen Harper. (9)

Another ultra-right wing group to enjoy the benefit of Pew dollars, is The Heritage Foundation.  According to SourceWatch: 'Its stated mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of "free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense." It is widely considered one of the world's most influential public policy research institutes.'  The Heritage Foundation also receives funds from the Koch Brothers, who finance the Tea Party, and have a stake in the Alberta tar sands.

According to Reuters, Stephen Harper is using our tax dollars to build them a pipeline.

The Keystone XL pipeline, awaiting a thumbs up or down on a presidential permit, would increase the import of heavy oil from Canada's oil sands to the U.S. by as much as 510,000 barrels a day ... what's been left out of the ferocious debate over the pipeline, however, is the prospect that if president Obama allows a permit for the Keystone XL to be granted, he would be handing a big victory and great financial opportunity to Charles and David Koch, his bitterest political enemies and among the most powerful opponents of his clean economy agenda.

The Koch brothers are not run-of-the-mill political opponents. An investigative report last year by the New Yorker magazine on the secretive and deep-pocketed pair have shown them to be "waging a war against Obama."  They have bankrolled the Tea Party movement, climate change skepticism and right-wing think tanks, such as the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the National Center for Policy Analysis.

Obama has not shown his cards on the pipeline permit, even after Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper made a personal appeal for swift approval at a White House meeting last week ....  After they finished with their prepared remarks, a Canadian reporter asked Harper if he had discussed the pipeline permit with President Obama. The prime minister said that "we did discuss the matter you raised," but he provided no fresh details, only a rambling rationale for why approval of the permit would be in the American interest. When Harper was done, the president offered no comment. He quickly took the next question. (10)

Yes, our man Harper.  The new shill for the Koch Brothers.

The pipeline, which will send many good Canadian jobs in the industry, South, (11) is meeting with a lot of opposition.  A decision is expected to be reached by the end of 2011.
However, if you think that Howard Pew has done enough for Canada, I'm afraid there's more to come.

Sources:

1. CANADA: Texas of the North, Time Magazine, September 24, 1951

2. Preston Manning and the Reform Party, By Murray Dobbin, Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing, 1992, ISBN: 0-88780-161-7, p. 14

3. Preston Manning: Roots of Reform, By: Frank Dabbs, Greystone, 2000, ISBN -13-97815-50547504 4, p. 44

4. Nickle Oil Bulletin, Calgary,  January 30, 1948

5. Black Bonanza: Canada's Oil Sands and the Race to Secure North America's Energy Future, By Alastair Sweeny,  John Wiley and Sons, 2010, ISBN: 978 0470 161 388

6. The Good Steward: The Ernest Manning Story, by Brian Brennan, Historical Society of Alberta, Winter 2009 

7. J. Howard Pew, By Richard Sanders, Editor, Press for Conversion magazine, Issue # 53, "Facing the Corporate Roots of American Fascism," March 2004

8. Privatizing a Province: The New Right in Saskatchewan, By: James M. Pitsula and Ken Rasmussen, New Star Books, 1990, ISBN: 0-921586-10-8, Pg. 7

9. The Pilgramage of Stephen Harper, By: Lloyd Mackey, ECW Press, 2005, ISBN: 10-1-55022-713-0 , p. 94 & p. 209

10. Koch Brothers Positioned to be BigWinners if Keystone XL Pipeline is Approved, By David Sassoon, Reuters, February 10, 2011

11. Pipeline would ship oil and jobs south, By Dave Coles, Toronto Star, August 8, 2010