You all spoke of a large group of people in the middle who did not oppose fascists/radical segregationists. These people seemed to see both fascists and communists/leftists as trouble-makers. What were the ramifications of the moderates not taking sides?

For any of the panellists, it seems like one of the most important elements involved is language and how language changes. Currently there's a lot of arguments over definitions, and one side or another not accepting 'common' ones, or working to redefine things. Did you see similar arguments in your own periods?

/u/kugelfang52, I was wondering if you could say more about "Brotherhood Week"? Was it adopted in New York City schools or just an idea that was more about marketing? Thanks!

A question for u/kugelfang52: As I understand the chronology of your work, a lot of the groundwork for totalitarian interpretations of fascism equating it with Soviet-style communism seems to have happened in the 1940s. Most of the foundational texts dealing with totalitarianism as a concept to describe both Stalinism and Nazism I can think of date from the 1950s or later. What sort of earlier ideas and discourses were being drawn upon in the 1940s to create the narratives you discuss?

Thank you all for putting this panel together! I haven't had a chance to watch yet, but I'm very much looking forward to it!

I have a few questions for /u/tdwentzell (with my apologies if they've already been addressed in the video!)

1. What information dissemination tactics did the NUP use to recruit new members and how did they know it would work?
2. You mentioned in the abstract that there were similar organizations on the west coast and in Montreal. How similar/different were these organizations from the NUP? Did they have any sort of official relationship at all?
3. You didn't mention the Atlantic provinces in the abstract—were there not similar movements there? (asking as a Maritimer!)

A fantastic job from all of you and a great video.

For /u/tdwentzell, you argued that because the communist groups adhered to an ideology, they were more prone to fracture whereas the fascists, who had less clear of a platform other than "unity," did not divide as much. How much of the fracturing was ideological and how much related to the geopolitics of the interwar years and early WWII?

/u/Dr_Megan_Hunt , you said that both desegregationists and radical segregationists sought media attention to bolster their cause. Did African American Civil Rights ultimately benefit from this attention, or did it simply make Americans aware of the conflict. Did it change responses? How? Conversely, in the short term, how much did it help the radical segregationists?

One for u/tdwentzell, who will spot the self-serving nature of the question a mile off :P

How far did anti-fascist demonstrators draw on transnational or international events, rhetoric and symbols to frame their protest? I'm thinking here of the comparison with the Battle of Cable Street in London, where despite the popular memory of the event as a very local affair, the anti-fascists (especially communists) drew on imagery and rhetoric grounded in the transnational nature of the struggle, explicitly linking their efforts to stop Mosley as being part of the same struggle to stop Franco, for instance. Was Toronto similar?

This question is for Mr Abt. You made a few statements about the far right and your explanation things. But you didn't mention the far left. Don't you agree that both far right and far left are both devastating to what's happening especially when it comes to unity throughout our history? Don't you agree that it is everyone's responsibility to fix the mistakes or country has made and continue to work on it together wouldn't this be more about unity and not about who's right who's wrong or who did worse or would do better?

What about non-black minorities?

Which don’t seem to get many mentions in American race discussions?

/u/tdwentzell, your paper was interesting, and timely, and, if I can say so, frightening in how it reflects modern fascist and antifascist protests, but I'm most curious about how you mentioned that the first NUP rally was held on July 4th. I have to imagine that was intentional; was it? Did the NUP and related fascist groups use other American iconography or history to promote their ideas?

I have a question for Mr. Abt, you mentioned how right-wing conservatives in the late-1940s switched the narrative of their own similarities to Nazi ideology onto the left-wing. I guess I'm wondering the extent to which the right-wingers involved were using the same tactics that the fake soldiers in the propaganda were using to strengthen their message. According to them, the American ideal of unity was at risk by the left-wing as they brought attention to injustices within the country, deeming the call for reflection and progress as a threat. How much did these right-wingers actually believe the similarities between the left and the Nazis, or was it all just a rouse to deflect responsibility and further alienate one side so that they could gain power or moral authority?

For those interested, I have posted some photos of the fascist and anti-fascist rallies during the summer of 1938 in Toronto. Here is the link: https://twitter.com/tylerwentzell/status/1306602115389890562

/u/kugelfang52, your title and paper abstract suggested that American fascists appropriated anti-Nazi rhetoric, but in your paper, you spoke mainly of conservative teachers rather than fascists who used such language. Were there other cases of domestic fascists also appropriating it?

As a follow up, I found everyones papers to be really interesting, and I'd be interested in hearing any additional points the experts might want to share but didn't have time to discuss in the video.

A question for Tyler Wentzell. Do you believe your background in law and the military gave you a different perspective on the subject and in the subject unity? And you expand on that?

This is a question for Megan hunt on her topic. Do you think media at that time skewed it in other ways that you mentioned. One might being that there was more people talking and trying to look at different ways of being done but the more exciting news was being portrayed because more exciting news pays more. This could be another reason why other candidates weren't being looked at because throughout history we can see how media can skew things and go for profit more than it can be factual.

u/kugelfang52 Which books about fascist movements in mid-20th century America most informed the argument in your paper?

Another fantastic round of speakers!

For now I have a three-parter question for u/tdwentzell:

1. I know you mentioned that the NUP aspired to be more British than the British, but what did that mean exactly? On the one hand, what did that mean relative to existing British Canadian identity at the time? How did they distinguish themselves in terms of identity against other Canadian nationalist or imperialist interest groups and identities?

2. Insofar as they had any policies (which you said they didn't really), did they have any particular stances on imperial devolution like the Statute of Westminster or imperial federation proposals? How was the NUP organized? Did it pursue any transnational ties with other British Commonwealth fascist groups (like Mosley's BUF), if not continental fascist powers?

3. Related to the first question, do you know if the Orange Order (which was regnant in Toronto at the time) had any particular stance or reactions towards the NUP? Did the NUP openly try to compete with the Orange Order in articulating what it meant to be "British Canadian", and did the Order reciprocate such a challenge? I presume that the NUP's anti-sectarian stance wouldn't be looked upon favourably by the Order...?

Thanks!

Good morning and welcome to the “Being the Change That Others Don’t Want: Asserting and Resisting Racial Hierarchies in Midcentury North America” conference panel Q&A! This panel examines strategies, language and culture of protests and counter-protests in the United States and Canada centered on the subjects of Fascism and Race. It focuses on a variety of actors engaging in protests and counter-protests, on questions of framing and re-framing protests and agendas as well as on reaction and reflection of social upheaval. By asking questions about language, effectiveness of protests and the role of so-called moderates, the panelists present a historical perspective on subjects that are evermore present and urgent in this very age.

Moderated by Johannes Breit (/u/commiespaceinvader), this panel features:

Tyler Wentzell (/u/tdwentzell), presenting his paper, “Fascists in Hogtown: Toronto’s Reaction and Resistance to the National Unity Party during the Summer of 1938”.

For most of the Great Depression, Canada’s fascist parties were small, marginal, and disunited. While the Parti National Social Chrétien had achieved a public presence in Montreal, similar organizations on the west coast, the prairies, and Ontario were small in membership and influence. They mostly lurked about in secret meetings in members’ homes. This changed in the summer of 1938 with the establishment of a National Unity Party (NUP). The NUP united the disparate nationalist parties; openly recruited soldiers, ex-soldiers, and police; and held a public rally at one of Toronto’s largest venues: Massey Hall.

This paper examines how Torontonians reacted to the “arrival” of the NUP that summer. Specifically, it examines the tactics employed by a disparate anti-fascist movement, how city officials publicly responded to the free speech debate, and how some members of the local militia and police openly supported the NUP. Drawing upon personal papers, organizational records of the resisters, legal records, and newspaper accounts, this paper concludes that while many vocal Torontonians were vocally opposed to the NUP, the majority were indifferent or even supportive of its stated objectives.

​Ryan Abt (/u/kugelfang52), presenting his paper, “Everyone I Don’t Like is Hitler: The Appropriation of Anti-Nazi Axioms by American Fascists, 1944–1949”.

In the 1930s and early 1940s, American educators perceived group hatreds as a significant danger when facing the growth of Nazism. They believed that the Nazis succeeded in coming to power and in conquering enemies through “divide and conquer” techniques. These methods fostered group antagonisms, which weakened the Nazis’ enemies. In response, educators seized upon intercultural and unity education to defeat the subversive effects of what they saw as imported “Nazi racial ideology.” These efforts found significant purchase in educational curricula between 1933 and 1945.

By the end of the war, however, organizations, which such educational initiatives had denounced, due to either their embrace of fascism or demagogic intolerance, began to use calls for unity to silence progressive educators. Decrying charges of bigotry as divisive, conservative educators depicted intercultural education as communist “divide and conquer” subversion. They, thereby, reoriented Americans’ understandings of Nazism by focusing on the methods of totalitarianism and ignoring its specific ideological components. This realignment submerged the racial components of the Nazi atrocities and silenced efforts at drawing parallels and lessons in U.S. society.

​Dr. Megan Hunt (/u/Dr_Megan_Hunt), presenting her paper, “Bringing the Millennium to Birmingham: To Kill a Mockingbird and Racial Protest in Alabama’s Magic City”. ​ On April 3, 1963, residents of Birmingham, Alabama woke to triumphant newspaper reports of “a new day” penned by mayor-elect, Albert Boutwell. Touting himself as a moderate, Boutwell was a segregationist: unlikely “to bring the millennium to Birmingham”, according to Martin Luther King, Jr. For the city’s Black population, barred from downtown employment, this “new day” signified “business as usual”. Boutwell celebrated his victory immediately, at the city’s segregated premiere of To Kill a Mockingbird. Across town, and willfully ignored by those at the premiere, April 3, 1963 marked the beginning of “Project X” a consolidated effort to draw attention to the city’s entrenched racism as part of a national push for civil rights legislation. Images of city police violently confronting young protestors would cement the city’s reputation for racial hatred and brutality, but ultimately force President Kennedy to acknowledge civil rights as a “moral issue”.

This paper argues that the election, premiere, and Project X offer a composite image of the city’s culture and self-image as it entered a defining era of “chaos, revolution, and change”. April 3, 1963 afforded glamour and celebration for some, as other residents began to storm the barricades of a segregated citadel. The Magic City, as inhabited and imagined by each group, could not have been more different.

Ask us anything!

Find more of today's conference content here.

Learn more about the AskHistorians 2020 Digital Conference here.

A slightly meta one for u/Dr_Megan_Hunt - are there any particular advantages or difficulties to researching your topic as a non-American?

What about minority religions? Other then Judaism , Sikhs ,Hindus,Muslims, Native American spiritualty, erect. How do they play into patterns of oppression and civil rights movement