Abstract
AbstractCanadian immigration policy of the 1930s and 1940s was the most restrictive and selective in the country’s history, making it one of the countries to take the smallest number of Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi persecution. After the war, Canada slowly opened its borders, but only through small token gestures in 1947 and 1948. This article explores how the main Canadian Jewish organization lobbied for the welcoming of more Jewish refugees and migrants in the immediate aftermath of the war. It examines how their perception of the public’s anti-Jewish immigrant sentiment and of the Canadian immigration policy’s discriminatory mechanisms informed their strategies. During that period, the Canadian Jewish Congress prioritized constant and subtle action with the government instead of trying to set up mass mobilization campaigns. This strategic shift is an overshadowed but essential chapter of both Jewish and human rights histories in Canada. This article invites a re-evaluation of Jewish activism’s role in ending ethnic selection in the Canadian immigration policy and promoting refugee rights. It contributes to broadening our understanding of how minority groups lobbied and worked with hostile media and authorities.
Highlights
Canadian immigration policy of the 1930s and 1940s was the most restrictive and selective in the country’s history, making it one of the countries to take the smallest number of Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazi persecution
Situation would be for us to be thankful that a resolution requesting the government to permit immigration to this country is super important – stop – the fight on educating the public to equal treatment for all will have to come later.’31 Hayes’ advice illustrated his idea of lobbying: in the short term, supporting any initiative pressuring the government to liberalize its immigration policy, even when it did not directly benefit Jewish populations, was more efficient than openly fighting antisemitism and anti-Jewish immigration sentiment
Pormises [sic] and reneg [sic] on commitments.’61 This controversy demonstrates the ambiguous relations between the non-Jewish media and government representatives; some of the latter did not hesitate to fuel the idea of strong anti-Jewish immigration sentiment in order to justify their position on the matter
Summary
In March 2015, Justin Trudeau, leader of the Liberal Party, criticized the conservative government’s response to refugees and accused Prime Minister Stephen Harper of using ‘the same rhetoric that led to a “none is too many” immigration policy towards Jews in the 1930s and 1940s’.1 By making a reference to the 1982 book by historians Irving Abella and Harold Troper, Trudeau drew a parallel with a period that is regarded as the most restrictive and selective in Canadian history, especially because of its discrimination towards Jewish migrants and refugees. The ‘blatant anti-Semitism’ and the stubbornness of its federal administration, the hostility of its population, and the powerlessness and division of its Jewish community are well documented. This article aims to look at the often neglected immediate aftermath of the war and to explore this general hostility and how it was perceived and fought against in the immediate post-war period by the country’s main Jewish lobbying and social organization, the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC). While reassuring her that the CJC’s policy was to advocate for the suppression of any racial discrimination in the Immigration Act and to fight against selective immigration, Hayes recommended that she vote in favour of the text, concluding his telegram by stating: ‘We feel the practical situation would be for us to be thankful that a resolution requesting the government to permit immigration to this country is super important – stop – the fight on educating the public to equal treatment for all will have to come later.’ Hayes’ advice illustrated his idea of lobbying: in the short term, supporting any initiative pressuring the government to liberalize its immigration policy, even when it did not directly benefit Jewish populations, was more efficient than openly fighting antisemitism and anti-Jewish immigration sentiment
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
