{"id":40,"date":"2008-02-02T15:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-02-02T21:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/?p=40"},"modified":"2021-04-04T12:17:42","modified_gmt":"2021-04-04T17:17:42","slug":"apostle-of-anarchy-emma-goldman","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/2008\/02\/02\/apostle-of-anarchy-emma-goldman\/","title":{"rendered":"“Apostle of Anarchy:” Emma Goldman’s First Visit to Winnipeg in 1907"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Originally published in Manitoba History Journal<\/a> (Number 57, February 2008)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Emma Goldman visited and lectured in Winnipeg on five separate occasions: first in 1907, twice in 1908, again in 1927, and finally in late-1939, just five months before her death on 14 May 1940. [2<\/a>] The Lithuanian-born Jewish revolutionary and pioneer feminist was not yet forty years old when she first came to Winnipeg, but she was already the most famous, or more precisely, infamous anarchist in North America. The newspapers of the day invariably labelled her \u201cRed Emma,\u201d or bestowed upon her grandiose, half-mocking titles such as \u201cHigh Priestess of Anarchy\u201d or \u201cAnarchist Queen.\u201d At first glance, Winnipeg might seem an unlikely destination for the person who J. Edgar Hoover called \u201cthe most dangerous woman in America.\u201d But Emma Goldman was a tireless activist, writer, and public speaker, one who lectured from coast-to-coast for much of her life, and it is not difficult to see what first drew her to the city.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Winnipeg was a colonial boomtown in the early twentieth-century. According to one estimate, it had about 90,000 people in 1906, and probably over 100,000 the following year\u2014making it one of the largest population centres in Canada at that time, and the fourth most important manufacturing centre in the Dominion. [3<\/a>] Winnipeg was the \u201cgateway\u201d to the \u201cnorthwest\u201d for arriving immigrants, and every other day the local newspapers featured front-page stories announcing the arrival of ships to eastern ports, as well as trainloads of new arrivals bound for points west. [4<\/a>] Who<\/em> these immigrants were was a matter of deep anxiety for the largely WASP elite, as exemplified even by relatively progressive voices like J. S. Woodsworth<\/a>, [5<\/a>] not to mention debates within the pages of the local labour weekly The Voice<\/em>. [6<\/a>] Anglo elites in Winnipeg, and prominent \u201cnational\u201d figures, such as Minister of Interior Clifford Sifton<\/a> and railway magnate William Van Horne<\/a>, sought to replicate \u201cBritish-style\u201d institutions in the northwest, and fill the Prairies with \u201cthe right class\u201d of \u201csettlers\u201d\u2014meaning, those of \u201cNordic\u201d or \u201cAnglo-Saxon\u201d stock, followed by a descending hierarchy of \u201cless desirable\u201d types based on assumed racial, cultural, and religious criteria. [7<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most of the new arrivals were, not coincidentally, British, or English-speakers from elsewhere in Canada or the United States\u2014and in terms of the prevailing imperial perspective of the day, such people were often characterized as the true \u201cnatives\u201d of the land. [8<\/a>] But Canadian expansionists were also torn between their ideal (and typically racist) imperial visions, and their pragmatism when it came to the logistics of continental expansion, or when it came to the \u201cneeds\u201d of industry for cheap labour. Significant numbers of Scandinavians, Italians, Germans, Russians, Ukrainians, and European Jews were also arriving, and other cultural groups in smaller numbers\u2014seeking land or wage-work, or both, in what was often viewed as a \u201cfree\u201d or \u201cvacant\u201d land of \u201copportunity.\u201d Before and after the completion of the continental railway, dozens of colonies of Jews, Icelanders, Mennonites, Doukhobors, and other ethnic, cultural or religious groups were founded in Manitoba and the Prairies, and this process continued into the twentieth-century. For example, as Roz Usiskin notes, after the failed 1905 Revolution in Russia, and renewed Tsarist pogroms, a new wave of Jewish immigration to Canada occurred. [9<\/a>] The ruling class was more than happy to utilize such immigrants, many of whom were unskilled or semi-skilled, as a weapon against skilled labour and established labour organizations. [10<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A significant minority of these new immigrants (Jewish and otherwise) had been dissidents and revolutionaries in their home countries, and brought with them, if not openly socialist or anarchist views, then often radical notions of labour organizing, and experience with strikes and unions. While English-speaking elites were trying to maintain their self-appointed privileges, and make enormous profits through control of colonization, local government, investments, access to patronage positions and resourceextraction leases, as well as early land acquisition and speculation, more marginalized immigrants brought with them their own visions of rights and justice. They formed trade and farmers\u2019 unions to protect their interests, engaged in strikes, formed cooperatives and mutual aid societies, and even established their own schools and newspapers\u2014 partly along cultural and religious lines, but also on the bases of class and ideology. It was in 1907, for example, that Jewish radicals formed their own Arbeiter Ring<\/em> (\u201cWorkers\u2019 Circle\u201d) local in Winnipeg, a mutual aid society that had as its ultimate goal the abolition of capitalism, and its replacement by some kind of \u201csocialist\u201d society. [11<\/a>] It was precisely this sector of Winnipeg\u2019s radical community that invited Emma Goldman\u2014the most famous anarchist in North America\u2014to speak that very same year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before discussing some of the details of Goldman\u2019s first visit, it is important to emphasize that colonial society\u2014despite its internal divisions, and despite the bitter class war that is often rendered invisible by narratives of \u201cpeaceful settlement\u201d and \u201cnation-building\u201d in Canadian historiography\u2014was in fact, fairly united in one critical domain: its willingness to instigate, ignore or profit from, the ongoing dispossession of indigenous peoples. Bryan Palmer was no doubt correct to suggest that the working-class\u2014despite its transformation from a largely skilled and \u201coverwhelmingly Anglo-American\u201d labour force, to a much more diverse (culturally and linguistically) and less-skilled labour force\u2014\u201cremained a distinct entity, with a culture marked off from that of its rulers.\u201d [12<\/a>] However, it was also true that poor and marginalized immigrants, regardless of whether or not they were fleeing tyranny elsewhere, and regardless of the degree of their \u201crevolutionary\u201d ideals, as well as their level of hostility to the rise of monopoly capitalism, were nevertheless colonizers<\/em>, seeking land and prosperity of their own. As such, rich or poor, they were also<\/em> a \u201cdistinct entity, with a culture marked off\u201d from that of indigenous peoples. As colonizers, they were generally disinclined to worry about the dispossession of the original owners of the land, except insofar as this might generate violent resistance. [13<\/a>] In many ways, Emma Goldman\u2019s visits to Winnipeg in 1907-1908 highlight this point, and speak to some of the contradictions within \u201cclassical\u201d Anarchism (and to be fair, within every current of revolutionary thought) in relation to settlercolonialism and indigenous peoples. [14<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before Emma Goldman ever got to Winnipeg, news of her pending visit and planned lectures made the mainstream media\u2014perhaps understandably, in her case, due to the attempt to link her to the assassination of President William McKinley in 1901. [15<\/a>] A full week before her arrival, The Manitoba Free Press<\/em> published a lengthy story that read more like a press release from supporters than the typical corporate media denunciations: \u201cCitizens of Winnipeg are to have opportunities next week of hearing Emma Goldman of New York, the great Jewish lady orator, who is now making a tour of the United States and Canada.\u201d The article outlined the titles of her five planned subjects, the location of the talks (at the James Avenue Trades Hall), the languages that each would be given in, and ended with a brief biographical description and a quote from one of her talks in Toronto, to the effect that \u201cAll natural wealth is due to the production of the working classes. If God has given the world for all, no man has a right to exclude any from it to \u2026 his own self-aggrandisement.\u201d [16<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On 6 April, four days before her arrival, the Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, published another article entitled \u201cPreaching Anarchy\u201d and sub-titled \u201cEmma Goldman\u2019s Doctrine as Promulgated in Toronto.\u201d The piece quoted Goldman as saying, in part:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Government is always on the side of the rich against the poor, of the strong against the weak, of the robbers against the robbed. Therefore, anarchy intends to destroy government, and allow each man to be a law unto himself, unrestrained by any form of coercion. Every human being will then be able to enjoy the fullest extent of self-expression and gratify his own desires, unrestricted except by his own respect for the rights of others.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

This time, however, the Free Press<\/em> chose to end with a note of sarcasm, saying: \u201cCuriously enough, the subject of Miss Goldman\u2019s address was \u2019Misconceptions about Anarchism,\u2019 and yet her description of anarchy and the view entertained of it by the public are wonderfully alike.\u201d [17<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The morning of Goldman\u2019s arrival on Wednesday, 10 April, both the Winnipeg Tribune<\/em> and Manitoba Free Press<\/em> had lengthy expos\u00e9s on Goldman\u2019s life, views, and local lectures. The Free Press piece, sub-titled \u201cWell Known Woman Anarchist to Deliver Addresses Here This Week,\u201d reiterated the basic facts of her lecture itinerary, but also stated that Goldman \u201cis being brought to the city by the Radical Club of Winnipeg, which is made up largely of Hebrew people. There are, however, a number of English members in the organization, and also a number of Galicians.\u201d [18<\/a>] The article also quoted an unnamed \u201cofficer\u201d of this \u201cRadical Club\u201d stating that \u201ceverywhere\u201d Goldman speaks she<\/p>\n\n\n\n

is heard by large audiences of people, especially of the working classes. All that she stands for is freedom and justice, and when the ideas which she advocates triumph, the world will be very much happier and better than it is at the present time. [19<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The Winnipeg Tribune<\/em> article of that same day was given prominent placement on the front page. A large sub-title read: \u201cEmma Goldman, Apostle of Anarchy Tells What the Philosophy of Anarchism is and What Would Happen if Anarchy Was in Place of Artificial Laws….\u201d This article was actually based on an interview by a beat journalist with the Tribune<\/em>, who went to meet Goldman after the paper received a formal invitation. The article began with the obligatory joke about bomb-throwing, and the journalist\u2019s trepidation at meeting such a notorious woman, who must surely have been \u201da swarthy Amazon, six feet or more tall, and with a voice like sounding brass.\u201d He was surprised, however, to find Goldman to be \u201ca small woman, with a soft voice and ready smile, but withal, of seriousness quite fitting to one who preaches a gospel so new that it has not yet advanced beyond the stage of persecution and unbelief….\u201d The interviewer then felt the need to inject his own gendered assessment of Goldman\u2019s character. He wrote that Goldman \u201chas the true womanly presence and charm of her sex … [and that] freedom of speech and the unburdened expression of thought increases, in the fair sex, in inverse proportion to the size of the individual.\u201d [20<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cA recognized authority on anarchy.\u201d The Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, Morning Telegram<\/em>, and Winnipeg Tribune<\/em> reported on a Goldman lecture in their 11 April 1907 editions. The Tribune concluded that \u201cthe unburdened expression of thought increases, in the fair sex, in inverse proportion to the size of the individual.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The transcript of the interview was wide ranging, beginning with the details of her lectures in Winnipeg. Goldman herself was quoted as saying:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I shall deliver five lectures while I am here, all at the Trades Hall, and they will be open to all who choose to come. These lectures have been arranged by the Society of Anarchists of this city, and the subjects of two of these talks have been announced. The other three will be given in the German language and will be upon the following subjects: \u201cCrimes of Parents and Educators,\u201d \u201cDirect Action versus Legislation\u201d and \u201cThe Position of the Jews in Russia.\u201d [21<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The first two talks that Goldman alluded to were two of her staple lectures: \u201cMisconceptions About Anarchism\u201d and \u201cThe Spirit of Revolt in the Modern Drama.\u201d The interview also touched on items as diverse as the cold Winnipeg weather, and Goldman\u2019s life in New York, to past tours of Europe, to Kropotkin, opposition and support for her current lecture tour in North America, what country she thought had the greatest degree of freedom, laws against anarchists in the United States, the futility of law, the causes of theft and crime, her own age (Goldman was 39 when she first came to Winnipeg), the number and type of anarchists in Winnipeg, and the relative violence of individual anarchists versus the monumental crimes and violence of the State.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Goldman\u2019s \u201cMisconceptions About Anarchism\u201d talk was held on Wednesday, 10 April, the night of her arrival. All three of the major newspaper dailies (The Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, and Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>) sent reporters to cover the talk, and all three printed lengthy accounts the next morning. The first two dailies attacked Goldman and her views (both real and imagined). The Telegram<\/em>, for example, ran both a full account of the talk itself, as well as an editorial called \u201cOn Barren Ground,\u201d which attacked Goldman for \u201csowing the seeds of discontent\u201d in Winnipeg. The editorial assured readers that Canadians had \u201cnothing to fear,\u201d because<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Emma Goldman, as long as she promotes her work in English-speaking countries, is sowing on barren ground. Where British institutions flourish the weeds of anarchism have little chance to grow. The soil of the Anglo-Saxon world is not suitable for anarchism, and those radicals must look for success in other parts of the world. [22<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Likewise, the Manitoba Free Press<\/em> published a review of Goldman\u2019s talk under the headline \u201cShe Abuses Our Freedom of Speech.\u201d Its review began by suggesting that the venue was \u201cstuffily\u201d crowded, and the audience \u201cwas largely composed of Russians, Roumanians, socialists and trade unionists.\u201d In what it no doubt considered a great witticism and mockery, it then described the crowd as \u201cthoroughly cosmopolitan.\u201d The Free Press<\/em> also inserted parenthetical remarks to indicate audience response to the speaker\u2014for example, when Goldman stated that every government sided with the rich \u201cfor the purpose of crushing the people,\u201d it inserted a cheer. Or when she sarcastically said \u201cYou have to learn from the government \u2026 Don\u2019t steal a little. Steal a whole lot and get the law to back you up\u201d (more cheers). [23<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By contrast, the Winnipeg Tribune<\/em> coverage the day after her talk, like its lengthy interview of the day before, was generally positive, though this time relegated to page eight in an article called \u201cLecture Not Sensational\u201d (which was not meant to suggest \u201cboring\u201d or \u201cuninteresting,\u201d but rather, that it was not \u201csensationalistic\u201d). Overall, the Tribune suggested that anyone who failed to have their initial preconceptions about Goldman dispelled, \u201cmust have been to some trouble of prejudice\u201d or suffered from \u201cperversions\u201d of logic \u201cto escape being impressed with the thorough sincerity of the speaker in regard to Anarchism.\u201d In fact, declared the article, \u201cfew public speakers have probably ever been heard in Winnipeg who had a better command of clear, terse, and yet ample, language, more beauty of expression or greater logical coherence of thought and speech.\u201d [24<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All three major dailies paraphrased elements of Goldman\u2019s first talk, focusing on the myth and the reality of Anarchism as a philosophy, with only slight variations in each account. After the initial frenzy, there was diminishing coverage for Goldman\u2019s remaining lectures. However, there were a couple ongoing editorials, op-eds, as well as an articulate, and thoroughly radical letter of support printed in the Tribune<\/em> signed by a T. Bell of Dudley Street, attacking the rival Free Press<\/em> and Telegram<\/em> for their coverage. The respondent wrote, for example, that \u201cif the seed [of anarchism] does not grow [in Winnipeg] it proves that the ground must be choked with the weeds of orthodoxy, conservativism, ignorance, and bigoted self-satisfaction, attributes which always tend to retard progress and advancement.\u201d The letter concluded with the observation that \u201cprogress\u201d is always fought by the status quo: \u201cFrom Christ down agitators for reform have ever been persecuted and unpopular. They are the pioneers who tread the unbeaten and thorny paths leading to progress, so that in time the masses may follow.\u201d Goldman, accordingly, was merely the latest example of \u201ca woman, man\u2019s Biblical inferior, but really his superior, who comes amongst us with the teachings of a nobler, broader brotherhood.\u201d [25<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There was also some coverage, both critical and supportive, in the labour weekly The Voice<\/em>, which was published every Friday. Unlike the major dailies, The Voice<\/em> published news pieces and editorials on at least three of Goldman\u2019s talks, beginning with her first lecture on anarchism. Two days after Goldman\u2019s initial arrival, for example, it reported that Goldman\u2019s first talk was \u201ccrowded to the doors,\u201d and characterized the majority of the audience as \u201cplainly of foreign origin,\u201d with a scattering of \u201cwell known Winnipeggers\u201d and a \u201cconsiderable contingent of trades unionists.\u201d The article also summed up the audience reaction, suggesting that most were \u201csurprised to find themselves listening to a fluent, clever and decidedly feminine woman reasoning out tactfully the philosophy of anarchism and frequently expressing very forcible sentiments which they were applauding.\u201d [26<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A week later, a more in-depth and critical review in The Voice<\/em> touched on elements of three of Goldman\u2019s lectures at once. The reviewer noted that Goldman gave five talks \u201con five consecutive nights,\u201d with audience \u201cinterest rather increasing than diminishing\u201d over time. The article suggested that listeners were receptive to Goldman\u2019s views on the nature of \u201cgovernments as they are,\u201d but maintained that \u201cthere was a refusal to admit of her conclusions.\u201d The reviewer went on to describe Goldman\u2019s Friday night talk on \u201cThe Spirit of Revolt in the Modern Drama\u201d as \u201cexceedingly forceful and stirring.\u201d Overall, Goldman\u2019s foray into literary criticism was praised as \u201ca splendid one,\u201d and her discussion of George Bernard Shaw in particular was highlighted. [27<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, The Voice<\/em> had less favourable things to say about Goldman\u2019s talk on \u201cDirect Action Versus Legislation,\u201d in which she criticized aspects of traditional labour unions, dismissed the American Federation of Labor and its leaders as \u201ccorrupt,\u201d and called for frequent and militant strike actions, culminating in a general strike. The reviewer described the \u201cdiscourse\u201d as being \u201con the lines of anarchism vs. socialism, and militant rather than philosophical anarchism was expounded.\u201d The article went on to suggest that \u201cthe bulk\u201d of the audience consisted of \u201cnon-anarchists\u201d who deemed the talk to be \u201cfar below\u201d the quality of Goldman\u2019s previous lectures. It summed up Goldman\u2019s message as \u201cstrike often, strike hard and work for the general strike,\u201d and then closed with a discussion of audience criticism. Local socialists John Mortimer and L. T. English took issue with Goldman at this talk. Mortimer suggested that Goldman\u2019s advice on strike actions was akin \u201cto pitting empty stomachs against bank vaults,\u201d whereas English rose to read the Socialist Party platform (apparently for fifteen minutes straight) as a further rebuttal. Professor R. M. Mobius, a follower of Henry George and founder of the Single Tax League of Manitoba, also challenged Goldman and suggested that a \u201cSingle-Tax\u201d strategy was more capable of solving the social ills and economic woes of the working class than anarchism. The reviewer concluded by noting that \u201cMiss Goldman took up the criticism with spirit,\u201d arguing that eventually \u201cthe people would catch on that Socialism had only a change of masters to offer them.\u201d [28<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The same issue of The Voice<\/em> also contained a regular Socialist Party of Canada (SPC) column as well as an editorial, both of which commented on Goldman\u2019s visit. The SPC column accused Goldman of manufacturing \u201cfacts\u201d to fit \u201cthe exigencies of her argument,\u201d and suggested that \u201cthe lady\u2019s hatred of what she feared would be arbitrary tyranny were a Socialist administration established could hardly have been exceeded by the most uncompromising defender of the present order of things.\u201d The column ended by stating that Goldman\u2019s \u201ccriticism of the futility of palliative legislation was not without point,\u201d but concluded that her brand of \u201cAnarchy\u201d would \u201cmake little headway with the intelligent proletariat.\u201d [29<\/a>] The main editorial of The Voice<\/em> defended Goldman\u2019s right to speak, and suggested that her lectures were \u201cthought provoking\u201d and \u201cuseful.\u201d But the editorial also insisted that Goldman\u2019s lectures \u201cdid not make a single convert to her doctrine,\u201d because \u201cthe environment\u201d in Winnipeg was \u201cnot favourable\u201d to her brand of radicalism. The editorial took pains to promote only \u201claw-abiding\u201d actions and reforms leading to socialism, stating that anarchism \u201cmay appeal to people who feel that they have no part in government, but it does not appeal to people who recognize that they are responsible for the government and who could be the government if they would.\u201d [30<\/a>] Notwithstanding much of the criticism expressed in The Voice<\/em>, evidently enough workers in Winnipeg were receptive to the kinds of tactics that Goldman promoted in the city, regardless of their \u201clegality\u201d or conformity to the Socialist Party platform. Had they all listened to \u201crespectable\u201d leaders in the Winnipeg Trades and Labor Council, the Labor Party, or even the Socialist Party (at least those in the vein of Goldman\u2019s critics Mortimer and English), there would never have been a General Strike in 1919. [31<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The two talks that did not receive coverage in any of the major dailies, nor in the English-language labour weekly, were those advertised by media outlets as being delivered variously in German, Russian, Hebrew, or sometimes \u201cJewish.\u201d These two talks were supposed to be \u201cCrimes of Parents and Educators,\u201d as well as \u201cThe Position of the Jews in Russia.\u201d It is not certain what the language spoken ended up being, but available evidence suggests that it was German, not Russian, Hebrew, or Yiddish. [32<\/a>] Either way, the fact that it was not English helps explain the absence of coverage in the major dailies, as well as in The Voice<\/em>. Furthermore, in 1907 there was still no Yiddish-language newspaper in Winnipeg. The earliest attempt to start one (Wiederklang<\/em> or \u201cThe Echo\u201d in 1906) had been short-lived, and it was not until a local Jewish anarchist named Fieve (Frank) Simkin founded Der Kanader Yid<\/em> (\u201cThe Canadian Israelite\u201d) in 1910, that Winnipeg could boast its first regular Yiddish newspaper. [33<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There does not appear to have been any mention of Goldman\u2019s visit, let alone reviews of her two Germanlanguage talks in Winnipeg\u2019s oldest German-language newspaper Der Nordwesten<\/em>. However, the short-lived rival Conservative newspaper Germania did print a brief mention of Emma Goldman in its 11 April issue. [34<\/a>] Buried deep within a regular local section called Aus Winnipeg<\/em> (\u201cFrom Winnipeg\u201d), the anonymous writer noted that \u201cEmma Goldman, the well-known Anarchist, is staying in Winnipeg, and is planning to deliver lectures on Anarchism here.\u201d The article referred to one of the upcoming German language talks and offered the following a priori<\/em> and patriarchal dismissal of Goldman\u2019s expertise: \u201cA lecture that she is also planning to give carries the title: How are children to be raised? We believe that this question could be better answered by mothers, than by a woman who has missed out on the marriage bond.\u201d [35<\/a>] Neither German-language paper published any actual reviews of Goldman\u2019s lectures in April 1907, though Germania paid greater attention to Goldman\u2019s subsequent visit the following year. [36<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There was, however, some extensive coverage of Goldman\u2019s first visit in the local Icelandic women\u2019s literary and political journal Freyja<\/em>, which had been founded by Margr\u00e9t Benedictsson<\/a> in 1898. [37<\/a>] The April 1907 issue contained a biographical profile on Emma Goldman, and included a review of two of her five Winnipeg lectures from earlier in that month. The Freyja<\/em> article was unsigned, but given its emphasis on what it termed \u201cthe liberation struggle of women,\u201d it was probably written by Margr\u00e9t Benedictsson. [38<\/a>] It focused on two of the three talks already covered in the major dailies, as well as in The Voice<\/em>\u2014namely, \u201cthe spirit of revolt in the modern drama\u201d and \u201cdirect action versus legislation.\u201d However, the Freyja<\/em> article provided many details about these lectures that were not available in the English-language newspapers. For starters, it went into much greater detail about Goldman\u2019s literary criticism talk, and her views on the writings of Ibsen, Tolstoy, Hoffman, and George Bernard Shaw. [39<\/a>] Specific plays were discussed in some detail, such as Ibsen\u2019s The Doll House<\/em> and Brand<\/em>, as well as Shaw\u2019s Man and Superman<\/em> and Mrs. Warren\u2019s Profession<\/em>\u2014with a particular emphasis on the significance of these works in relation to women. The article also noted that a number of Icelanders attended Goldman\u2019s drama talk, and described them as \u201csatisfied.\u201d However, the author went on to criticize the Icelandic community for what it called \u201ca tendency to be unnecessarily rigid and sensitive over various issues.\u201d [40<\/a>] It concluded with a brief discussion of Goldman\u2019s talk on \u201cdirect action\u201d\u2014apparently the only sympathetic review of this lecture published in Winnipeg\u2014which must be quoted in full to capture its flavour. According to Freyja<\/em>,<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[Goldman\u2019s talk] was meant to show that the people had themselves won in direct and indirect ways all those human rights, which they are still succeeding in extracting from the governing powers of the world, whatever name they may be called and wherever in the world they are. She believes that in order to acquire complete justice in relation to government and capitalism, working people need to have a global association. She showed how a few strikes have succeeded in recent times, the latest of them being the electricians\u2019 union in Paris a few weeks ago, not for the negotiation of the government, but rather because it was done in a suitable time and immediately. At the end of the lecture there was a free debate and then there were various questions directed at the lecturer. Then there was a spirited scrap among Emma, the Socialists, and the Single-taxers. Her opponents spoke well and with authority, but at the same time many were left with the impression that Emma had prevailed. There were a few of her opponents who were so inflamed that they formed a circle around her after the gathering was dispersed, we saw nothing from her but a hand once in a while, when she was upright giving some telling truth which she said with still more emphasis, because she was pointed at or had her fingers directly up in the faces of her adversaries, who were all men and gigantic beside her. This became good fun for all who were lucky enough to see and hear this encore. But in spite of their zeal they departed good friends, and all who were there in attendance gave her many good wishes on her way to Minneapolis where she intended to take her lectures next. [41<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Goldman published her own reflections on her time in Winnipeg a month after her visit as part of an ongoing column called \u201cOn the Road\u201d in Mother Earth, the monthly magazine she had started up about a year before. Overall, she was pleased with her visit to Winnipeg. She wrote that \u201c[m]y six days\u2019 visit seemed a dream. Large, eager audiences every evening and twice on Sunday, [plus] a beautiful social gathering that united two hundred men, women and children in one family of comrades, and people constantly coming and going during the day \u2026 When I stood on the platform of the train bidding a last farewell to a large group of friends, I keenly felt the pangs of parting\u2026\u201d [42<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Goldman ended her report on her trip to Winnipeg by singling out the newspapers in Minneapolis and Winnipeg, saying that they \u201chave been remarkable for their fairness and decency in reporting my meetings.\u201d In particular, she quoted an editorial written on 15 April 1907 by the Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>\u2019s Managing Director. Goldman was so impressed with this editorial that she later included the exact same passage in her autobiography (Living My Life<\/em>). But in both Mother Earth as well as her autobiography, what Goldman quoted was a partial, and slightly altered, selection from the original editorial. [43<\/a>] The full text of the editorial, as printed in the Tribune<\/em>, was actually as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is legitimate to criticize Emma Goldman for the bad influence that she is said to have had on some shallow-brained followers in the United States. It is legitimate to denounce any utterances that incite to crime. But in fairness it must be admitted that it is unjust to accuse her of having \u201cabused British freedom of speech\u201d in Winnipeg. It is also absurd to denounce Anarchism on the ground that it teaches bomb-throwing and other violence.<\/p>

Emma Goldman has been accused of abusing freedom of speech in Winnipeg. Anarchism has been denounced as a system that provides for murder. As a matter of fact, Emma Goldman, while in Winnipeg, indulged in no dangerous rant\u2014made no statement that deserved more than moderate criticism of its wisdom and logic. Also, as a matter of fact, that man who claims that Anarchism teaches bomb-throwing and violence doesn\u2019t know what he is talking about.<\/p>

Anarchism is an ideal doctrine that is now\u2014and probably always will be\u2014utterly impracticable. Some of the gentlest and most gifted men in the world believe in it. The fact that Tolstoi alone is an Anarchist is conclusive proof that it teaches no violence.<\/p>

It is the fact that great numbers of ignorant men in Europe, whose minds are quite incapable of grasping the meaning of Tolstoi\u2019s ideal, have resorted to the most shocking violence to remove the restraint that\u2014Anarchy teaches\u2014should not exist, which gives Anarchy its bad name.<\/p>

It is quite unreasonable to hold the ideal system responsible for these acts of the ignorant and criminal few who profess to believe in a doctrine that they are incapable of understanding. It would be quite as reasonable to condemn Christianity for the horrible crimes that have been committed by fanatics who believed they were Christians.<\/p>

We all have a right to laugh at Anarchy as a wild dream. We all have a right to condemn the violence of murderous fanatics. We all have a right to agree or disagree with the teachings of Emma Goldman. But we should not make ourselves ridiculous by criticizing a lecturer for things that she did not say, nor by denouncing as violent and bloody a doctrine that teaches the very opposite of violence.<\/p>

The morning papers evidently expected a shock and when they did not get it, their nerves gave way and left them in hysterics. [44<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

What was remarkable about this editorial, was not simply that it rejected outright the myth that anarchism was inherently violent, mentioned Tolstoy as evidence of this view, and was a relatively positive defence of free speech, but that its author was Robert Lorne Richardson, a prominent local newspaper publisher, novelist, and former Liberal Party M.P. in the Laurier government. [45<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several significant developments occurred as a result of Goldman\u2019s visit to Winnipeg. First, Winnipeg was added as a new distribution outlet for Mother Earth<\/em>, something that did not happen very often, and was perhaps a reflection of the size of the anarchist community in the city at that time. In the May 1907 issue, Winnipeg was added as an \u201cagent\u201d for the magazine, with two local anarchists as contacts: \u201cS. B. Benedictsson, 470 Main St.\u201d and \u201cSam Prasow, 452 Manitoba Ave.\u201d [46<\/a>] The first of these local \u201cagents\u201d and distributors for Mother Earth<\/em> was none other than Sigf\u00fas Benedict Benedictsson, the anarchist husband of Freyja<\/em>\u2019s founder and editor Margr\u00e9t Benedictsson<\/a>. The Benedictssons also helped promote the Chicago anarchist newspaper Lucifer, the Light-Bearer<\/em>, and its persecuted editor Moses Harman, a cause shared by Goldman. [47<\/a>] According to historian Ryan Eyford, Margr\u00e9t regularly translated and reprinted articles from Harman\u2019s newspaper in Freyja<\/em>, and both her and Sigf\u00fas were among the rare Canadians to have their letters published in Lucifer<\/em>. In 1901, for example, a letter from Sigf\u00fas was published in Lucifer<\/em> in which he declared: \u201cIf I was to be electrocuted tomorrow I would still believe and say that Anarchism is the most noble ideal I have ever heard.\u201d [48<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second of the new \u201cagents\u201d for Mother Earth<\/em> was Samuel Prasow, a prominent anarchist organizer in Winnipeg, along with his brother, until at least the 1950s. [49<\/a>] Goldman stayed with the Prasow family on her return trips in 1908, and again in 1927, as did other prominent anarchist visitors such as Rudolf Rocker. [50<\/a>] The Prasow brothers were not simply anarchist organizers; they were also writers, and their work was featured in the pages of Der Kanader Yid<\/em>. [51<\/a>] Goldman considered the Prasows to be lifelong comrades, although she became disappointed with Samuel for his handling of her 1927 visit, and in particular, for an attempt to bar her from any public criticism of the Bolshevik Revolution for fear of jeopardizing alreadytenuous relations with local Communists. [52<\/a>] According to the distributor lists printed in Mother Earth<\/em>, Prasow was the more stable and long-term of the \u201cagents\u201d lined up by Goldman during her first visit to Winnipeg. [53<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second significant development arising from Goldman\u2019s visit to Winnipeg was related to the International Anarchist Conference, which was to be held in Amsterdam in August 1907. It was largely at the behest of anarchists in Winnipeg and Chicago during her spring 1907 tour, that a fund was started specifically to send Goldman to this conference. [54<\/a>] J. Richman, \u201cSecretary\u201d of an unspecified group of Winnipeg anarchists, sent an official statement which was published in Mother Earth<\/em> in May 1907. In this statement, Richman took pains to explain that Goldman was not<\/em> to act as \u201crepresentative\u201d of North American anarchists, but simply \u201cas a comrade whose participation in the Conference cannot fail to prove beneficial to our friends abroad, as well as to the movement at home.\u201d [55<\/a>] It was at the Amsterdam conference that Goldman met many of the leading anarchists of the day, and was re-acquainted with others she had met only briefly during her prior travels, such as Errico Malatesta and Rudolf Rocker. It was there that she also began to refine her political philosophy, and argue more confidently for her unique blend of individualism and collectivism. [56<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the spirit of Goldman herself , it is perhaps appropriate to conclude with a critical assessment of both her 1907 visit and her ongoing legacy. Many of Goldman\u2019s political and even personal strengths and weaknesses have received a good deal of attention elsewhere, and need not be reiterated here in any detail. [57<\/a>] However, one aspect of her thought and practice has been largely, if not entirely neglected in the literature\u2014namely, her treatment of colonialism in North America. Goldman\u2019s 1907-1908 visits to Winnipeg highlighted some of the contradictions in anarchist thought and practice in relation to settler-colonialism and indigenous peoples.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Goldman did not once mention indigenous peoples during or after her visit to Winnipeg, and to be fair, there was almost no mention of them in the local Winnipeg media during her stay in the city. [58<\/a>] In her immediate reflections on her visit Goldman wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Men and women from every nook in the world gather in Winnipeg, the land of promise. They are soon made to realize, however, that the causes which drove them from their native shores\u2014 oppression, greed and robbery\u2014are quite at home in this new, white land. The true great promise lies in all these nations coming together, to look one another in the face, to learn for the first time the real force that makes for wealth. Men and women knowing one another and clasping hands for one common purpose, human brotherhood and solidarity. Yes, Winnipeg is the place of promise. It is the fertile soil of growth, life and ideas. [59<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Without actually mentioning indigenous peoples, this passage suggests that Goldman shared many of the dominant assumptions and myths of the European colonial paradigm\u2014at least, with respect to the original peoples of North America. Her reference to the \u201cland of promise\u201d was in sole relation to colonizers, and she seemed unaware that the \u201chuman brotherhood and solidarity\u201d she described amongst Winnipeg workers was predicated upon a dispossession of the original inhabitants of the land after 1870, as well as a second-wave of ethnic cleansing that resumed locally in earnest the year she arrived, most notably with accelerated efforts to dissolve the St. Peter\u2019s Reserve, and \u201cremove\u201d the Indian inhabitants to a more remote location. [60<\/a>] While it is unlikely that Goldman knew anything about this specific example of ethnic cleansing, it is clear that local Winnipeg anarchists must have been aware of the \u201cremoval,\u201d and either supported such dispossession as \u201cprogress,\u201d viewed it as an ongoing \u201cinevitability,\u201d or viewed the consequences of \u201cinternal\u201d colonialism as a \u201cfait accompli\u201d (even when such events were still unfolding). [61<\/a>] Had they considered the dispossession of indigenous peoples to be worthy of documentation and protest, it is almost certain they would have responded in a similar way as they did<\/em> in the face of the potential dispossession and deportation of the Doukhobors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An editorial in Mother Earth<\/em> from July 1907 (three months after Goldman\u2019s visit to Winnipeg) illustrates this differential consciousness and treatment. The editors stated that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Canada is about to perpetrate one of the most unspeakable outrages\u2014ostensibly in the name of civilization, in reality because of governmental violence and greedy land speculation. Recent reports from Winnipeg state that the Canadian government has finally decided to expel the Doukhobors from the lands assigned to them in 1899. The Doukhobors are splendid agriculturalists; they have successfully cultivated a considerable part of the land, and now they are to be despoiled of their homes and the fruits of their labor, in the manner practiced by our own railroad and land sharks. [62<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Leaving aside the specifics of the Doukhobors themselves, Mother Earth\u2019s call to arms over this \u201cunspeakable outrage,\u201d and its acceptance of the basic colonial paradigm that promulgates an agricultural imperative, is notable for both its timing, and what it leaves out. The dispossession of indigenous peoples, also<\/em> \u201costensibly in the name of civilization,\u201d also<\/em> in the interests of land speculators and white settlers, also<\/em> in many cases directed at successful Indian farmers who were being \u201cdespoiled of their homes and the fruits of their labor,\u201d was ongoing at this time. [63<\/a>] No reports came from Winnipeg anarchists about the attempt to take the last vestiges of land from the descendents of Saulteaux Chief Peguis<\/a> at St. Peter\u2019s in 1907. In other words, at the exact same time as there was outrage and action over the removal of other colonizers who had been in the hemisphere for less than a decade, there was complete silence about efforts to forcibly relocate indigenous peoples from the land of their ancestors\u2014so that their so-called \u201creserve,\u201d guaranteed to them under the terms of the 1871 \u201cStone Fort\u201d treaty, not to mention elementary justice, could be sold off to a \u201cbetter class\u201d of immigrant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One might object that Emma Goldman\u2019s brief visit, and scattered references to Winnipeg in 1907 ought not to be taken as definitive evidence of a weakness or contradiction in her philosophy, and it is certainly not the contention here that everyone must focus exclusively, or even primarily on specifically indigenous issues and solidarity. However, like most European and North American radicals of her time, Goldman almost never mentioned indigenous peoples in her writing or speeches. [64<\/a>] One of the few public references to Aboriginal peoples ever<\/em> made by Goldman was in the statement she prepared on \u201cThe Situation in America\u201d for the 1907 Anarchist conference in Amsterdam. In this report she made a very passing reference to a process of privatizing land in \u201cthe vast American territory\u201d that she suggested went back to \u201cthe Christians\u201d who were \u201cgreedy of the new continent\u201d and \u201cdespoil[ed] the American Indian, whose ownership of the land [had been] communistic.\u201d [65<\/a>] Goldman was well aware that historical<\/em> injustices had been committed. At least two earlier articles by or about Goldman also made passing reference to the theft of the continent and the \u201cmurder\u201d of \u201ckind,\u201d \u201cpeaceful,\u201d and \u201cinnocent\u201d Indians. [66<\/a>] Furthermore, in Living My Life<\/em> Goldman\u2019s brief description of a visit to a \u201creservation\u201d in Montana mocked \u201cthe blessings of the white man\u2019s rule.\u201d She wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The true natives of America, once masters of the length and breadth of the land, a simple and sturdy race possessing its own art and conception of life, had dwindled to mere shadows of what they had once been. They were infected with venereal disease; their lungs were eaten by the white plague. In return for their lost vigour they had received the gift of the Bible. The kindly and helpful spirit of the Indians was very cheering after the forbidding attitude of their white neighbours. [67<\/a>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

However, these apparent exceptions, which are in many ways also indicative of a colonial framework, serve to reinforce the rule. Regardless of any direct knowledge she may have had about Aboriginal peoples in Canada or the United States, Goldman made almost no mention of them in her travel reports, published articles, and speeches. She was aware that the overall colonial project in North America entailed the dispossession of indigenous peoples who had had \u201ccommunistic\u201d systems of land tenure. But beyond this acknowledgement of the obvious, indigenous rights and self-determination, as issues that might have relevance into the twentieth-century, seemed to be beyond her conceptual framework\u2014even as her own newspaper Mother Earth <\/em>(launched in March 1906) railed against what it called \u201cimperialism\u201d in \u201cthe colonies,\u201d in places such as Mexico, the Philippines, Cuba, Africa, and elsewhere. [68<\/a>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In marking the centenary of Goldman\u2019s first visit to Winnipeg, and in honoring both her spirit of resistance, and her example as an activist and speaker of unpopular truths, [69<\/a>] it is important to make something clear. The ideal of anarchism which Goldman herself tried to live up to, is not about constructing untouchable heroes or demi-gods out of historical figures, nor about declaring fealty to their views or setting up a \u201ccanon\u201d of acceptable opinions and political positions with which to define one\u2019s friends and enemies. It is about recognizing that people are human, and can be respected despite their inevitable flaws and weaknesses (both in terms of their political views and in terms of their actual behaviour).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To describe Goldman\u2019s legacy as \u201cfar-reaching\u201d in global terms is something of an understatement. The increasing number of books devoted to Goldman\u2019s politics and personal life, the very existence of the Emma Goldman Papers Project at the University of California, the number of young activists, men and women alike, who continue to be influenced by her, and the countless institutions named after her (from collectively-run caf\u00e9s and \u201cinfoshops\u201d around North America, to activist-run centres and buildings), all testify to the enduring nature and significance of her legacy. [70<\/a>] However, it is harder to assess or quantify Goldman\u2019s impact on radicalism in exclusively Winnipeg terms. It appears to be the case that both Goldman\u2019s fiery lectures on the one hand, and the efforts of local anarchist organizers during the first half of the twentieth-century on the other, had a profound impact on the political landscape in Winnipeg\u2014both in terms of widening the parameters of debate, but also in terms of the development of actual institutions on the ground. A. Ross McCormack has alluded to the importance of \u201cthe anarchist tradition among Jews and Russians\u201d in Winnipeg\u2019s North End, as a way to explain, at least in part, the growing support for syndicalism, radical industrial unionism, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), the One Big Union, and the increasing willingness on the part of Winnipeg workers to resort to direct action and strikes in the decade leading up to 1919. [71<\/a>] Emma Goldman\u2019s speaking engagements in Winnipeg were both contingent upon, and contributors to, this anarchist tradition. It is clear from both the newspaper coverage of Goldman\u2019s talks, and the formal debates scheduled during her subsequent visits, that local Marxists and socialists found Goldman\u2019s ideology and arguments\u2014or perhaps the threat of anarchism\u2019s influence\u2014to be sufficiently compelling to demand a response. [72<\/a>] But a more detailed assessment of her impact and legacy must be sifted and salvaged out of the largely unwritten, under-acknowledged, and in some cases, consciously-distorted history of anarchism and libertarian socialism\u2014not just within Winnipeg, but also in terms of the global radical left since the days of the First International.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is not surprising that anarchism\u2019s role in helping to shape both Jewish radicalism and broader left-wing politics in Winnipeg has remained largely unacknowledged in local municipal, regional, and labour histories, as well as histories of Jewish immigration in the Prairies. However, it is curious that many of these same histories, biographies, or personal reflections have insisted upon the importance of institutions founded or heavily-influenced by local anarchists, without ever knowing or acknowledging the political views of some of the pivotal figures involved. Furthermore, labour historians and other progressive and socialist commentators continue to highlight Emma Goldman\u2019s early visits as themselves an expression of Winnipeg\u2019s turn-of-the-century importance, while consciously or unconsciously contributing to the general impression that anarchism was an insignificant player in the history of Winnipeg radicalism. [73<\/a>] A salient example of this relates to Fieve Simkin\u2019s role in Winnipeg radical politics, beginning with the early formation of the Arbeiter Ring<\/em> in Winnipeg (before he was expelled from Branch #169 by the Communists, and forced to start a separate anarchist branch). Few historians and writers, regardless of their politics or focus, have acknowledged that Simkin was an anarchist. [74<\/a>] Simkin\u2019s involvement in the Arbeiter Ring School on Manitoba Avenue, the I. L. Peretz School, as well as his founding role in Winnipeg\u2019s first long-lasting Yiddish newspaper in 1910-1911 have typically been highlighted without reference to his actual political views.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short, the institutions that anarchists participated in, and in some cases established\u2014from Arbeiter Ring branches and radical schools, to labour halls, as well as newspapers such as Dos Yiddishe Vort<\/em> (The Israelite Press)\u2014have often been acknowledged as critical and influential. But the anarchist sensibilities of many of the participants have been written out of the narrative. Assessing the impact of Goldman\u2019s visits to Winnipeg in 1907-1908 is intimately tied to the process of salvaging and writing the history of anarchism in Winnipeg. The city in which she urged workers in 1907 to adopt the general strike as the preferred weapon of the working class, became the site of the Winnipeg General Strike in 1919. Of course, the explanation for such an event can hardly be reduced to the polemics of a single public orator. [75<\/a>] But it is clear that there was a tactical debate amongst leftists and workers over such matters, and Goldman\u2019s public lectures on direct action and general strikes were significant local events. Prominent socialists in Winnipeg such as J. Mortimer, L. T. English, J. D. Houston<\/a>, and W. H. Stebbings felt compelled to challenge, debate, and in some cases ridicule Goldman\u2019s calls for a general strike in 1907 -1908, as well as take on anarchism as both a political philosophy and movement rival. [76<\/a>] Furthermore, local anarchists distributed Mother Earth<\/em> in Winnipeg from the moment of Goldman\u2019s first visit in April 1907, and continued to subscribe to the magazine until its demise in 1917. [77<\/a>] They also started their own newspapers, organized speaking engagements with other prominent anarchists such as Rudolf Rocker, and played a significant role in the life and longevity of many important labour, cultural, and political institutions. [78<\/a>] A great deal of this political work took place within the North End Jewish community, though it was certainly not confined to it, and conscious attempts were made to transcend ethnic and language barriers to working-class solidarity. Emma Goldman\u2019s influence on the views and trajectory of both Jewish and non-Jewish radicals in Winnipeg, like the place afforded anarchism within the history of Winnipeg as a whole, was no doubt more significant than hitherto appreciated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Notes<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

1. This article has been expanded from a local Mayworks Festival presentation entitled \u201cApostle of Anarchy\u201d in honour of the centenary of Emma Goldman\u2019s first visit to Winnipeg, held at Mondragon Bookstore & Coffee House, 16 May 2007. The event was organized by Tim Brandt, and it seemed appropriate to keep the same title.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. The first overview of Goldman\u2019s neglected time in Canada, which mentions some of the details of each of these visits to Winnipeg, can be found in Theresa & Albert Moritz, The World\u2019s Most Dangerous Woman: A New Biography of Emma Goldman<\/em>. Vancouver & Toronto: Subway Books, 2001. For earlier articles on Goldman\u2019s visits to Winnipeg see Martin Zeilig, \u201cEmma Goldman in Winnipeg<\/a>,\u201d Manitoba History<\/em> (Spring 1993), No. 25; as well as two articles by A. J. Arnold<\/a>, \u201cAnarchist Had Critics on All Sides: \u2019Red Emma\u2019 Lectured Here in 1907,\u201d The Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 10 April 1975, and \u201cVisit to Canada in 1907 by \u2019Queen of Anarchists\u2019 Stirred Up Controversy with her Outspoken Ideology,\u201d Canadian Jewish News<\/em>, 25 April 1975.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3. Moffat, Riley, Population History of Cities and Towns in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand: 1861-1996<\/em>. Lanham, MD & London: Scarecrow Press, 2001, p. 28; Bryan Palmer, Working-Class Experience: The Rise & Reconstitution of Canadian Labour, 1800-1980<\/em>. Toronto & Vancouver: Butterworth & Co., 1983, p. 139.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4. See, for example, \u201cArriving in Thousands: Present Year Will Eclipse All Others in Immigration,\u201d Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 6 April 1907; \u201cEuropeans On Way West,\u201d Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 15 April 1907; \u201cImmigrants Are Pouring In,\u201d Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 16 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5. Woodsworth<\/a>, who was a Methodist missionary at the time of Goldman\u2019s first visit, outlined a hierarchy of what he called \u201cdesirable\u201d immigrant \u201ctypes,\u201d from the \u201cbetter class\u201d (which tended to be British) to the \u201cundesirables\u201d (especially Mormons but also, in general, non-Europeans). See, for example, his treatment of what he called \u201cthe Hindu problem,\u201d in which South Asians were referred to as \u201chordes,\u201d and the \u201cdangers\u201d of such people \u201cswarming in upon [Canada]\u201d and putting \u201cwhite labor\u201d out of work, was discussed. J. S. Woodsworth, Strangers Within Our Gates<\/em>. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1972, original publication 1909, pp. 152-155.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

6. See, for example, \u201cAsiatic Question,\u201d The Voice<\/em>, 4 October 1907, p. 1, as well as the accompanying front-page cartoon entitled \u201cThe Canadian Gulliver and the Japanese Lilliputians.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

7. The \u201cright class of settlers is coming,\u201d Clifford Sifton stated in an interview, and went on to specify who he meant: \u201cpeople of the northern stocks, Germans, Scandinavian, British.\u201d See \u201cHon. Mr. Sifton Interviewed in London,\u201d Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, 8 April 1907. Also, see \u201cFor a White Canada is Stand Adopted by Mr. Borden: Mr. Borden\u2019s Emphatic Demand for a White Canada,\u201d Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, 25 September 1907; and \u201cGood Year Ahead for the Dominion: What Sir William Van Horne Told Londoners in Regard to Canada,\u201d Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, 1 April 1908. For a general overview of British imperial attitudes in Winnipeg, see Robert A. Wardhaugh, \u201c\u2019Gateway to Empire\u2019: Imperial Sentiment in Winnipeg, 1867-1917.\u201d In Colin M. Coates, ed., Imperial Canada, 1867-1917<\/em>. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, Centre of Canadian Studies, 1997, pp. 206-216. For actual legislation designed to weed out \u201cundesirable\u201d nationalities and \u201craces,\u201d from the Chinese Immigration Act (1885) to the Continuous Journey Stipulation (1908) to the 1910 Immigration Act, see Lisa Marie Jakubowski, Immigration and the Legalization of Racism<\/em>. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing, 1997, pp. 10-21.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

8. See, for example, \u201cWest Not Peopled With Foreigners,\u201d Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, 10 April 1907, in which the newspaper relays Dominion officials\u2019 indignation over charges that the Prairies were being overrun by \u201cthe worst characters of Whitechapel\u201d and others who constituted \u201cthe scum of the earth.\u201d The article assured readers that \u201c60 Per Cent of People in the Western Provinces are British Born,\u201d not \u201cforeigners\u201d at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

9. Usiskin, Roz, \u201cThe Winnipeg Jewish Community: Its Radical Elements, 1905-1918<\/a>,\u201d Manitoba Historical Society Transactions<\/em>, Series 3, Number 33, 1976-1977 Season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

10. Palmer, Working-Class Experience<\/em>, pp. 141-142.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

11. According to Usiskin, Winnipeg\u2019s Arbeiter Ring was divided into three broad currents, each with its own branch: 1) \u201crevolutionary Marxists\u201d were generally organized into Branch # 169; 2) nationalist-Zionist elements tended to be organized into Branch # 506; and 3) the anarchists were organized into Branch # 564. These three branches were, in turn, organized into a \u201cCity Committee\u201d that coordinated activities locally, as well as maintained ties with the larger national and international Arbeiter Ring network. See Usiskin, \u201cThe Winnipeg Jewish Community: Its Radical Elements, 1905-1918<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

12. Palmer, p. 137.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

13. A small handful of notable exceptions, such as Honor\u00e9 Joseph Jaxon, or to a lesser degree, Tory MP George Bradbury (who spoke out against the theft of the St. Peter\u2019s Reserve in the House of Commons), do not alter the overarching rule. For the first definitive biography of Jaxon, see Don Smith, Honor\u00e9 Jaxon: Prairie Visionary<\/em>. Regina: Coteau Books, 2007. For details about George Bradbury, see Tyler, Wright & Daniel, The Illegal Surrender of the St. Peter\u2019s Reserve<\/em>. Winnipeg: Treaty and Aboriginal Rights and Research Council, 1979 and 1983.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

14. For a more full treatment of classical anarchism\u2019s contradictions in relation to indigenous peoples, see Paul Burrows, \u201cAnarchism, Colonialism & Aboriginal Dispossession in the Canadian West,\u201d unpublished paper presented at the Canadian Historical Association, Saskatoon, May 2007.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

15. An article in The Voice<\/em>, for example, advertised Goldman\u2019s lectures by referencing the McKinley assassination. See \u201cAnarchist Lecture: Emma Goldman to Speak in Winnipeg Next Week,\u201d The Voice<\/em>, 12 April 1907. For general background on the attempt to \u201clink\u201d Goldman to the McKinley assassination, see Richard Drinnon, Rebel in Paradise: A Biography of Emma Goldman<\/em>. Boston: Beacon Press, 1970, pp. 68-77.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

16. \u201cEmma Goldman Will Speak Here,\u201d Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, 3 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

17. \u201cPreaching Anarchy,\u201d Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, 6 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

18. \u201cGalician\u201d did not refer to someone from Galicia, in northern Spain, but was instead a homogenizing term (often used as a reproach) for anyone from eastern Europe, particularly Ukrainians and Slavs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

19. \u201cEmma Goldman Lectures,\u201d Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, 10 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

20. \u201cAnarchy Expounded by Woman Leader,\u201d Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 10 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

21. \u201cOn Barren Ground,\u201d Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, 11 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

23. She Abuses Our Freedom of Speech: Anarchist Lecturer Attacks Principles of British Constitution,\u201c Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, 11 April 1907. Some reviewers did not pick up on the sarcasm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

24. \u201dLecture Not Sensational: Emma Goldman Defines Anarchism\u2014Philosophy Has Been Misrepresented,\u201c Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 11 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

25. See T. Bell, \u201dOn Barren Ground,\u201d Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 15 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

26. \u201cLecture on Anarchy,\u201d The Voice<\/em>, 12 April 1907, p. 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

27. \u201cApostle of Anarchy: Emma Goldman\u2019s Series of Lectures in Winnipeg\u2014A higher and Lower Plane: Socialist Lost in Sea of Compromise, and A. F. of L. Corrupt,\u201d The Voice<\/em>, 19 April 1907, p. 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

28. Ibid<\/em>., p. 1. Mobius was himself a regular lecturer on such topics, and gave his own talk at the Trades Hall soon after Goldman left the city in late April 1907; see \u201c\u2019The Landless Man, The Manless Land and the Dog in the Manger:\u2019 Prof. Mobius Lectures on Single Tax to Crowded Meeting of Canadian Labor Party,\u201d The Voice<\/em>, 3 May, 1907, p. 1. See also J. M. Bumsted, Dictionary of Manitoba Biography<\/em>. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1999, p. 179.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

29. Socialist Party of Canada (Winnipeg), weekly \u201cSocialism\u201d column, \u201cResembles Trade Unionism,\u201d The Voice<\/em>, 19 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

30. Editorial, \u201cThe Anarchist Lectures,\u201d The Voice<\/em>, 19 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

31. The Socialist Party of Canada was later swept up in the movement for a general strike in Winnipeg, but like many left and labour organizations, arguably not by choice. Many \u201cmoderate\u201d labour leaders, such as Arthur Puttee, lost all credibility and support from workers for denouncing the general strike as a Wobbly tactic, and the SPC leadership was well aware that they needed to \u201ckeep up\u201d with the rank-and-file or risk being left behind. Even R. B. Russell initially opposed the Winnipeg General Strike, ostensibly on the grounds that it might hinder the development of the O. B. U., but he nevertheless became a prominent strike leader. See Tom Mitchell and James Naylor, \u201cThe Prairies: In the Eye of the Storm.\u201d In Craig Heron ed., The Workers\u2019 Revolt in Canada, 1917-1925<\/em>. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998, pp. 178, 187, 217n10.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

32. Goldman wrote and lectured in German, Yiddish, and later, wanting to reach a wider audience in North America, increasingly in English. But she did not consider her own command of Yiddish to be adequate for public talks, and tended to speak German for both Russian Jewish and German anarchist audiences. See introduction to Candace Falk, Barry Pateman & Jessica Moran eds., Emma Goldman: A Documentary History of the American Years: Volume 2: Making Speech Free, 1902-1909<\/em>. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2005, pp. 5, 48. Furthermore, Goldman was herself quoted in Winnipeg newspapers as indicating that three of her talks would be conducted in German; see \u201cAnarchy Expounded by Woman Leader,\u201d Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 10 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

33. Harry Gutkin dated the founding of \u201cThe Echo\u201d to 1900, though Arthur Chiel stated that \u201cThe Echo\u201d was only published \u201cfor several months after March, 1906.\u201d According to Gutkin, one of the principal founders of Der Kanader Yid<\/em> was a prominent local anarchist named Fieve (Frank) Simkin. However, Chiel argued that Der Kanader Yid<\/em> was sponsored initially by Jewish Liberals, who quickly withdrew support from the project due to the \u201cfiery and independent\u201d stance of the newspaper\u2019s editor (Baruch Goldstein). According to Chiel, it was not until 1914 that Simkin became involved. See Harry Gutkin, Journey Into Our Heritage: The Story of the Jewish People in the Canadian West<\/em>. Toronto: Lester & Orpen Dennys Publishers, 1980, p. 179, and Arthur A. Chiel, The Jews in Manitoba: A Social History<\/em>. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1961, p. 125. Writing about his 1913 visit, Rudolf Rocker noted that \u201cour comrade Simkin\u201d published \u201ca good Yiddish weekly\u201d in Winnipeg, and its editor \u201cGoldstein, was sympathetic to our ideas.\u201d It seems certain that Rocker was referring to none other than Der Kaneder Yid<\/em>, which later changed its name to Dos Yiddishe Vort<\/em> (\u201cThe Israelite Press\u201d). Rudolf Rocker, The London Years<\/em>, Nottingham & Oakland: AK Press, 2005, p. 138. Historian Irving Abella dates the founding of Der Kanader Yid<\/em> three years too early in his A Coat of Many Colours: Two Centuries of Jewish Life in Canada<\/em>. Toronto: Lester & Orpen Dennys Limited, 1990, p. 124.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

34. Der Nordwesten<\/em> was a weekly newspaper, published on King Street in Winnipeg\u2019s Old Market district. In fact, it was the first German-language newspaper in the Canadian West (its first issue appeared in April 1889). By 1900, its readership was estimated to be over 4,000, by 1905 it was 13,000, and by 1912 it was 25,000. Germania<\/em> first appeared in November 1904, as a Conservative Party alternative to the Liberal Nordwesten<\/em>. At the time of Goldman\u2019s visit, its offices were at the corner of McDermot and Albert. However in 1911, Germania<\/em> was absorbed by its rival. See Arthur Grenke, The German Community in Winnipeg, 1872-1919<\/em>. New York: AMS Press, 1991, pp. 77-94.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

35. In English, this lecture has typically been rendered as \u201cCrimes of Parents and Educators.\u201d The German wording was \u201cEin Vortrag, den sie ferner halten will, ist betitelt: Wie soll man Kinder erziehen? Wir glauben, dass diese Frage besser von Muettern als wie von einem Fraulein, das den Anschluss verfehlt hat, beantwortet werden kann.\u201d See \u201cAus Winnipeg,\u201d Germania<\/em>, 11 April 1907, p. 10. Many thanks are owed to Helmut-Harry Loewen for transcribing and translating the German.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

36. See Germania<\/em>, 2 April 1908, p. 10 as well as the following week\u2019s issue, for an even longer article on Goldman\u2019s second visit to the city.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

37. In addition to publishing Freyja, Margret Benedictsson<\/a> was a pioneer in the women\u2019s suffrage movement in Manitoba. See Ryan Eyford\u2019s unpublished essay \u201cLucifer Comes to New Iceland: Margret and Sigfus Benedictsson\u2019s Radical Critique of Marriage and the Family,\u201d presented to the Canadian Historical Association, Saskatoon, 2007.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

38. Benedictsson, Margr\u00e9t J\u00f3nsd\u00f3ttir, \u201cEmma Goldman,\u201d Freyja<\/em>, Vol. 9, No. 9 (April 1907), p. 221. Thanks so much to Ryan Eyford, not only for bringing this article to my attention, but also for translating the Icelandic for me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

39. \u201cHoffman\u201d probably referred to the German dramatist Gerhardt Hauptmann. See Goldman\u2019s essay \u201cThe Modern Drama: A Powerful Disseminator of Radical Thought,\u201d in Emma Goldman, Anarchism and Other Essays<\/em>. New York: Dover, 1969, original publication 1911, pp. 248-249.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

40. Benedictsson, \u201cEmma Goldman,\u201d p. 223.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

41. Ibid<\/em>., p. 224.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

42. Goldman, Emma, \u201cOn the Road.\u201d Mother Earth<\/em>, Vol. 2, No. 3 (May 1907), p. 134. The large and \u201cbeautiful social gathering\u201d that Goldman referred to was possibly the same one at which Jacob Penner met his future wife Rose. Penner was one of the founding members of the Socialist Party of Canada in 1905, and later, was involved in the formation of both the Social Democratic Party as well as the Communist Party of Canada. He was elected to Winnipeg City Council in 1934 on a Communist platform. See Roland Penner<\/a>, \u201cPersonal Perspectives on Rose Penner.\u201d In Daniel Stone ed., Jewish Radicalism in Winnipeg, 1905-1960<\/em>. Winnipeg: Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada, 2002, p. 123; Bumsted, Dictionary of Manitoba Biography<\/em>, pp. 197-198.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

43. See Emma Goldman, \u201cOn the Road.\u201d Mother Earth<\/em>, Vol. 2, No. 3 (May 1907), p. 135, as well as Emma Goldman, Living My Life<\/em>. New York: Dover Publications, 1970, original publication 1931, Vol. 1, p. 397-398. This abridged and altered quotation was, in turn, highlighted by Moritz and Moritz in their study of Goldman\u2019s time in Canada; see The World\u2019s Most Dangerous Woman<\/em>, p. 11.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

44. Richardson, R. L., \u201cEmma Goldman,\u201d Winnipeg Tribune<\/em>, 15 April 1907, p. 4.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

45. Ibid<\/em>. Also see Bumsted, Dictionary of Manitoba<\/em>, p. 208.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

46. See advertisement for \u201cAgents of Mother Earth\u201d in Mother Earth<\/em>, Vol. 2, No. 3 (May 1907).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

47. For an overview of Harman\u2019s social and political philosophy, and further details about Lucifer, the Light-bearer, see William O. Reichert, Partisans of Freedom: A Study in American Anarchism<\/em>. Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green University Popular Press, 1976, pp. 301-312. Also, see Mother Earth<\/em>, Vol. 2, No. 3 (May 1907) for an advertisement calling for support for Moses Harman and Lucifer, the Light-bearer<\/em>. In the 1930s, Goldman published an article called \u201cWas My Life Worth Living\u201d in Harper\u2019s Magazine<\/em> in which she referred to Harman as \u201cthe pioneer of woman\u2019s emancipation from sexual bondage.\u201d Cited in Alix Kates Shulman ed., Red Emma Speaks: An Emma Goldman Reader<\/em>. New Jersey: Humanities Press, 3rd edition, 1996, p. 437.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

48. Details about the Benedictssons, and Sigf\u00fas quote, taken from Eyford, \u201cLucifer Comes to New Iceland.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

49. See Moritz & Moritz, The World\u2019s Most Dangerous Woman<\/em>, p. 65. Information about the Prasow brothers is scarce, and further complicated by the multiple forms of spelling used for the name. Goldman used the spelling \u201cPrasow\u201d in Mother Earth (see footnote note 46 above). Rudolf Rocker\u2019s memoirs referred to \u201cPrasov\u201d (see footnote 50 below). Chiel alluded to the \u201cPrassow Brothers;\u201d see Chiel, The Jews in Manitoba<\/em>, p. 126. A transcript of an interview with Toronto anarchist Julius Seltzer used the name \u201cProsoff.\u201d According to Seltzer, \u201cWinnipeg\u2019s [anarchist group] was the most active group, headed by the two Prosoff brothers, very able and active until the 1950s. They had a department store.\u201d Cited in Paul Avrich, Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America<\/em>. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995, p. 329.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

50. Rocker, for example, recorded in his memoirs that while in Winnipeg in 1913 \u201cI stayed with comrade Prasov and his wife, whom I had known as a young girl in our London movement.\u201d Rudolf Rocker, The London Years<\/em>, p. 137.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

51. Chiel, The Jews in Manitoba<\/em>, pp. 125-128.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

52. Goldman\u2019s critique of the Russian Revolution of 1917 had just been published in 1922 under the title My Disillusionment in Russia<\/em>. According to Goldman, Prasow did not wish to jeopardize relations with the Communists in Winnipeg, and in the words of Moritz and Moritz Goldman came to view him as \u201cdisappointingly sympathetic to the Bolsheviks.\u201d See Moritz & Moritz, pp. 65-71.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

53. Sigf\u00fas Benedictsson was dropped as a Winnipeg contact and \u201cagent\u201d relatively quickly after May 1907, whereas Prasow continued in that capacity at least as long as the \u201cagent\u201d list was published in Mother Earth<\/em>. Unfortunately, the final issue containing this distribution list was printed a year later in Vol. III, No. 3 (May 1908), so the duration of Prasow\u2019s tenure as \u201cagent\u201d for Mother Earth<\/em> is unknown. Given his ongoing friendship and political association with Goldman until at least her 1927 visit, it is plausible that Prasow continued to act as a Winnipeg \u201cagent\u201d for Mother Earth<\/em> until the magazine\u2019s demise in 1917.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

54. See, for example, EG to Peter Kropotkin, 31 May 1907, In Falk et. al. eds., Emma Goldman: A Documentary History of the American Years: Volume 2<\/em>, p. 228.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

55. Richman, J., \u201cThe International Anarchist Conference,\u201d Mother Earth<\/em>, Vol. 2, No. 3 (May 1907), p. 157.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

56. For example, Goldman and Max Baginski argued against what they considered a false dichotomy promulgated by many of the participants of the Amsterdam conference between the individualism of Ibsen and collectivism of Kropotkin. In her autobiography, Goldman wrote: \u201cWe held that anarchism does not involve a choice between Kropotkin and Ibsen; it embraces both.\u201d Goldman, Living My Life<\/em>, Vol. 1, p. 402.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

57. See, for example, Drinnon, Rebel in Paradise<\/em> and Alice Wexler, Emma Goldman in America<\/em>. Boston: Beacon Press, 1984.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

58. During her six days in Winnipeg, there were only two brief references to indigenous peoples in the three mainstream dailies. The first was a short article calling for increased funding for \u201cthe physical and moral training of the Indians;\u201d \u201cTo Train the Indians,\u201d Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, 10 April 1907. The second was a general opinion piece comparing the British and U.S. \u201ccivilizing\u201d missions in which the U.S. (unlike Britain) was alleged to have made \u201ca mess\u201d of both \u201cnational colonization\u201d and the \u201cpacification or control of primitive peoples.\u201d The Anglophile author smugly concluded that \u201cThe White Man\u2019s Burden is easier to discuss than to assume.\u201d See \u201cThe White Man\u2019s Burden,\u201d Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, 10 April 1907.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

59. Goldman, Emma, \u201cOn the Road,\u201d Mother Earth<\/em>, Vol. 2, No. 3 (May 1907), p. 133.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

60. For an elaboration of the use of the term \u201cethnic cleansing\u201d and its application to a North American settler-colonial context, see Paul Burrows, \u201cThe St. Peter\u2019s Reserve \u2019Removal\u2019 as a Case Study of Ethnic Cleansing,\u201d unpublished paper presented to the Fort Garry Lectures Graduate Student Conference, Winnipeg, April 2007. For a similar interpretation in a North American indigenous context, see Theda Perdue & Michael Green, The Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears<\/em>. New York: Viking, 2007, p. 42.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

61. Local media coverage in Winnipeg and Selkirk related to the St. Peter\u2019s Reserve had increased since the 1906-1907 Royal Commission, under the jurisdiction of Chief Justice Hector Howell, to look into reserve land \u201cdisputes,\u201d largely on behalf of non-Indian claimants. Coverage increased in the Fall of 1907 with the fraudulent \u201csurrender\u201d of the entire \u201creserve\u201d by an unpopular, unaccountable, and thoroughly bought-off Band Council. For example, see \u201cLand Claims Settled After Thirty Years: Chief Justice Howell Has Handed in His Report on St. Peter\u2019s Reserve Land Case,\u201d Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, 8 April 1908; and \u201cSt. Peter\u2019s Land Claims Settled,\u201d Manitoba Free Press<\/em>, 8 April 1908. For an overview of the St. Peter\u2019s \u201cremoval,\u201d see the unpublished report commissioned by the Treaty and Aboriginal Rights and Research Centre: Tyler, Wright & Daniel Limited, The Illegal Surrender of the St. Peter\u2019s Reserve<\/em>. Winnipeg: T.A.R.R. Centre of Manitoba, 1979 and 1983.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

62. \u201cObservations and Comments,\u201d Mother Earth<\/em>, Vol. 2, No. 5 (July 1907), p. 207.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

63. See Tyler et. al., The Illegal Surrender of the St. Peter\u2019s Reserve<\/em> for specifics about the role of land speculators in that case. For government efforts to undermine successful Indian agriculture, see Sarah Carter, Lost Harvests: Prairie Indian Reserve Farmers and Governmental Policy<\/em>. Montreal: McGill-Queen\u2019s University Press, 1990, p. 112, and Leo Waisberg & Tim Holzkamm, \u201cA Tendency to Discourage Them From Cultivating,\u201d Ethnohistory<\/em> 40 (No. 2, Spring 1993).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

64. See Burrows, \u201cAnarchism, Colonialism, and Aboriginal Dispossession in the Canadian West\u201d for further examples, and elaboration of this argument.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

65. Goldman, Emma, \u201cThe Situation in America: Amsterdam Report,\u201d Mother Earth<\/em>, Vol. 2, No. 7 (September 1907), p. 272-273.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

66. Goldman, Emma, \u201cThe Condition of the Workers of America,\u201d Torch of Anarchy<\/em> (18 October 1895), pp. 75-77, Reprinted in Candace Falk, Barry Pateman, & Jessica Moran eds., Emma Goldman: A Documentary History of the American Years: Volume 1: Made For America, 1890-1901<\/em>. Berkeley & L.A.: University of California Press, 2003, pp. 229-230. Also, Emma Goldman, \u201cA Woman Anarchist: Emma Goldman Teaches Anarchy to 250 Laboring People,\u201d The Pittsburg Leader<\/em> (22 November 1896), p. 6, reprinted in Falk et. al. eds., Emma Goldman: A Documentary History of the American Years<\/em>, p. 244. I would like to thank Bryan Palmer for first bringing these two Goldman quotes to my attention, and my dear friend Lorna Vetters at AK Press in Oakland for finding me the first volume of this important series (the libraries in Winnipeg did not have any copies). Thanks also to Jon Schledewitz and Gillian Roy for their gift of the second volume.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

67. Goldman, Living My Life<\/em>, pp. 431-432.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

68. For numerous examples, see Burrows, \u201cAnarchism, Colonialism, and Aboriginal Dispossession in the Canadian West.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

69. Goldman\u2019s \u201cunpopular\u201d convictions related to her pioneering role in the realm of women\u2019s rights, free love, and birth control, not to mention her uncompromising criticism of the Russian Revolution from a working-class perspective (especially after the suppression of the Kronstadt soviet in 1921), as well as her insistence that rights are not conferred by the ballot nor by getting the \u201cright people\u201d into power, but by ceaseless and uncompromising direct action on the part of ordinary people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

70. In Winnipeg alone there was a collective caf\u00e9 on Cumberland Ave. called \u201cEmma G\u2019s\u201d during the late 1980s and early 1990s, and more recently, in 1995 the entire building at 91 Albert Street in the city\u2019s historic Old Market district was dedicated to Emma Goldman. For the latter building, which continues to promote worker-run collectives and radical politics, see the Old Market Autonomous Zone website at: http:\/\/www.a-zone.org<\/a>. In Toronto, Who\u2019s Emma was a long-lasting anarchist bookstore and infoshop in Kensington Market.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

71. McCormack, A. Ross, Reformers, Rebels, and Revolutionaries: The Western Canadian Radical Movement, 1899-1999<\/em>. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977, p. 113.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

72. Goldman garnered letters of support from workers and leftists in 1907 (see footnote 25 above), and subsequent visits, such as \u201cIs it true,\u201d The Voice<\/em> (17 April, 1908). On her third visit to Winnipeg in November 1908, a formal public debate was organized between Goldman and two local Socialists (J. D. Houston<\/a> and W. H. Stebbings). Billed as \u201cthe Event of the Year\u201d in an advertisement in The Voice<\/em>, the debaters were asked to address the following resolution: \u201cResolved that Anarchism and not Socialism will solve the Social Problem.\u201d The event was held at the Selkirk Hall (Logan Ave. & Stanley St.) on Tuesday, 1 December 1908, with an admission price of 25 cents. See \u201cReal Debate\u201d advertisement in The Voice<\/em> (27 November 1908). Also see \u201cJ. Houston is First Socialist Candidate,\u201d Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, 2 April 1908.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

73. Doug Smith\u2019s biography of Joe Zuken<\/a>, for example, makes brief mention of Goldman\u2019s 1907 visit as indicative of Winnipeg\u2019s radical milieu, though anarchism is not otherwise discussed in the narrative as a formative influence upon Zuken\u2019s life and politics. Doug Smith, Joe Zuken: Citizen and Socialist<\/em> Toronto: James Lorimer & Company, 1990, p. 14. Similarly, at the September 2001 \u201cJewish Radicalism in Winnipeg\u201d Conference, Roland Penner<\/a> spoke of his parents\u2019 meeting at a 1907 \u201creception\u201d for Goldman with an element of vicarious pride, but anarchism was otherwise absent, and prominent anarchists (such as Fieve Simkin) were not referred to as such. It should be noted that Penner\u2019s own accounts differ as to the precise year and nature of this \u201creception.\u201d His more recent memoirs tentatively suggest a \u201cmeeting\u201d at the Trades Hall on 31 March 1908 as the date and location in question. However, this was not an informal \u201creception,\u201d but a public talk entitled \u201cWhat Anarchism Really Stands For.\u201d See Penner, \u201cPersonal Perspective on Rose Penner,\u201d p. 123, as well as Roland Penner<\/a>, A Glowing Dream: A Memoir<\/em>. Winnipeg: J. Gordon Shillingford Publishing, 2007, pp. 18, 97, and 234n7. For information about Goldman\u2019s 31 March 1908 lecture, see \u201cEmma Goldman to Arrive Today: Anarchist Queen Left Minneapolis Yesterday Afternoon for Winnipeg,\u201d Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, 31 March 1908, p. 1, along with an advertisement for the talk itself in the entertainment section of the same issue, as well as \u201cEmma Holds Forth\u2014Addresses a Bumper Crowd in Trades Hall\u2014Talked Interestingly,\u201d Winnipeg Telegram<\/em>, 1 April 1908. For a relatively lengthy reference to one of Goldman\u2019s 1908 visits as indicative of a pre-General Strike milieu, see Donald Avery, \u201cThe Radical Alien and the Winnipeg General Strike of 1919.\u201d In Laurel S. Macdowell & Ian Radforth eds., Canadian Working-Class History<\/em>. Toronto: Canadian Scholars\u2019 Press, 2006, 3rd edition, p. 219.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

74. See, for example, Bumsted\u2019s entry for Simkin in Dictionary of Manitoba Biography<\/em>, p. 228. Chiel devoted a number of pages to Simkin, and his critical role in establishing and maintaining Der Canader Yid<\/em>, and Dos Yiddishe Vort<\/em>. But Simkin\u2019s anarchist views were nowhere acknowledged. Chiel, The Jews in Manitoba<\/em>, pp. 125-128. Also, Abella, A Coat of Many Colours<\/em>, p. 124. Harry Gutkin\u2019s overview of Jewish immigrant life in the Canadian West (Journey Into Our Heritage<\/em>) also makes mention of Simkin\u2019s important role, without mentioning his anarchist perspective\u2014though elsewhere Gutkin has made clear this aspect of Simkin\u2019s ideology. Gutkin, Journey Into Our Heritage<\/em>, p. 179; Harry Gutkin, \u201cThe Radical Influence in Jewish Community Organizations.\u201d In Daniel Stone ed., Jewish Radicalism in Winnipeg, 1905-1960<\/em>. Winnipeg: Jewish Heritage Centre of Western Canada, 2002, pp. 34-35. Roland Penner<\/a>\u2019s recent book of memoirs is one of the rare works that acknowledges Simkin\u2019s anarchism, though even this is strangely minimized in a footnote as being merely an \u201cideological\u201d commitment. See Penner, A Glowing Dream<\/em>, p.236, n7.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

75. For a discussion of some of the structural forces and triggers behind the labour revolts of 1919, see Gregory S. Kealey, \u201c1919: The Canadian Labour Revolt,\u201d Labour\/Le Travail<\/em> 13 (Spring 1984), pp. 11-44.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

76. For details of a formal debate with Houston and Stebbings scheduled for 1 December 1908 see endnote 72<\/a> above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

77. The Anarchist branch (local # 564) of the Arbeiter Ring remained on the Mother Earth<\/em> mailing list until the final days of the magazine in 1917, as did a number of individual supporters in Winnipeg and southern Manitoba, including M. Aronson (171 James Street), M. Cirulnikoff (775 Portage Avenue), Leon Litin (365 Manitoba Avenue), William Roby (Deerhorn, Manitoba), and A. Rosenthal (287 Salter Street, Salter Block, Suite 2). See Mother Earth<\/em> mailing list, 1917, Emma Goldman Papers, UC Berkeley. Thanks to Barry Pateman, Associate Editor of the Emma Goldman Papers, for all his supportive correspondence and for providing me with these details about the mailing list.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

78. Rocker visited and lectured in Winnipeg on at least three separate occasions: April – May 1913, November 1927, and February – March 1934.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Originally published in Manitoba History Journal (Number 57, February 2008) Emma Goldman visited and lectured in Winnipeg on five separate occasions: first in 1907, twice in 1908, again in 1927, and finally in late-1939, just five months before her death on 14 May 1940. [2] The Lithuanian-born Jewish revolutionary and pioneer feminist was not yet forty years old when she first came to Winnipeg, but she was already the most famous, or more precisely, infamous anarchist in North America. The newspapers of the day invariably labelled her \u201cRed Emma,\u201d or bestowed upon her grandiose, half-mocking titles such as \u201cHigh Priestess of Anarchy\u201d or \u201cAnarchist Queen.\u201d At first glance, Winnipeg might seem an unlikely destination for the person who J. Edgar Hoover called \u201cthe most dangerous woman in America.\u201d But Emma Goldman was a tireless activist, writer, and public speaker, one who lectured from coast-to-coast for much of her life, and it is not difficult to see what first drew her to the city. Winnipeg was a colonial boomtown in the early twentieth-century. According to one estimate, it had about 90,000 people in 1906, and probably over 100,000 the following year\u2014making it one of the largest population centres in Canada at […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":41,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"image","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[11,12,14,13],"class_list":["post-40","post","type-post","status-publish","format-image","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-political-writings","tag-anarchism","tag-emma-goldman","tag-labour-history","tag-winnipeg-history","post_format-post-format-image"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=40"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":103,"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40\/revisions\/103"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/41"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blackcatredriver.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}