The period between 1920 and 1960 saw the penetration of American Imperialism into Quebec to the point where it became dominant in the Quebec economy. This expansion was facilitated by the cooperation of the regime of Prime Minister Maurice Duplessis (1936-1939; 1944-1959) whose party, the Union Nationale (National Union Party), represented the traditional professional petty bourgeois elite of Quebec. In the absence of any programme of indigenous industrialization, U.S. capital came to control Quebec’s most profitable sectors and resources. The ideological stranglehold maintained by the Catholic Church throughout this period also helped in demobilizing potential opposition.
The result of this development was a relatively advanced economic infra-structure on the one hand and a rather traditional political and ideological superstructure on the other hand.
By 1960 the contradiction between the needs of a modern industrial society and the backwardness of the state structure clearly required a solution. With Duplessis’ death in 1959 and the defeat of his party in the provincial election of 1960, it became possible to begin a modernization of the state structure. This period, called by its supporters the “Quiet Revolution,” was essentially a transformation of the superstructure to bring it into line with the relatively advanced economic development of the Quebec economy: its roots go back to the 1920’s, but the big push came with the accession of the Liberal Party to power in 1960.
For most of its initiators and supporters, the Quiet Revolution meant that Quebec would catch up economically and socially with the U.S. and the rest of Canada. This implied a more active role for the provincial government. The main impetus behind this programme came from Quebec’s middle-level bourgeoisie) which sought to remain within the Canadian federal structure while at the same time acquiring a greater degree of autonomy in managing its state affairs.
On the whole the Quiet Revolution helped to create state economic structures (e.g. the nationalization of the hydro-electricity industry) which aided the consolidation of the middle-level bourgeoisie and the expansion of the large Canadian and American monopolies. The province became even more attracive for investment as the investors could now count on active support from the provincial government in terms of research, regional planning, a lowering of electricity costs, highways, etc...
The Quiet Revolution also created modern state structures through legislative reforms such as the reinstitution of a Ministry of Education (which had been abolished in the last century as education was returned to the control of the churches). Hospitalization Insurance, reform of the Labour Code, etc.; all of which were attempts to respond to the needs of advanced capitalism in Quebec. The school system, for example, now trained technicians, technocrats, engineers and administrators rather than the priests, doctors and lawyers it had before.
Around 1964-65, however, the Quiet Revolution began to die out and there was a clear slowdown in governmental social and economic measures. While economic and political difficulties demanded increased state intervention, divisions grew within the governing Liberal Party, primarily over two inter-related questions: i) should bold socioeconomic policies be slowed down or should this course of action be pursued, primarily through public and mixed enterprise; and ii) should it be the provincial or the federal government which controls Quebec’s socio-economic policies? From 1965 to 1969, federalist and nationalist elements had been united within the Liberal Party. The dominant faction of the Liberal Party – most closely tied to big capital – chose now to slow down economic and social legislation and took a federalist stance; the minority faction (with support among the upper civil servants and the newer strata of petty bourgeoisie) began to push for a greater state role in socio-economic development, with independence for Quebec seen as the only way of creating a “modern” and “balanced” society.
Thus, in 1967 there was an open split in the Liberal Party. With some of the Liberals, Rene Levesque, leader of the nationalist faction, founded the Mouvement Souverainte-Association (Sovereignty-Association Movement) which became the Parti Quebecois in October of the same year (with the support of both right-wing and social-democratic nationalist groups).
From 1967 on, the national question became the principal contradiction on the Quebec political scene[2]; witness the rise of the Parti Quebecois; the relatively direct confrontations between the Union Nationale prime minister Daniel Johnson and his federal counterpart, Pierre Elliot Trudeau; the tumultuous provincial elections in 1970, when the Liberals came back into power and the Parti Quebecois won 25% of the popular vote; the October Crisis, the adoption of a hard line towards Quebec nationalism by both the provincial and federal Liberal governments, etc. In short, we can say that the national question was a secondary contradiction in the years 1960 to 1967 but that it became principal five or six years ago.
The independence debate in Quebec has slowly led to a realignment of forces within the different factions of Quebec’s petty and middle-level bourgeoisies.
a] the Parti Quebecois
The Parti Quebecois is the only political party in Quebec whose programme is based on Quebec’s political independence from Canada. On the one hand, the PQ recruits its supporters from among intellectuals, civil servants, and some former supporters of the Union Nationale (small town elites, professionals); it has also made certain gains within the middle-level bourgeoisie and the “state bourgeoisie” (top level bureaucrats in the state apparatus), who see in independence the possibility of acquiring political hegemony.
As well, the PQ has attracted important support from the working class, mainly among the unionized francophone sector working in large and medium-sized plants. There are two principal reasons for this: 1) the image of social change that it projects (militancy; the nature of its party funding, i.e. by the base; a somewhat more progressive platform than the other parties); and 2) the lack of any revolutionary alternative representing the interests of the working class.
What this “class collaboration” by sectors of the working class in the PQ means in effect is that the party is controlled by elements of the petty and middle-level bourgeoisie who in turn are supported by parts of the working class. These working class elements, therefore, seldom occupy positions of leadership, and thus their objective interests are subordinated to those of the petty and middle-level bourgeoisie.
b] the Liberal Party
On the other hand, the Liberal Party has established itself more and more clearly as the party of the American and Canadian monopolies, of their Quebecois subordinates and of a good part of the middle-level bourgeoisie, whose interests favour the maintenance of the Canadian confederation.
c] the Ralliement Creditiste (Social Credit)
The Ralliement Creditiste is a right-wing, populist party concentrated in rural areas, and whose economic programme is largely based on far-fetched schemes for credit and banking reforms. They have only been present in Quebec on the provincial level since 1970 and are an off-shoot of a federal party of the same name.
The Creditistes seek to channel the discontent of the population toward an ideology that is clearly reactionary and into propositions which are directly opposed to the objective interests of the working class (for example, unconditional apologies and support for free enterprise, the battle against the “socialists.” the restoration of religious instruction in the schools). On the national question the Creditistes lean toward the status quo.
d] the Union Nationale (National Union)
Not having succeeded in electing a single member in the last election in October 1973, the Union Nationale is now clearly on the decline.
The industrialization of Quebec by American imperialism which created the need for a modern state structure undermined the strength of the Union Nationale, a party which had been rooted among the traditional professional petty-bourgeois elites.
While the 1968-1972 recession hit North America and a good number of other capitalist countries, it affected Quebec with particular force. In 1972. for example, 80 out of the 200 factories closed in Canada were in Quebec. In 1972, 18,000 workers were victims of layoffs due to plant closures. This figure obviously does not take into account partial layoffs, which would raise the total considerably.
The recession reached its worst point in 1970-1971. The situation became so serious that there was talk of a “crisis.” The official unemployment level reached 10% in Quebec in February 1971. Every industrial sector was affected: The machinery and transport materials industry laid off one worker in ten, while the pulp and paper and electrical equipment industries laid off one worker in 20. Aeronautics workers and workers in electronics and communications equipment were also seriously affected.
A special characteristic of this period of recession was the fact that both unemployment and inflation were on the rise: between 1968 and 1971, the rate of inflation rose by 12.4%, while from 1961 to 1965, a period of economic prosperity in Quebec, the inflation rate had risen by only 6.9%.
For the workers who had jobs, this meant that they had to fight harder to obtain salary hikes which were lower than those obtained during the preceding period of “prosperity”.
Thus, from 1965 to 1970, the average weekly salary of Quebec workers rose from $85.35 to $92.74. This represents an increase of 8%, adjusting for inflation. In fact, the recession seemed to have the effect of increasing the bosses’ power over the workers by permitting them to play off the unemployed against the workers who had jobs with threats of factory closures, etc. However, the bosses’ tactics didn’t always work, as can be seen by the marked rise of worker combativity in this period.
In the realm of politics, the period from 1968 to 1971 was one of considerable activity. The two major events of this period occurred in 1970-the provincial elections of April 1970 and the October Crisis.
In general, these events did not alter the relation of forces between the federalist and independentist factions but both events contributed to a certain polarization and clarified the respective alignments. On the federalist side, despite the victory of the provincial Liberals in April, the military intervention of the federal government was deemed necessary to deal with what was a relatively minor crisis in October.[3] The Quebec bourgeoisie and its political representatives, the provincial Liberals, were unable to handle the situation alone and had to call on Ottawa, who demonstrated a firmness and determination to use any means to deal with the situation.
On the nationalist side the fence-straddling Union Nationale had lost out in the April elections. In general, the nationalist forces also closed ranks in October with opposition to the repressive measures of the federal government coming from the petty and middle bourgeoisie as well as union officials, the cooperative movement and various intellectuals previously associated with the Liberal Party. The Federalist forces (Canadian financial bourgeoisie and sectors of the Quebec middle-level bourgeoisie-the former playing the dominant, heavy-handed role) succeeded not only in dealing a blow to the nationalist forces but also severely set back the nascent community and progressive movement by conjuring up links between them and the terrorist FLQ. Their objective was to isolate progressive forces they felt could lead to an eventual workers’ organization.
The working class during this period, as previously, did not play an autonomous political role. On the political level, it continued to support the different established political parties who became more and more interested in recuperating the working class vote. And its struggles were virtually all restricted to a purely economic level. It identified itself, in part at least, only with the unions and it was here that the transformations began in the 1960’s continued to develop.
The pronounced recession of 1970-71 stimulated both the various sectors of the working class it affected and the union movement which was forced to respond, at the same time, to the militancy of the rank and file and to the impossibility of dealing with the problems it confronted (work conditions can be negotiated, but not the closing of a plant).
[2] We have strong reservations on the manner in which the principal contradiction is defined. See critical commentary after the main text.
[3] In October 1970, the Front de Liberation du Quebec - The Quebec Liberation Front, a terrorist organization kidnapped the British Trade Commissioner and the Quebec Labour Minister. The most important of their demands were the release of political prisoners and the broadcasting of the FLQ manifesto on national television. The situation was used by the federal and provincial governments to bring down repression on all left groups in Quebec. The federal government, not trusting the provincial government to do the job well, moved in the Canadian army for the occasion.