Canada’s strength as a nation has historically rested on its ability to foster unity through shared values and a collective identity that embraces diversity. In recent years, however, identity-based movements, such as Pride celebrations, have increasingly emphasized group-specific grievances, sometimes at the expense of broader societal cohesion. While Pride has roots in advocating for equality, its shift toward queer activism—evident in events like the 2023 Toronto Pride parade, where political messaging dominated festivities—has led some to perceive it as divisive, challenging traditional norms. This essay argues that Canada should prioritize supererogatory values, such as compassion, civic duty, and national pride, to promote unity and counter the fragmenting effects of identity politics, while acknowledging the positive intentions of movements like Pride.
Pride celebrations, originally focused on inclusion for the LGBTQ+ community, have increasingly incorporated activist agendas that can alienate segments of the population. For example, the inclusion of controversial slogans and demands for systemic change during Pride events has sparked debates about whether these celebrations prioritize unity or ideological conformity. While supporters argue that Pride fosters inclusivity by amplifying marginalized voices, critics contend that its focus on specific identities can overshadow shared Canadian values, creating a perception of competing victimhoods. This dynamic risks fragmenting society, as public discourse shifts from collective goals to debates over who faces greater oppression, potentially undermining the moral and social cohesion that Canada has long championed.
In contrast, supererogatory values—those that inspire actions beyond basic moral obligations, such as volunteering, mutual respect, and national pride—offer a framework for uniting Canadians. Initiatives like the 2017 Canada 150 celebrations, which emphasized shared history and community service, demonstrate how focusing on collective identity can bridge divides across cultural and ideological lines. By promoting virtues like selflessness and civic responsibility, Canada can encourage citizens to prioritize the common good. For instance, community-driven programs, such as Calgary’s Neighbour Day, foster local engagement and reinforce a sense of belonging, countering the divisiveness of identity-based narratives with tangible acts of unity.
To address the risks of identity politics, Canada must balance the recognition of individual identities with a renewed emphasis on shared values. Identity politics, when unchecked, can foster resentment by framing societal issues as a zero-sum struggle, as seen in debates over funding for identity-specific programs versus universal public services. Acknowledging the positive contributions of Pride, such as its role in advancing legal protections for the LGBTQ+ community, does not negate the need to refocus on unifying principles. Policies that incentivize collective action—such as national volunteer campaigns or inclusive cultural festivals—can redirect public discourse toward shared goals, reducing the fractiousness of competing identity claims while respecting diverse perspectives.
In conclusion, Canada must navigate the tension between celebrating individual identities and fostering national unity by prioritizing supererogatory values. While Pride and similar movements have played a vital role in promoting inclusivity, their activist turn can inadvertently deepen societal divides. By investing in initiatives that emphasize compassion, civic duty, and a shared Canadian identity, such as community service programs or inclusive national celebrations, Canada can rebuild a cohesive social fabric. This approach does not dismiss the importance of individual identities but integrates them into a broader narrative of unity, ensuring that all Canadians feel connected to a common purpose and a stronger national community.





9 comments
June 5, 2025 at 6:18 am
Steve Ruis
Hear, hear! If any country can pull this off, it is Canada!
LikeLike
June 5, 2025 at 6:29 am
tildeb
Way, way too late. ‘Canada’ (the federal government) has already gone full bore legislation to make the country a hierarchy of competing identity groups guaranteeing civic dysfunction and disunity which receives both money and legal status from the feds. The provinces (excepting Alberta partially) have gone along (that’s why each have human ‘rights’ tribunals that guarantees an identity ‘win’ regardless of the case).
So this kind of pie-in-the-sky essay is pure wishful thinking. There is no possibility of social cohesion through ‘collective’ identity because not only is there no collective identity, policy, procedures, and practices make sure this ‘threat’ cannot take root. Zero.
LikeLike
June 5, 2025 at 6:49 am
tildeb
Name me one common purpose that isn’t a generic woke term. Just one.
There’s a reason Trudeau claimed Canada is a post national state: this deconstruction of every facet of nationalism has been the goal of multiculturalism for over 50 years. It’s way too late to pretend the social silos now fully established and protected by law and funded by the public in perpetuity can be altered by wishful thinking. There is no common thread left unraveled.
LikeLike
June 5, 2025 at 7:54 am
Carmen
It appears that our last federal election has sent a clear signal — Canadians — all kinds of Canadians – do not want to be American. Nor do we want the kind of negativity we see in American politics. Remember how all the polls were predicting a Conservative win just months before what was seen as a threat to our democracy? That the Liberals should win an election and reverse the course of what many saw as a solid Conservative win just months previous to that, in my opinion, reveals very clearly that Canadians will unite when needed. To me that is proof positive that Canadians are still rallying behind the cohesive social fabric that Arb’s talking about. We know what’s important and that’s what we all want. Please don’t give up on us yet, Tildeb. We need the heavy thinkers like you. I am sorry for your pessimism but remain hopeful that things can turn around. Remember, I’ve got eight grandchildren. ;)
LikeLike
June 5, 2025 at 8:57 am
The Arbourist
@Tildeb
I recognize the challenges posed by policies that deepen identity-based divisions, and your concerns about their impact on social cohesion are valid. However, I remain hopeful that Canada can foster unity by focusing on supererogatory values like compassion and civic duty through local community building.
Grassroots initiatives, such as Calgary’s Neighbour Day or local volunteer programs, demonstrate how communities can unite across differences. By prioritizing local efforts—neighborhood cleanups, inclusive cultural events, or community dialogues—we can rebuild trust and shared purpose from the ground up. These small-scale actions can counter divisive policies by fostering tangible connections, proving that on some scales, collective Canadian identity is still within reach.
LikeLike
June 5, 2025 at 8:57 am
tildeb
Canada was founded on not-American (with unique laws of governance to keep Upper and Lower Canada from joining the American revolution) and so it’s true that this is an identity – albeit a negative identity shared by the vast majority of the world’s population. But in itself, not-American is not a purpose… although politicians here sure try to paint it that way (elbows-up posturing rather than keep-your-stick-on-the-ice advice). The problem is that we as Canadians are – far more than any other of our cultural inheritances – clearly American by daily practice. So even that foundation is crumbling (as revealed in polling data that shows a very clear divide between those who grew up in Canada’s heyday – late 50s to early 80s – and who still imagine – and vote as if – the echoes from that promising future are as real today versus younger cohorts who are approaching majority numbers dissatisfied to the point of supporting some kind of national dissolution they attribute from being disenfranchised from their parent’s national inheritance).
This a social problem of growing dimensions covered up temporarily by fear and loathing of Trump specifically.
So where does that leave this notion of a shared Canadian identity organized and directed by common purpose, common values, common direction? Dead on arrival.
Sure, we’ve got anti-Americanism… and that’s it. We have our fear directed by policy against our largest trading partner, our cultural brethren, our greatest ally, our closest political and economic connection. (The alternative is China. And boy, are the Chinese making inroads into Canada – including over a hundred Chinese police stations throughout the country – and not one of the inroads is good for Canada.)
In contrast to the ‘unifying’ anti-Americanism ripe in the older cohorts, neither Canadians nor Americans view the other as ‘foreigners’. That’s how close we are in reality. And young people know this to be true… in spite of their elders insisting we are somehow qualitatively different while teaching our young just how terrible and awful their historical inheritance has been… just not as terrible and morally bankrupt as our southern ‘fascist’ neighbours.
Pretending Canada has a worthwhile national identity yet prostituting itself for China’s gain in the name of anti-Americanism – while lowering its flag in shame for coming into being and teaching generations of Canadians they have inherited this shame – is schizophrenic at best and delusional at worst.
Yes, the Liberals ran a more successful campaign against Trump than did the Conservatives. Again, a negative campaign of fear. Not a shared purpose. A shared fear. Is that really a ringing endorsement of national unity? Or were the conditions to utilize anti-Americanism really a Liberal political spin doctor’s wet dream come true?
LikeLike
June 5, 2025 at 9:23 am
tildeb
Arb… ‘community’ building sounds great. But look at the decline of every historical ‘community building’ organization across the country. The replacements are geared towards identity silos.
Until I see a dedicated plan and funding connecting Canada to Canadians, I have no reason to question the suicidal spiral we are now dedicated to pursuing.
As a very proud Canadian of very long Canadian heritage (long before Confederation) I don’t want to be this way. I would love nothing better than to have cause for optimism and be able to pass this along to the next generations. But I’m not seeing it. I’m not reading about it. I’m not hearing about it. Anywhere. All I am encountering is the opposite and the younger the cohorts I talk to, the more obvious the direction of decline becomes. Canada is not a serious country anymore.
LikeLike
June 5, 2025 at 9:41 am
tildeb
Huh… I just came across this from Michael Shermer:
“Gad Saad’s theory of idea pathogens posits that—analogous to biological parasites—ideological parasites can take hold and corrupt reason not only in individuals but within entire populations (at the moment, Canada appears to be one such place, England may be another). In that conception, ideas that are wholly untethered from reality can flourish in ideological echo chambers—like universities—and then have a tenacious hold once they find their way into the population at large.”
“The liberal tradition that evolved out of the Enlightenment is grounded in individual autonomy. It is the individual who is the primary moral agent because it is the individual who survives and flourishes, or who suffers and dies. It is individual sentient beings who perceive, emote, respond, love, feel, and suffer—not populations, races, genders, groups, or nations.”
“Contrary to this liberal tradition, collectivism holds that individuals are expendable parts of a larger whole: the band, tribe, state, nation, religion, class, race, ethnicity, gender, and countless intersectional variations on these collective cohorts. As such, individual identity is lost to what Andrew Doyle calls identitarian collectivism, for which “the illiberal left and the authoritarian right both share this habitual inclination towards collective thinking.”
Right there is Canada’s new and improved and progressive collective national identity, which only divides and separates in practice! And, sure enough there it is …right here in my local Board of Education’s new and improved and progressive collective curriculum and guidelines for 2025-26! The spiral continues.
LikeLike
June 5, 2025 at 9:56 am
Carmen
Again, so terribly bothered to read your inflammatory and callous remarks, Tildeb. I do not share your pessimism and feel that you are being sucked into a deep void of nonsense. (I’ll be frank, you be Tildeb)
LikeLike