Gearey: In the federal public service, simple gender parity isn’t enough

Remarkably limited in scope. It’s not just gender parity but representation of visible minorities and Indigenous peoples, along with the intersectionality with gender.

The overall public service record has become much more representative over the years, as any cursory reading of employment equity reports and related data tables demonstrates.

Women visible minorities are slightly greater than the overall percentage of women: 57.8 percent, while Indigenous peoples women are much more strongly represented, 63.4 percent compared to 56.9 percent.

To put departmental diversity variation in context, out of the 31 departments with over 1,000 employees, only 6 do not have gender parity:

Partnership is collective; it doesn’t “give” women anything but rather frees everyone. True gender partnership is architectural — it’s not just paint on the walls. Partnerships must create space for trans women too, whose representation is even more marginal. Broadening partnerships in this way, even beyond binary gender lines, creates more durable and valuable culture change.

This kind of partnership culture-building is especially needed in portfolios such as National Defence, Innovation, Science and Economic Development, and STEM-related departments such as Natural Resources — areas where women remain under-represented and influence is unevenly distributed.

Departments that prioritize inclusion will not only improve productivity and retention, but also align more closely with the values of younger generations entering the workforce.

Still, not all mechanisms for achieving equity have kept pace with the progress they helped achieve. Some public service job postings continue to include criteria restricted to equity groups that include women. If true equity had been realized, women wouldn’t need to tick a box to be counted.

Not all equity groups have progressed at the same pace, so we’re not at a one-size-fits-all approach. Equity must begin with presence before it can refine process.

Tying this up, the risk card — “Diminished Male Relevance” — wasn’t just hypothetical. It captured a fear that progress must come at someone’s expense. Real partnership, however, isn’t subtraction, it’s about choosing to evolve together. If that feels uncomfortable, it likely means we’re getting somewhere.

Source: Gearey: In the federal public service, simple gender parity isn’t enough

Idées | La montée du wokisme… de droite

Along with “snowflakes:”

Dès son assermentation, Donald Trump a signé un décret intitulé « Pour restaurer la liberté d’expression », mais peu après, des mots et des expressions comme « équité », « genre » et « discours haineux » ont disparu des sites Web fédéraux. Après avoir fustigé la fixation du wokisme sur l’identité de genre et de race, le président états-unien a accueilli comme réfugiés des fermiers blancs soi-disant victimes de racisme en Afrique du Sud. Le vice-président Vance a quant à lui accusé les Européens de bafouer la liberté d’expression en malmenant les médias de droite, alors que Trump écartait les journalistes qui s’opposent à ses politiques ou qui, simplement, refusent d’employer l’expression « Gulf of America » pour parler du golfe du Mexique.

Ce ne sont là que quelques exemples. La liste des assauts de Trump contre le wokisme est longue. Mais quand on l’examine, on constate que ceux-ci ne font en fait que substituer une forme de wokisme à une autre. « Trump is going woke », écrivait d’ailleurs Thomas L. Friedman dans le New York Times.

Des mesures « antiwoke » ayant tous les attributs du wokisme minent la liberté d’expression chez nos voisins depuis quelques années déjà. Des professeurs ont été menacés de renvoi en Floride s’ils soutenaient de leur témoignage la contestation d’une loi électorale restrictive. Des législatures républicaines ont adopté des lois qui « encadrent » l’enseignement de certaines matières. Un rapport de PEN America signale que plus de 10 000 bouquins ont été bannis des écoles publiques en 2023-2024, la plupart concernant les personnes de couleur et issues de la communauté LGBTQ+.

Le phénomène a attiré le regard d’observateurs de divers horizons avant même que Donald Trump n’entame son second mandat. Sous le titre « The Regrettable Rise of Right-Wing Wokeism », The Imaginative Conservative remarquait que la droite woke utilise l’histoire exactement de la même façon que la gauche woke, « la réinventant pour nous éloigner de nos mythes fondateurs dans l’espoir que nous embrassions sa vision de l’avenir ».

La revue The Atlantic titrait pour sa part « How the Woke Right Replaced the Woke Left ». Thomas Chatterton Williams y stigmatisait les dérives linguistiques du wokisme de gauche, mais il ajoutait qu’en dépit de son décret sur la liberté d’expression, Trump avait imposé sa propre liste de mots et d’expressions à bannir. « Cette fois-ci, disait-il, les règles ont la force du gouvernement. »

Dans un article paru dans Le Devoir il y a quelques années, le linguiste Gabriel Martin expliquait que le mot « wokisme », qui décrit une idéologie de gauche radicale structurée en fonction de questions identitaires, désignait à l’origine une sensibilisation accrue à la justice sociale.

En dehors du milieu concerné, on ne s’est pas formalisé de cette récupération qui dénaturait le sens original du mot. En revanche, l’expression « wokisme de droite » illustre les nouvelles dérives de la droite américaine sans dénaturer le sens courant du mot, puisque le wokisme repose sur des enjeux identitaires et qu’il se manifeste par l’intolérance, la censure et en corollaire, la rectitude. La droite américaine a simplement remplacé les enjeux identitaires de genre et de race par ceux de l’homme blanc, de préférence chrétien. Pour le reste, le wokisme de droite se manifeste lui aussi par l’intolérance, la censure et la rectitude, et c’est sans retenue qu’il embrasse la culture de l’annulation.

L’ex-chroniqueuse du New York Times Bari Weiss affirmait il y a quelques années que les gens sont toujours plus nombreux à s’autocensurer par crainte d’être attaqués par une horde woke. Aujourd’hui, ce sont aussi les sanctions du gouvernement que ses concitoyens risquent de s’attirer s’ils négligent de s’autocensurer.

Ce wokisme de droite qui touche nos voisins a aussi des effets chez nous. Parce que des chercheurs de l’Université de Montréal en font les frais, le recteur Daniel Jutras considère cet « autoritarisme à la Trump » comme une menace plus grande à la liberté académique que ce qu’il nomme le « wokisme interne ». Le recteur ne nie pas pour autant le danger de ce wokisme interne, « une menace réelle — disait-il en entrevue au Journal de Montréal —, mais qui a parfois été exagérée par certains commentateurs ».

On nous répète que le « wokisme interne », ou de gauche, est né dans les universités américaines avant d’essaimer chez nous. Le wokisme de droite, né dans l’esprit des gouverneurs et des législateurs de certains États américains, est maintenant embrassé par le gouvernement Trump. Ainsi soutenu par le pouvoir, il est d’autant plus efficace… et dangereux ! Il mérite donc d’être surveillé avec la même vigilance et dénoncé avec la même vigueur que sa contrepartie de gauche. « On a fermé la lumière aux États-Unis sur plusieurs sujets dont l’étude permet de faire progresser la société […] Il ne faut pas que la même chose se produise ici », disait la rectrice Sophie d’Amours, de l’Université Laval, lors d’un récent colloque sur la liberté académique.

Source: Idées | La montée du wokisme… de droite

Upon his swearing-in, Donald Trump signed a decree entitled “To restore freedom of expression”, but soon after, words and expressions such as “fairness”, “gender” and “hate speech” disappeared from federal websites. After criticizing the fixation of wokism on gender and racial identity, the US president welcomed white farmers so-called victims of racism in South Africa as refugees. Vice-President Vance accused Europeans of flouting freedom of expression by mistruting the right-wing media, while Trump dismissed journalists who oppose his policies or who simply refuse to use the expression “Gulf of America” to talk about the Gulf of Mexico.

These are just a few examples. The list of Trump’s assaults against wokism is long. But when we examine it, we see that they are in fact only substituting one form of wokism for another. “Trump is going woke,” wrote Thomas L. Friedman in the New York Times.

“Anti-woke” measures with all the attributes of wokism have been undermining freedom of expression among our neighbors for a few years now. Teachers were threatened with return to Florida if they supported their testimony to challenge a restrictive electoral law. Republican legislatures have adopted laws that “frame” the teaching of certain subjects. A PEN America report reports that more than 10,000 books were banned from public schools in 2023-2024, most of them concerning people of color and people from the LGBTQ+ community.

The phenomenon attracted the attention of observers from various backgrounds even before Donald Trump began his second term. Under the title “The Regrettable Rise of Right-Wing Wokeism”, The Imaginative Conservative noted that the right woke uses history in exactly the same way as the left woke, “reinventing it to take us away from our founding myths in the hope that we embrace its vision of the future”.

The Atlantic magazine headlined “How the Woke Right Replaced the Woke Left”. Thomas Chatterton Williams stigmatized the linguistic drifts of leftist wokism, but added that despite his decree on freedom of expression, Trump had imposed his own list of words and expressions to be banned. “This time,” he said, “the rules have the strength of the government. ”

In an article in Le Devoir a few years ago, linguist Gabriel Martin explained that the word “wokism”, which describes a radical left-wing ideology structured according to identity issues, originally referred to increased awareness of social justice.

Outside the environment concerned, we have not formalized this recovery which distorted the original meaning of the word. On the other hand, the expression “right-wing wokism” illustrates the new drifts of the American right without distorting the common meaning of the word, since wokism is based on identity issues and is manifested by intolerance, censorship and in corollary, rectitude. The American right has simply replaced the identity issues of gender and race with those of the white man, preferably Christian. For the rest, right-wing wokism is also manifested by intolerance, censorship and rectitude, and it is without restraint that it embraces the culture of cancellation.

Former New York Times columnist Bari Weiss said a few years ago that more and more people are self-censoring for fear of being attacked by a woke horde. Today, it is also the government’s sanctions that its fellow citizens are likely to attract if they neglect to self-censorship.

This right-wing wokism that affects our neighbors also has effects on us. Because researchers at the University of Montreal pay the price, Rector Daniel Jutras considers this “Trump-style authoritarianism” as a greater threat to academic freedom than what he calls “internal wokism”. The rector does not deny the danger of this internal wokism, “a real threat – he said in an interview with the Journal de Montréal -, but which has sometimes been exaggerated by some commentators”.

We are told that “internal wokism”, or leftist, was born in American universities before swarming at home. Right-wing wokism, born in the minds of the governors and legislators of some American states, is now embraced by the Trump government. Thus supported by the government, it is all the more effective… and dangerous! He therefore deserves to be monitored with the same vigilance and denounced with the same vigor as his left-wing counterpart. “We have closed the light in the United States on several subjects whose study makes it possible to advance society […] The same thing must not happen here,” said Rector Sophie d’Amours, of Laval University, at a recent symposium on academic freedom.

Out of sight, out of mind: underrepresentation of racialized faculty in Canadian psychology

Solid analysis and data, likely reflecting historical trends.. One question that remains is the degree to which students from visible minority groups choose psychology versus other areas of medicine as well as the degree that faculty diversity influences that choice. Visible minority students overall are over-represented in medical schools, save for Black and Indigenous:

Psychologists of colour (herein referred to as BIPOC—Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour) contribute to diverse perspectives and also conduct critical research that addresses the significant disparities and challenges faced by communities of colour in accessing mental healthcare services. There has been some concern that BIPOC psychologists are underrepresented in academia, but this issue has yet to be evaluated in a Canadian context due to a lack of available data. This study examined the racial demographics of psychology faculty across 23 major universities in Ontario, Canada (n = 1421), the province with the largest number of universities. White psychologists are overwhelmingly overrepresented compared to BIPOC psychologists, reflecting significant underrepresentation relative to the province’s population. White faculty predominantly hold secure academic positions (tenured, tenure track) while BIPOC faculty are concentrated in precarious roles (adjunct, sessional, lecturer). Professors of East Asian heritage constituted the largest group among BIPOC faculty. Additionally, BIPOC psychologists are underrepresented across all professional subspecialties. Systemic racism, historical biases, and exclusionary practices were identified as major barriers. Our findings call for urgent reforms in university hiring practices and psychology training programmes to reflect the diversity of the population they serve and to dismantle systemic barriers that perpetuate racial inequalities in academia. 

Figure 2

Rank position by race and within race. (A) Depicts numbers of psychology faculty by their job seniority. White faculty are shown in blue and aggregate BIPOC faculty in pink. (B) shows numbers of faculty by job seniority excluding White faculty but including breakdown by race for the BIPOC group.

media/image002.png

Source: Out of sight, out of mind: underrepresentation of racialized faculty in Canadian psychology

Jamie Sarkonak: He mildly questioned DEI. His law school calls that ‘misconduct’

Of note. May not have been from a neutral position but nevertheless a cautionary tale. Court case to watch:

…Tim Haggstrom’s crime? Writing an open letter to his fellow students, from a neutral position, to foster dialogue and attempt to inject reason into the debate. His punishment? A campaign by other students to sabotage his career, culminating in an official finding of misconduct by a spineless university that appears to have forgotten its role in protecting free expression on campus.

That campaign, at least, didn’t work. Now a lawyer (and the national director of the Runnymede Society, whose local chapter events I often attend) Haggstrom, via his legal team at civil liberties charity Freedoms Advocate, is asking the Saskatchewan Court of King’s Bench to have the misconduct ruling thrown out — along with the university policies that work to deny procedural fairness to those who don’t emphatically agree with diversity, equity and inclusion.

For the university’s own sake, Haggstrom better win.

He alleges unfair, Charter-infringing treatment in his court filings, and he’s got a strong argument. At the time Haggstrom expressed the need for discussion over affirmative action at the law school, the University of Saskatchewan had already adopted an identity-based worldview, aimed at elevating certain groups in the university.

The institution had, since 2020, a diversity, equity and inclusion policy that implored the entire campus to uphold DEI values, cementing identity-based thinking — and with it, the idea that procedures are only fair when they result in equal outcomes between groups — into campus culture. That year, the university president committed himself to the “dismantling of institutional structures, policies and processes that contribute to inequalities faced by marginalized groups.”

In 2021, the university signed a memorandum of understanding with the student union, committing to deliver anti-oppression and anti-racism training to staff, which was being rolled out by the next year. That initiative was led by anti-racist scholar Verna St. Denis, who has openly called for biasing university education to favour her own progressive, deeply racial worldview. St. Denis also contributed to the university’s Indigenous strategy, also released in 2021, which planned for institution-wide decolonial change.

Further, according to the originating application filed in court by Haggstrom, the university had made training materials available on the topic of “power and privilege.” The materials are no longer on the university website, but were archived online. They teach a hierarchical understanding of race (specifically, that white people have better access to education and success); they characterize meritocracy as a feature of “settler mindsets”; they state that internalized colonialism causes oppressed people to commit sexual assault; they instruct readers to “refute colonialism” (that is, the very basis of our nation) to assist in making Canada “the friendly, open, welcoming country it espouses to be.” They remark that anti-oppressive education “ought to be uncomfortable as white students begin to unlearn what they have been taught through their previous learning experiences.”

The course ends on a question: “As an individual how can you decolonize yourself and what can you do with your power and privilege to help in the betterment of Canada?”…

Source: Jamie Sarkonak: He mildly questioned DEI. His law school calls that ‘misconduct’

Treasury Board reports gains on diversity and equity in public service, but will cuts hamper progress?

Good question:

The federal public service continued to increase the number of women, Indigenous people, visible minorities, and people with disabilities in its ranks between 2023 and 2024, according to the latest report on employment equity. But as the federal public service now begins to shrink for the first time in over 10 years, some have raised concerns that job cuts will hamper progress for equity-seeking groups….

Source: Treasury Board reports gains on diversity and equity in public service, but will cuts hamper progress?

TBS publishes some rich infographics and infographics: Employment Equity Demographic Snapshot 2023–2024

Figure 33: Representation trends for members of visible minorities by subgroup – percentage

Text version below:



Is addressing anti-Black racism in Canada still a policy priority?

Suspect it will become a lower priority given more pressing issues but hopefully become more focussed on results and outcomes and more in-depth evaluations on which government programs are more effective:

…Placating the anti-equity backlash has left Canada unable to achieve or sustain the goal of employment equity. The federal government and its institutional post-secondary partners should instead commit to following more transformative paths laid out by Black scholars. These recommendations include: 

  • Redressing anti-Black racism and supporting Black inclusion in universities and colleges by following actions set out in the Scarborough Charter
  • Advancing equitable participation of Black researchers by upholding the SSHRC’s action plan. 
  • Heeding Blackett’s call to meaningfully pursue equity by affirming the quasi-constitutional status of employment equity legislation. This would include focusing attention on removing barriers for Black workers. 

Much Black effort has gone into showing us what policies and actions are needed to address anti-Black racism. The question is do Canadian institutions have the moral fortitude to follow through in the face of mounting anti-EDI backlash? 

Source: Is addressing anti-Black racism in Canada still a policy priority?

NYT editorial: Antisemitism Is an Urgent Problem. Too Many People Are Making Excuses.

Good editorial. Applies to Canada as well:

Americans should be able to recognize the nuanced nature of many political debates while also recognizing that antisemitism has become an urgent problem. It is a different problem — and in many ways, a narrower one — than racism. Antisemitism has not produced shocking gaps in income, wealth and life expectancy in today’s America. Yet the new antisemitism has left Jewish Americans at a greater risk of being victimized by a hate crime than any other group. Many Jews live with fears that they never expected to experience in this country.

No political arguments or ideological context can justify that bigotry. The choice is between denouncing it fully and encouraging an even broader explosion of hate.

Source: Antisemitism Is an Urgent Problem. Too Many People Are Making Excuses.

Public service shrinks by nearly 10,000, with tax, immigration hit the hardest

Interestingly, core public administration, the basis for employment equity reports, only shrank by some 3,000 (CRA not included in core public administration, meaning that IRCC had the vast majority of cuts). The 2023-24 EE report shows an increase, but as I go through hiring, promotion, and separation data, hiring has started to decrease. Real issues, as others have flagged, with cuts disproportionately affecting younger workers. More to come:

The federal public service shed almost 10,000 people last year, with the Canada Revenue Agency and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada losing the most employees.

The last time the public service contracted was in 2015, when the number of people employed dropped just slightly from 257,138 to 257,034.

The number of public servants employed by the federal government fell from 367,772 to 357,965 over the last year.

The CRA lost 6,656 employees between 2024 and 2025, dropping from 59,155 to 52,499. The size of the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada workforce fell from 13,092 to 11,148, a loss of 1,944 employees.

The Public Health Agency of Canada lost 879 employees, Shared Services Canada dropped 608 employees, Health Canada lost 559 and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency lost 453.

Some departments and agencies saw their workforces expand over the past year. The RCMP hired another 911 public servants, Elections Canada hired another 479, National Defence hired an extra 381 and Global Affairs Canada took on another 218.

The data does not include employees on leave without pay, locals employed outside of Canada, RCMP regular force and civilian members, Canadian Armed Forces members, employees of the National Capital Commission and those who work for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

Most of those who lost their jobs were “term” employees — people hired for a limited period of time. Between 2024 and 2025, the public service lost almost 8,000 term employees.

The government also dropped almost 3,000 casual employees — people who can’t be employed by any one government department or agency for more than 90 days — and 1,750 students.

The number of permanent federal public service employees increased by about 2,700 last year.

More than three-quarters of the people who left the federal public service last year were under the age of 35.

Of those who lost their jobs, 4,413 were between the ages of 25 and 29, another 3,354 were between the ages of 20 and 24, 563 were aged 30 to 34 and 246 were under 20.

Lori Turnbull, a professor of political science at Dalhousie University, said it’s not surprising that most of the positions eliminated were term positions — short-term positions that don’t have to be renewed.

“These contract positions are often vehicles for entry into the public service,” Turnbull said.

David McLaughlin, executive editor of Canadian Government Executive Media and former president and CEO of the Institute on Governance, said term employees and younger staffers are the easiest people for governments to cut.

“If you’re paying people out, they don’t require big packages, so they are the easiest, cheapest employees to let go,” he said.

But by dropping younger employees whose careers are just beginning, he said, the government risks missing out on the kind of cultural change and innovation the public service badly needs.

“You run the longer-term risk by letting go younger people who may be dedicating their careers and to public service,” he said. “You are simply reinforcing the older sub-performers that may exist in the public service.

“I would not recommend this as an approach to resolving public service spending.”

The government spent $43.3 billion on public servants’ salaries in 2023-24, according to the parliamentary budget officer. It spent a $65.3 billion on all employee compensation, including pensions, overtime and bonuses.

PBO data also indicates that, in 2023, the average salary for a full-time public servant was $98,153.

The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat said it could not provide an average salary for public servants for 2024 or 2025.

Public service employees have been braced for layoffs since the previous Liberal government launched efforts to refocus federal spending in 2023.

In the 2024 budget, ­the previous government said it expected the public service population to decline by around 5,000 full-time positions over the subsequent four years.

It also said that, starting on April 1, 2025, departments and agencies would be required to cover a portion of increased operating costs with existing resources.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has vowed to cap, not cut, the federal public service, though his government has given little indication of what that might entail. The prime minister also has promised to launch a “comprehensive” review of government spending with the aim of increasing its productivity.

Hundreds of workers in the Canada Revenue Agency, Employment and Social Development Canada and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada have been laid off recently.

Those organizations also saw their numbers increase during the pandemic years.

Turnbull said that, with the pandemic over and immigration numbers being scaled down, the federal government sees this downsizing as “logical.”

McLaughlin, meanwhile, warned that downsizing only offers “episodic savings” and wondered whether service delivery can keep up with demand.

Source: Public service shrinks by nearly 10,000, with tax, immigration hit the hardest

McWhorter: Viewed From Any Angle, This Station Is a Wonder and an Inspiration

Money quote: “That feeling of hunger to see, to know, that sense of awe and joy — that is what education should foster.”

…Which is why it depresses me endlessly when these goals narrow in the way they so often do today. So many teachers or professors seem to think that during the short time we have students under our influence, our primary job is to instruct them in how to illuminate injustice.

The field of education, for example, is a rich subject — “How many miles to the heart of a child?” asked the lead character in Kurt Weill and Maxwell Anderson’s 1949 musical “Lost in the Stars.” But in “What’s College For?” the author Zachary Karabell describes something sadly familiar these days: a professor focused on telling students how America’s educational apparatus perpetuates class stratification.

The film critic David Denby, in “Great Books,” his volume about Columbia University’s core curriculum, described an instructor whose only apparent interest in Aristotle was in condemning his sexism and racism, rather than exploring the broader scope of his writings. I once sat in on a course about Black film in which the main theme class after class was how each movie exemplified negative stereotypes. The artistry, the richness, the reasons the films were meaningful to Black people were considered of lesser interest. Rachmaninoff’s piano concertos, every word of George Eliot’s “Middlemarch,” William Levi Dawson’s “Negro Symphony” from start to finish — all of these can be laboriously interpreted as demonstrations of the abuse of power. But doing so misses their true value.

I would hate to see anyone put that kind of teaching to use when entering Michigan Central Station — to internalize the idea that upon encountering that magnificence, one’s thoughts should be primarily about injustice. Certainly the Black porters there worked under less than ideal conditions; white passengers often saw them as barely human. (The convention back in the day was to call all Black porters “George,” because who cared what they called themselves?) It’s important to remember these facts. But even amid that bigotry, Black people had the same capacity as white people to see beauty. And they have the same capacity today.

On the way to Michigan Central, I was talking with a Black guy named Anton who had grown up nearby. As the building came into view, rising so majestically into the day’s overcast sky and set diagonally to the main road, I shouted, “Goddamn!” At the very same second, Anton exclaimed “Look at that! There it is, man!”

That feeling of hunger to see, to know, that sense of awe and joy — that is what education should foster.

Source: Viewed From Any Angle, This Station Is a Wonder and an Inspiration

Rioux: Une odeur de guerre civile

Mix of both side-ism and overly rigid perspective of “strong-borderism:”

….Certes, à 18 mois des élections de mi-mandat, l’envoi des gardes nationaux et des marines pour mater les émeutiers relève probablement d’un calcul politique. Mais le gouverneur de la Californie, Gavin Newsom, n’est pas non plus dénué d’ambition à un moment où les démocrates se cherchent un sauveur. Rappelons aussi que les rafles sauvages de la police de l’immigration (ICE) sont en partie dues au refus de la Ville de Los Angeles, une ville « refuge », de fournir, par exemple, les informations sur la sortie de prison d’illégaux condamnés par les tribunaux. C’est ce qu’a rappelé la journaliste du Wall Street Journal Allysia Finley, qui évalue leur nombre à quelques centaines de milliers sur tout le territoire américain.

On doit certes reprocher à Donald Trump et tout particulièrement à son chef adjoint de cabinet, Stephen Miller, leur acharnement sur ces illégaux qui travaillent et vivent pacifiquement depuis longtemps aux États-Unis. Mais certainement pas de combattre une immigration illégale devenue endémique, puisque le président a justement été élu pour ça. Et encore moins de renvoyer ceux qui ont été condamnés par la justice, comme ont souhaité le faire tous les ministres de l’Intérieur qui se sont succédé depuis dix ans en France. Dans ces combats — qu’il a d’ailleurs en partie déjà gagnés puisque les entrées à la frontière mexicaine ont chuté de manière spectaculaire —, Trump a le soutien d’une majorité d’Américains.

« L’indécence de l’époque ne provient pas d’un excès, mais d’un déficit de frontières », a écrit Régis Debray. Frontières que l’écrivain définissait comme « le bouclier des humbles ». Cette odeur de poudre, en France comme aux États-Unis, est le fruit de longues années qui ont vu triompher l’idéologie du sans-frontiérisme. Pas plus que les hommes ne peuvent vivre sans famille, les nations ne peuvent vivre sans frontières. Si celles du pays s’effondrent, des murs s’élèveront dans chaque région, des clôtures dans chaque quartier et autour de chaque maison. À terme, les citoyens décideront de se défendre eux-mêmes. C’est ainsi que l’on crée le terreau d’une guerre civile dont les symptômes avant-coureurs sont déjà sous nos yeux.

Source: Une odeur de guerre civile

…. Certainly, 18 months before the mid-term elections, the sending of national guards and the navies to control the rioters is probably a matter of a political calculation. But California Governor Gavin Newsom is also not without ambition at a time when Democrats are looking for a savior. Recall also that the savage round-ups of the immigration police (ICE) are partly due to the refusal of the City of Los Angeles, a “refuge” city, to provide, for example, information on the release from prison of illegals convicted by the courts. This is what Wall Street Journal journalist Allysia Finley, who estimates their number at a few hundred thousand throughout the American territory.

We must certainly blame Donald Trump and especially his deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, for their fierceness on these illegals who have been working and living peacefully in the United States for a long time. But certainly not to fight illegal immigration that has become endemic, since the president was precisely elected for that. And even less to dismiss those who have been convicted by justice, as all the interior ministers who have succeeded each other for ten years in France have wished to do. In these fights – which he has already partly won since entrances to the Mexican border have fallen dramatically – Trump has the support of a majority of Americans.

“The indecency of the time does not come from an excess, but from a deficit of borders,” wrote Régis Debray. Borders that the writer defined as “the shield of the humble”. This smell of powder, in France as in the United States, is the result of long years that have seen the ideology of borderlessism triumph. Just as men cannot live without a family, nations cannot live without borders. If those of the country collapse, walls will rise in each region, fences in each neighborhood and around each house. Eventually, citizens will decide to defend themselves. This is how we create the soil of a civil war whose harbingering symptoms are already before our eyes.