What Canada can learn from Quebec

Hey, assis-toé!

I've been doing many X Spaces lately with plenty of like-minds and not-so-like-minds. The battle for the soul of Canada is raging on in our darkest hour, with public intellectuals, commentators, and political party advocates chiming in to the obliviousness of yapping mainstream figures.Ethnic nationalists, racial nationalists, and civic patriots go head-to-head in these spaces to large audiences of Canadians and internationals, proclaiming their beliefs and backing them up with evidence and sound logic. The space, in particular, was a great and productive conversation (which had me pacing back and forth, listening intently), hosted by a People's Party of Canada supporter Rachel Caroline Plaza. You can listen here:

It was a great convergence of many different figures and their followers, all of whom share overlapping beliefs but have different approaches to victory conditions—or entirely different victory conditions altogether. As an ethnic nationalist, my own position is between Dr, Ricardo Duchesne, the notorious Ferryman, and Alex Cargill.

Dr. Duchesne highlighted the importance of ethnicity and culture, in addition to race, as core pillars of identity, emphasizing that race as a biological phenomenon only goes so far as a unifying factor. White nationalism, in its modern context, arose out of to Post-WWII Race Realism, as a reaction to the Civil Rights movement, and the converging of deracinated White ethnic groups—accelerated by suburbanization in the 1940s—into a collective identity of "White Americans" with no shared ethnic heritage. This occurred in response to the rising demographic tide of mostly foreign groups acting in their own collective interests against them, a situation that, until recently, was not a shared experience across the Western world. Disparities in IQ, innate propensities toward innovation, and exploration—traits observed most frequently among European peoples—are objectively true facts of life. However, they lack the compelling stories, narratives, symbols, and distinct heritages that truly invigorate or inspire collective identity

From Charles Murrays' book "Human Accomplishment"

For all intents and purposes, both Spaniards and Russians share a root in ancient Indo-European heritage, yet they couldn’t be more different from each other. A Russian claiming the heroic lineage of El Cid, or a Spaniard taking pride in the reforms of Peter the Great, would come across as odd. The only two categories of identification they share are a historically broad religion with significant variety and race.

Nonetheless, this race is globally threatened—not only by below-replacement birthrates but also by the mass migration of foreign interlopers across Western civilization. It should be noted, however, that Western birthrates would likely be less of an issue without mass migration, as global fertility rates are collapsing everywhere, including in East Asia, South America, the Middle East and North Africa, and India.

If you are a Canadian born at any point in the Post-WWII era, you have been subjected to varying degrees of liberal "Cultural Mosaic" propaganda. This narrative exploits the historic presence of three British Isles ethnic groups and the predominantly Norman French settlers to justify the unprecedented mass migration of people from the third world into Canada. While Lester B. Pearson’s immigration reform in 1967 was the catalyst, this process only truly began in the 1980s before accelerating rapidly in the 2010s.

The Great Canadian Lie is the claim that we’ve “always been multicultural,” as though the extremely small and inconsequential presence of "Black Loyalists" or the historically hostile Indigenous groups who, to this day do not identify with Canada, (making up only 1% of the population at Canada's founding in 1867) played any serious role in shaping the Canadian nation, its identity, institutions, or culture. Inspired by Dr. Ricardo Duchesne’s book Canada in Decay: Mass Immigration, Diversity, and the Ethnocide of Euro-Canadians (2017), which chronicled the emergence of two ethnic groups uniquely born of the New World, I delved into the 2021 Census data collected by Statistics Canada to explore the ethnic breakdown of White Canadians in detail.

The evidence is clear. In 2021, just four years ago, 72.7% of the entire Canadian population was not just White, but Anglo-Canadian and French-Canadian, representing an overwhelming presence compared to visible minorities and other White ethnic groups, such as the small populations of Germans and Ukrainians.

In the space last night, I highlighted this historical fact and explained to the audience the ethnogenesis of the Anglo-Canadian and its significance. While we all recognize that the Québécois are a homogeneous group descended predominantly from Norman French settlers—and groups such as the Filles du Roi and Samuel de Champlain’s 1608 expedition, who established Quebec City—the Anglo-Canadian story also deserves similar recognition for its role in shaping Canada’s identity.

But what is less known is that Anglo-Canadians are just as ethnically homogeneous as the Québécois, from Nova Scotia to British Columbia.

Anglo-Canadian identity emerged from Loyalist Americans in the 1760s, though settlement of Canada would begin earlier with New England Planters in Nova Scotia. Loyalist Americans were “continentals” with a culture distinct from both England and the emergent revolutionary Americans. After the American Revolutionary War, they marched north with indomitable purpose, like Aeneas and the Trojans, to rebuild their Dominion. Author Carl Berger, in his influential work The Sense of Power: Studies in the Ideas of Canadian Imperialism, demonstrates that the descendants of Loyalists were the one ethnic group that nurtured “an indigenous British Canadian feeling.” The following passage from Berger’s work is worth citing:

The centennial arrival of the loyalists in Ontario coincided with the fiftieth anniversary of the incorporation of the City of Toronto and, during a week filled with various exhibitions, July 3 was set aside as ‘Loyalist Day.’ On the morning of that day the platform erected at the Horticultural Pavilion was crowded with civic and ecclesiastical dignitaries and on one wall hung the old flag presented in 1813 to the York Militia by the ladies of the county. Between stirring orations on the significance of the loyalist legacy, injunctions to remain faithful to their principles, and tirades against the ancient foe, patriotic anthems were sung and nationalist poetry recited. ‘Rule Britannia’ and If England to Herself Be True were rendered ‘in splendid style’ and evoked ‘great enthusiasm.’ ‘A Loyalist Song,’ ‘Loyalist Days,’ and ‘The Maple Leaf Forever,’ were all beautifully sung

60,000 Loyalist Americans arrived in two significant waves, and were soon bolstered by mass settlement from the British Isles. However, British settlers assimilated into the Loyalist American culture rather than imposing a British identity on the new Canadians. The first major wave of British settlers after the Loyalists primarily consisted of the Irish. Before Confederation in 1867, approximately 850,000 Irish settled in Canada. Between 1790 and 1815, an estimated 6,000 to 10,000 settlers, mainly from the Scottish Highlands and Ireland, also made their way to Canada.

Another large-scale migration occurred between 1815 and 1867, bringing approximately 1 million settlers from Britain to Canada, specifically to Ontario, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. The province of New Brunswick having been originally carved out from the larger province of Nova Scotia to make room for the influx of Loyalists. During this time, settlers from England, Scotland, and Ireland intermingled, religious differences softened, and assimilated into the growing Anglo-Canadian culture. Some Scottish immigrants, who constituted 10–15% of this wave, spoke Gaelic upon arrival but adopted English as they integrated.

Most settlers from the British Isles spoke English, were ethnically and culturally similar, and had much more in common with each other than with their continental European counterparts. But settlement would slow down in the years immediately preceding Confederation in 1867, though surging again during the period between 1896 and 1914, with an estimated 1.25 million settlers yet again from Britain moving to Canada as part of internal migration within the British Empire. The largest and final mass movement of British settlers, was from England. By 1900 to 1930, an estimated 1.6 million English people had settled in Canada.

A common misconception among Canadians is that Canada "was a colony" of Britain, subordinate to, or a "vassal state." This is wrong. Canadians were the British, in North America. There were no restrictions on what Canadians could or could not do in their own Dominion. From the first wave of Loyalists onward, Canadians were regularly involved in politics and governance, actively participating in shaping the nation.

Like the ethnogenesis of the English, which saw Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians converge into a new people and ethnicity (the Anglo-Saxons), Anglo-Canadians are a combination of 1.9 million English, 850,000 Irish (from both Northern and Southern Ireland), and 200,000 Scots, converging with a foundational 60,000 Loyalist Americans from the Thirteen Colonies. These distinct yet similar ethnic groups no longer exist as separate peoples in Canada. Anglo-Canadians are the fusion of the entire British Isles. The Arms of Canada, the favourite symbol of Canadian nationalists today, represents this new ethnic group with the inclusion of the French.

Arms of England, Scotland, Ireland and France in that order.

It’s no coincidence that, once rediscovered, the Arms of Canada exploded in popularity as the emblem of Canadian nationalists. Unlike more controversial symbols that appeal to pan-White racial unity, such as the Sonnenrad or Celtic cross, the Arms of Canada resonate as a distinctly Canadian icon, deeply rooted in the nation’s true heritage and history—a heritage that cannot be bought, sold, or traded away. This is an immutable bloodline stretching into the ancient past.

If culture is downstream from race, and deeper still, ethnicity, then Canadian culture, values, and identity are fundamentally tied not just its race, but its ethnic composition. The ethnos defines the ethos. Canadians are not as receptive to the abstract idea of White nationalism for the same reason Europeans aren't—because they possess a cohesive ethnic identity, unlike most White Americans.

This is bad news for those who believe that a piece of paper, magic dirt, or mere adherence to values can define a person’s identity. The very word nationality is derived from nation, which is fundamentally defined as a group of people who share common descent. The word nation originates from the Latin term natio, which comes from the verb nascor, nasci, natus meaning “to be born.”

---

Quebec Mindset

The French-Canadian is the only man on Earth who has the genius of the two greatest civilizations, carried to the highest degree: the Latin civilization and the Saxon civilization.

— Adrien Arcand

My experience and identity as a Canadian are different from much of the country. Growing up, there was never any doubt in my mind about who or what a Canadian is, and my understanding as an Anglo-Québécois was always vaguely rooted in ethnicity and culture. We are Quebec’s version of Franco-Ontarians or “Ontarois”, but in reverse. Foreigners were not us, but they could become like us—partly, just enough to get by for a time. I am a linguistic and ethnic minority in Canada, coming from an obscure region where Anglo-Canadians and Québécois freely intermarried. Despite their immense contributions to Canada’s history, their historical presence is scarcely acknowledged. People have often described me as an Anglo-Canadian with a distinctly Quebec mentality. I believe this has granted me the privilege of being able to see both sides of Canada’s national temperments. I go more into my origins below:

The Québécois are a historically unique people, deeply rooted in the land of Canada for a century and a half longer than their Anglo-Canadian brothers. And they are indeed brothers, as the shared history between the Norman French and the Anglo-Saxons binds them. The Norman invasion of England in 1066 A.D. not only introduced French into Anglo-Saxon, leading to the evolution of modern English, but also established the Normans as the new aristocracy of England.

This connection set the stage for the Québécois and Anglo-Canadians to share the colonial experience of North America, influencing each other’s development in ways unparalleled in the histories of Britain and France, especially with the 1760 British Conquest of Quebec. The largest subgroup of French settlers in Quebec hailed from Normandy, specifically from the Upper Country, where a belt of three cities established by Vikings still stands today. This deep connection to Normandy is evident in modern Quebec; over 56% of the top 30 most common surnames in the province trace their origins to this region.

Naturally, the Québécois are most closely related to Northern Frenchmen, yet they exhibit even more northerly tendencies not typically seen in Latin cultures, such as those of continental French, Spanish, or Italian peoples. Their disposition toward nationalism versus imperialism is far more Germanic in temperament compared to their Latin counterparts. The average Québécois tends to be fairer-featured, taller, and arguably stronger than the average Frenchman. This is reflected in feats of strength; for example, three out of five of Canada’s top powerlifters hail from Quebec—a small nation of only around 7 million—while France, with a population of 54–58 million ethnic Frenchmen, has yet to produce a single powerlifting standout of similar calibre.

According to Emmanuel Todd in The Explanation of Ideology, Quebec stands out in Canada due to its authoritarian family structure, one of three standard family structure types found in Europe. This structure, shared with scattered groups around the world, often gives rise to highly cohesive and aggressive cultures. Defined by strict hierarchies and rigid household roles, the authoritarian family concentrates authority in the father as the head of the family, with younger members and women subordinated. Unequal inheritance practices, such as primogeniture—where the eldest son inherits the family estate—further reinforce familial hierarchies. Strong bonds of loyalty and a focus on collective reputation reflect cultural and religious norms that prioritize obedience, order, and tradition.

Globally, this family structure is prevalent in Germany, also among the Irish and Scottish in Britain, in Appalachia in the United States, and in East Asia, particularly Japan. Societies rooted in this model often resist liberal individualism, instead favouring conservative ideologies and centralized governance. The loyalty and subordination cultivated within families reflect and reinforce broader national hierarchies, fostering strong nationalist sentiments and cohesive collective identities.

This dynamic is particularly evident in Germany’s traditions of primogeniture and militaristic nationalism, where familial and societal hierarchies align seamlessly. Similarly, in Appalachia, a culture of loyalty, resilience, and hierarchy mirrors these values on a regional scale. Emmanuel Todd argues that the authoritarian family structure profoundly shapes the political cultures and ideologies of nations, leaving a lasting influence on their societal development and systems of governance.

By contrast, the Anglo-Canadian family structure, rooted in British traditions, aligns with Emmanuel Todd’s concept of the absolute nuclear family. It emphasizes individual autonomy, egalitarian inheritance, and weaker familial hierarchies compared to authoritarian systems. In this model, parental authority exists but is less rigid, and children are encouraged to develop independence and self-reliance. Inheritance is typically divided equally among offspring, reflecting a commitment to greater fairness. This structure fosters liberal individualism, emphasizing personal rights and responsibility, which have deeply influenced Anglo-Canadian political culture and institutions. Unlike the more cohesive and hierarchical Québécois families, Anglo-Canadian families prioritize slightly more freedom and adaptability, making them more open to multiculturalism and universalist ideals. However, this weaker familial cohesion also translates into a less cohesive form of nationalism, with Anglo-Canadians generally favouring inclusivity over exclusivist or ethnocentric ideals.

That being said, it would be an oversimplification to claim that the Québécois are as exclusionary as other Germanic peoples such as the Anglo-Saxons when they invaded the island of Britain, and displaced the Celts. They retain a distinctively chauvinistic, imperial mindset that often aggressively—and at times pettily—insists on the integration of foreigners into their culture. This is very Roman, and it demonstrates a blend of both Germanic and Latin influences in their approach to identity and assimilation.

Mindset in Practice: Past & Present

The Québécois, following the 1760 British Conquest, adopted a defensive, fortress-like mentality in response to the influx of Loyalists, who would later undergo ethnogenesis to evolve into Anglo-Canadians. French Canadians countered this cultural and demographic threat with a strategy known as La revanche des berceaux—the Revenge of the Cradle. Recognizing the need to sustain their numerical advantage over the Loyalists, this approach built upon earlier pro-natalist methods initiated by leaders like Samuel de Champlain and Jean Talon.

By the time of Champlain's death in 1635, the population of New France was just 300 to 500 people, mostly concentrated in Quebec City and smaller settlements like Tadoussac and Trois-Rivières. Jean Talon, the first Intendant of New France, implemented significant measures to expand the population, including financial incentives for large families and the introduction of approximately 800 Filles du Roi (King’s Daughters) from France to marry settlers and encourage natural growth. Talon also diversified the economy by establishing breweries, shipyards, and sawmills to bolster self-sufficiency. These efforts brought the population to approximately 6,700 by the end of his tenure.

By 1712, New France's population had grown to 20,000, doubling to 40,000 by 1739, and reaching 70,000 by the time of the British conquest in 1763. High fertility rates among French-Canadian women, averaging 5.6 surviving children, were central to this growth. French Canada’s population multiplied an extraordinary 80 times during this period—a feat unmatched by most other global or European populations of the time. This demographic strategy ensured the survival of French culture and identity in the face of external pressures. It also demonstrates an absolute refusal to die.

---

In modern times, the recognition of Quebec as a distinct society became central during the Quiet Revolution of the 1960s, which transformed Quebec’s social and cultural landscape. Moving away from the influence of the Catholic Church, Quebec embraced secular nationalism and sought to protect its language and identity. These policies include:

• Bill 101, the Charter of the French Language, passed in 1977 under the Parti Québécois government, remains the cornerstone of these efforts. It made French the sole official language of Quebec, mandated that immigrant children attend French-language schools, and required French to dominate commercial signage and public services. These measures aimed to ensure the survival of the French language in an overwhelmingly English-speaking continent.

• The Canada–Quebec Accord on immigration (1991) gave Quebec control over immigrant selection, allowing the province to prioritize French-speaking newcomers. Bill 96 (2021) further strengthened the language laws, limiting access to English-language education and tightening requirements for businesses and institutions to operate in French.

• The nationalization of industries like hydroelectric power under Hydro-Québec allowed Quebec to assert control over its resources and diminish Anglo-Canadian economic dominance. Investments in cultural institutions helped promote Québécois art, music, and literature, reinforcing a unique cultural identity.

These policies, while controversial to some, have been critical in preserving Quebec’s identity as a distinct society. They reflect a long-standing commitment to safeguarding the province’s language and culture in the face of pressures to assimilate into a broader Anglo-Canadian framework.

A New Nationalism

Now that we have established Anglo-Canadians as not only the majority ethnic group in Canada but also as a distinct people with values rooted in their historic culture and ethos-driving ethnos, Canada could adopt policies inspired by Quebec’s approach to safeguarding its identity, emphasizing the primacy of the English language, Anglo-Canadian culture, and traditions.

• An immediate re-migration of current temporary foreign workers (TFWs), illegal aliens, international students, and refugees would be a foundational step in reclaiming cultural coherence.

• Similar to Quebec’s Bill 101, Anglo-Canada could legislate English as the sole official language in education, public services, and business communications (barring exceptions for French in necessary critical services like healthcare). Carefully selected newcomers, chosen based on ethnic, linguistic and cultural compatibility, would be required to integrate through English-language schooling.

• Immigration policies could prioritize applicants from Britain, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, acknowledging shared heritage and cultural affinities. Investments in education and the arts would bolster Anglo-Canadian history and traditions with a focus on heritage symbols like the Red Ensign or the Arms of Canada to foster national pride.

• Pro-natalist strategies, inspired by Quebec’s successes past and present, could include measures such as loans, land grants, and baby bonuses to encourage larger families and ensure demographic stability without relying on mass migration.

These policies would aim to preserve Anglo-Canada’s distinct identity in the face of cultural and demographic changes, ensuring that its values and traditions endure while fostering a unified national ethos across its provinces. In truth, either these policies are implemented, or the country risks balkanization, leaving Anglo-Canadians vulnerable to an even greater existential threat as scattered and disparate provinces.