Why Speaking Honestly About Canada Is So Hard
Exploring identity, discourse, and the troubling shifts in online spaces silencing nuanced voices in Canada’s evolving democracy.
Learning to Speak Honestly Again
It has been almost three years since I returned to Canada. In that time, I’ve experienced a complex mix of relief, frustration, hope, and resistance. I’ve watched the country evolve, reorient, and sometimes regress. While many Canadians pride themselves on having a more inclusive, democratic society than the United States, that belief is being tested in real time.
In the past week alone, the challenges of writing truthfully about Canada have become clearer than ever. Toxic responses from new readers, algorithmic shifts on Substack, and a broader reluctance to discuss uncomfortable realities have all converged. What I’ve realized is that learning how to speak honestly again about this country, as someone who has lived abroad, requires persistence.
Canada Isn’t Immune to Criticism
Prime Minister Carney is trying to lead with reason and long-term thinking, but any tangible changes from his efforts won’t be felt for another year or more. That’s the reality of governance: slow, cautious, and sometimes invisible to those struggling now.
What’s more visible are the unresolved issues that have haunted Canada for over a decade. The Harper era left deep scars, particularly in terms of public services, housing, and institutional trust. While many hoped Trudeau would reverse these patterns, his tenure brought a different kind of complacency. As Toronto residents well know, simply taking the subway downtown means witnessing a growing crisis of homelessness and drug addiction in public spaces.
Sadly, in many conversations, these realities are muted or deflected. When Americans elect someone like Trump, the Canadian reflex is often to point south and say, “At least we’re not them.” That deflection has served as a shield against self-examination. However, ignoring problems at home by focusing on chaos elsewhere only leaves our challenges to fester.
The Danger of the “Not Canadian Enough” Accusation
One of the most persistent and hurtful accusations I’ve received as a writer is that I am “not Canadian enough” to speak about the country’s problems. I’ve been called entitled, opportunistic, and even unpatriotic simply because I lived abroad for many years and returned with a broader perspective.
This idea that there are tiers of “Canadian-ness” with those who have never left occupying the top rung is a form of quiet discrimination. It creates an unspoken hierarchy where those who have lived outside the country are expected to defer, to keep quiet, to be grateful rather than critical. Also, if you do speak up, you’re accused of ranting or being divisive.
What makes this dynamic so disturbing is that it mimics the very same exclusionary logic we often critique in other countries. When people are told they don’t belong because of where they live or how they think, we edge closer to the ideological tribalism we claim to reject.
Substack, Algorithms, and the New Gatekeepers
On a practical level, the ability to even have these conversations is becoming harder due to changes in how platforms distribute content. Substack quietly updated its algorithm in March. Since then, smaller progressive and liberal voices, including my own, have seen dramatic drops in visibility and subscriber growth.
This isn’t paranoia. Writers who focus on nuanced, critical perspectives of both Canada and the U.S. are being deprioritized. In contrast, more ideologically rigid and reactionary voices are gaining ground. Many of us suspect this is related to Substack’s recent Series C funding, which included $100 million from venture capital firms like Andreessen Horowitz, with known ties to the American right and even the Trump political machine.
The result is a chilling effect. Posts that once found a thoughtful audience are now attracting readers primed to attack rather than engage. Some new subscribers, particularly those migrating from Twitter, bring with them the worst habits of that platform: quick outrage, bad-faith interpretations, and personal insults.
The Real Cost of Silencing
This change has consequences. It is creating a culture of silence where critical perspectives are drowned out, where writers second-guess whether it’s worth sharing their thoughts at all. The fear of backlash of being labelled ungrateful, divisive, or simply "not Canadian enough" is strong.
I’ve been told to stop talking about Canadian issues until Trump is no longer a threat, as though one cannot hold two thoughts at once. Bear in mind that logic is what led us here in the first place. The last time Trump held office, many Canadians deferred critical engagement with their government. That vacuum of attention allowed housing issues to spiral, far-right candidates to gain traction provincially, and a disturbing normalization of inequality to deepen.
To dismiss every critique as a “rant” is to reject the foundational idea of democratic participation. It erases the importance of dissent. It also marginalizes those who return to Canada with eyes wide open, eager to contribute rather than conform.
What We Can Do Together
We can choose to read and share content that challenges us. We can support writers whose views may not always align perfectly with our own but who argue in good faith. We can stay vigilant about how digital platforms manipulate visibility for ideological reasons, and we can resist the pressure to silence ourselves in the name of politeness or tribal loyalty.
Most of all, we can relearn the value of conversation. The kind where disagreement can be aired without dehumanization. That’s how communities grow stronger.
If this resonates with you, I hope you’ll share it with someone who might benefit from a broader perspective. Share this blog if you want to support more writing like this or refer a friend. Because if we don’t have these discussions, someone else will decide what it means to be Canadian for us.
‘Most of all, we can relearn the art of conversation.’
This seems to be a skill that so many people have lost. Instead of listening, they shout. Instead of being empathetic or even rational, they cling to ideological tribalism. I am a Canadian who has lived abroad for many years now but has never lost interest in or love for her country, so I can empathise with the Canadian Returnee. I have even been told that I am not really Canadian anymore. What I do know is that I am not on ‘this side’ or ‘that side’- only Canada’s side. Canada does not have to be perfect to be worth fighting for, but to ignore its flaws will only put it in a more perilous situation.
Canadians need to stop shouting at each other and have a proper national conversation- hopefully the PM and the premiers have been doing exactly that. There are already people in the country who do not feel listened to. There are people who have lost hope. If those people start looking elsewhere to be listened to, then Canada will be looking at not only surviving Trump’s war on Canada but at considerable internal strife too. Canadians need to remember what a civilized conversation is. Keep talking Canadian Returnee!
Online “conversation” is not the same as face to face. Therein lies the problem. I notice in myself that I am reluctant now to dialogue with some who may not have the same political outlooks that I have. Face to face demands thoughtfulness, nuance and caring. It can also be emotional. Because it is so very easy to type instead of talk, typing can allow us to bypass difficult feelings. It can also be mis-understood, in ways that face to face allows.