Category: English

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Dax D’Orazio, Peacock Postdoctoral Fellow in Pedagogy, Department of Political Studies, Queen’s University, Ontario

With a suspect in custody in the murder of MAGA activist Charlie Kirk, it’s clear Kirk’s legacy is bound to be as polarized as the campus culture wars trenches where he dwelled.

On Sept. 10, a shooter killed Kirk at Utah Valley University while he was speaking to a large audience.

At age 18, Kirk co-founded Turning Point USA (TPUSA), a conservative non-profit organization focused on education that would eventually become a force in American politics and culture.

As a public speaker, his events attracted thousands of attendees all over the country. Online, he amassed huge numbers of followers across several different mediums and platforms.

Most importantly, he earned the admiration of United States President Donald Trump, who appreciated Kirk’s ability to galvanize young conservative voters and therefore contributed to Trump’s return to the White House in 2024. Kirk is now slated to receive a Presidential Medal of Freedom posthumously.

Kirk’s legacy, however, needs to include his controversial and sometimes discriminatory ideas. He was emblematic of a polarized public discourse and how mainstream conservatism has shifted towards more extreme positions.

But his impact cannot be reduced simply to the ways he represented that shift towards extremism, including flirtations with Christian nationalist and white supremacist ideas.

His death is also sadly emblematic of the frightening rise in political violence in the United States since 2016.

---

Read more:
Charlie Kirk shooting: another grim milestone in America’s long and increasingly dangerous story of political violence

---

As a scholar focused on the law and politics of free expression on university campuses, I’m struck by how Kirk also symbolizes how campuses have become central to contemporary politics and culture.

Political anchors in campus politics

No longer just the site of occasional culture war battles, university campuses are the dividing line between different political persuasions, a training centre for new generations of political activists and the target of public policy and executive power like never before.

Put another way, if a political movement is going to sustain itself, it will need to anchor itself in campus politics. That’s where it can draw intellectual legitimacy, reproduce itself with the young and ambitious and generate ample fodder for social media virality.

Like the culture warriors that came before him, Kirk was motivated by a simple but profound insight that’s often credited to the late Andrew Breitbart, founder of the alt-right news platform that bears his name: politics is downstream from culture.

In other words, focusing political energy on changing a society’s culture will affect electoral politics, and a narrow focus on electing representatives in legislatures misses the importance of culture.

Yet, this insight far precedes Breitbart. Current culture wars crusades — like the campaign to remove traces of critical race theory from higher education — are drawing inspiration from an unlikely source: Antonio Gramsci, the once-imprisoned Italian communist activist known for the theory of “cultural hegemony.”

---

Read more:
Why the radical right has turned to the teachings of an Italian Marxist thinker

---

When the revolutionary fervour of the 1960s waned and the political pendulum began swinging in the opposite direction, some progressives thought they could embed themselves and their ideas in public institutions because electoral politics seemed like a dead end. Increasingly, conservatives are using some of those same political tactics.

While most people think of civil rights, the Vietnam War or feminism in the context of social movements, conservatives recently gave us the Tea Party movement. Similarly, for a long time, progressives boasted a lively independent media presence, along with potent critiques of mainstream media bias.

Now conservatives are becoming dominant in the alternative media sphere too, with the Democratic Party realizing it needs to catch up after after the 2024 election that saw influencers and podcasters play an important political role.

If you’re interested in changing the culture, you simply cannot ignore youth. What’s the most effective way of capturing the hearts of minds of youth? It’s education.

Conservative campus activism

Founded in 2012, Kirk’s TPUSA initially reflected a traditional form of conservative campus activism, sticking with familiar themes like limited government and individual liberties.

But when he and others adopted a more edgy and confrontational style of engagement, people started paying attention, including deep-pocketed donors and political strategists. Kirk had found a way to address a long-running problem for conservatives: speaking persuasively to young and educated people. The problem was particularly acute on campus, arguably the beating heart of American liberalism.

Rather than cultivating bookish disciples of Milton Friedman or Ayn Rand, Kirk instead downplayed some of the traditional themes of American conservatism and created a more aggressive and unapologetic image, one bound by grievance and a populist desire to restore the “glory days.”

The approach, suited to the social media age, helped popularize Trump’s populist MAGA doctrine.

Suddenly, conservatives started to organize more effectively on campus. They found additional wind at their backs amid a wave of public attention paid to an alleged free speech crisis that was stifling conservatives, but also the partial product of a concerted network of conservative political figures.

Pioneering political strategist

Kirk’s experimentation would cement TPUSA as a major conduit between campuses and the Republican Party.

The momentum Kirk and others created on campus and online has since been carried by lawmakers, who’ve unleashed a wave of bills at the state level that impose restrictions on what can be taught and threaten institutional autonomy and academic freedom.

In Florida, for example, tenured professors are reviewed for “productivity” every five years and content restrictions (like “non-western” ideas) are resulting in censorship. In Ohio and Kentucky, state legislatures embarked upon similar moves and banned diversity, equity and inclusion officers and programs on their campuses.

So while Kirk wasn’t necessarily revolutionizing conservative thought, he will surely be remembered as a pioneering political organizer and a major source of support for the MAGA movement.

‘Professor Watchlist’

Kirk wasn’t exactly a household name in Canada, but some of his campus campaign strategies have trickled into Canada in the past decade or so.

For example, at the height of the Jordan Peterson affair at the University of Toronto in 2017, the now psychology professor emeritus announced and then abandoned an idea with similarities to one launched by TPUSA the previous year.

---

Read more:
Campus culture wars: Why universities must ditch the dogma

---

The TPUSA’s “Professor Watchlist” has a mission “to expose and document college professors who discriminate against conservative students and advance leftist propaganda in the classroom.” Critics rightfully point out that such lists have led to harassment and threaten academic freedom.

Reverberations in Canada

At least since the escalation of Trump’s “51st state” rhetoric, Canadians have seemingly grown wary of the shock-and-awe style of punditry that’s common south of the border. But Canada has been gripped by some of the same campus controversies and debates.

---

Read more:
Campus tensions and the Mideast crisis: Will Ontario and Alberta’s ‘Chicago Principles’ on university free expression stand?

---

A University of Toronto professor is on leave following an “apparent tweet reacting to” Kirk’s fatal shooting. This suggests Kirk’s murder will have reverberations on Canadian campuses.

The American campus culture wars have largely been a metaphor until now. That is despite campuses occasionally resembling battlegrounds, especially in the wake of Trump’s first victory in 2016, like at the University of California Berkeley and the University of Florida.

Sadly, Kirk’s murder has shown a frighteningly literal face of this, and the stakes are high for both political and university life.

Dax D’Orazio receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

– ref. How Charlie Kirk became a pioneering MAGA political organizer on campuses – https://theconversation.com/how-charlie-kirk-became-a-pioneering-maga-political-organizer-on-campuses-265156

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Triveni Srikaran, PhD Candidate, Department of History, McMaster University

In our age of digital influencers, it could be easy to believe that building a professional network is a modern phenomenon.

However, long before the dawn of social media, women artists in late Victorian and Edwardian London mastered this art.

Although they weren’t the first in history to do so, they crafted a revolutionary style of social networking — not for the sake of fame, but as a means to break down systemic barriers and challenge the gender norms that dominated the English art world.

A historical framework for success

Historians David Doughan and Peter Gordon have documented the rise of women’s clubs in Britain, and feminist art historians Maria Quirk and Zoë Thomas have emphasized how these networks enabled women artists to professionalize and promote their work.

This article explores how the frameworks of authenticity, trust and mutual support established by these women laid a strong foundation for their professional success — a strategy that remains strikingly relevant today.

Exclusion and the art world

During the Victorian era, the art world operated like an exclusive “old boys’ club” that kept female talent at bay. Prestigious institutions like the Royal Academy largely excluded women, denying them entry for many years.

It wasn’t until 1860 that the first female member, Laura Herford, gained acceptance by submitting her application under the ambiguous name “L. Herford.” Once her true identity was revealed, the embarrassed academicians had no choice but to reconsider their policies.

Despite this landmark achievement, crucial training opportunities, such as life drawing, remained inaccessible to female students. Women were sidelined from major exhibitions organized by their male counterparts and excluded from influential social clubs where valuable connections and potential patronage were often made.

The few artworks they managed to sell were generally limited to themes like flowers or still lifes, which fetched much lower prices compared to the grand historical paintings that propelled their male colleagues to stardom.

Members of the press and art critics, predominantly male, dismissed their efforts as mere “amateur” pursuits — a label that served to undermine their professional credibility. In this stifling environment, the system was designed to ensure women artists were never given a fair chance.

The rise of women’s art clubs

Confronted with a system that marginalized them, determined women artists formed their own women’s clubs aimed at overcoming institutional barriers.

In late 19th and early 20th-century London, several prominent women’s art organizations emerged, including the Society of Women Artists, the Women’s Guild of Arts, the Women’s International Art Club, the Pioneer Club and the Lyceum Club.

Each of these groups was founded on a commitment to professional development, mutual support and the essential need for a united voice.

My emerging research explores the dynamics of women’s networks by closely analyzing letters, documents, exhibition catalogues and contemporary newspapers related to these organizations, and so far has identified three vital functions:

1. Fostering artistic development

At a time when formal networking opportunities were scarce for women, organizations like the Pioneer Club (1892) and the Lyceum Club (1903) emerged as crucial, supportive environments. These clubs began with the ambitious vision of creating a space for personal and artistic growth and also provided venues for connection and collaboration.

They also offered the rare chance for members to stay overnight, giving women the freedom to travel for their work without a chaperone.

Founded in 1907, the Women’s Guild of Arts became a dynamic hub where members could learn, showcase their art, receive constructive criticism and hone their skills. These networks fostered mentorship and empowered women artists to refine their craft within a supportive community.

2. Creating independent exhibition opportunities

In the face of exclusion from male-only exhibitions, women artists established their own platforms. They launched their own venues to bypass the gatekeepers of the art world and connect directly with their audiences.

A striking example is the Society of Women Artists, founded in 1855, which has hosted annual “women-only” exhibitions that not only sparked public conversation but also created a lasting space for visibility.

The Women’s International Art Club, established in 1898, broadened this mission, forming a transnational network that enabled its members to exhibit and sell their works across Europe, America and Australia.

3. Building community and professional identity

Women’s clubs emerged as the original networking hubs, similar to modern meetups. For those often labelled “amateurs,” joining organizations like the Society of Women Artists, Women’s International Art Club or Women’s Guild of Art offered a pathway to professional development and recognition.

These social networks fostered a supportive environment where members could share advice and provide emotional backing as they navigated careers filled with systemic challenges. This ecosystem highlighted how working together was crucial in driving individual successes.

Their enduring legacy

The story of early women’s art clubs highlights a crucial chapter in the history of creative entrepreneurship. These women both created their own professional opportunities and worked to change societal perceptions of women in the arts.

The strategies they used to navigate a restrictive environment still resonate today.

---

Read more:
When it comes to social networks, bigger isn’t always better

---

In a digital landscape filled with fleeting followers and superficial likes, their legacy prompts us to reflect on the fundamental need for human connection, and the extent to which true success still hinges on building a community rather than simply amassing a following.

Triveni Srikaran’s research is funded by McMaster University, the Ontario Graduate Scholarship, and the Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art at Yale University.

– ref. Influencers of a bygone era: How late Victorian women artists mastered the art of networking – https://theconversation.com/influencers-of-a-bygone-era-how-late-victorian-women-artists-mastered-the-art-of-networking-262659

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Alexandra Flynn, Associate Professor, Peter A. Allard School of Law, University of British Columbia

Imagine if every time a hospital was built, it came with an expiry date. Twenty-five years later, it would be sold to the highest bidder and patients would be told to find care elsewhere.

This is unthinkable in health care, yet this is precisely how we treat affordable housing in Canada. Government programs provide funding for the construction of affordable housing, but without long-term commitments to ensure those same housing units remain affordable.

As the federal government puts the finishing touches on planning its new housing programs, we must ensure that affordable housing stays affordable for generations.

Governments pour billions into new housing programs, but the homes that are built aren’t required to remain affordable over the long term, meaning they often slip back into the speculative market after just a few decades.

Government programs subsidize the capital costs of housing construction, with rent affordability guaranteed for a limited period (usually 10-20 years). A recent study found that Canada lost 10 affordable housing units for every new one built over a decade.

The implication is that land is a tradeable asset as governments forget it’s also the foundation for homes, communities and stability. If governments are serious about solving the housing crisis, they must change that.

Canada has done it before. In the 1970s and ’80s, governments invested heavily in co-operative housing, creating tens of thousands of permanently affordable homes that continue to serve communities today. Those investments prove what’s possible when land and housing are treated as long-term public goods rather than short-term commodities.

---

Read more:
‘Home sweet home’ is a dying dream: Federal election promises won’t solve affordable housing crisis

---

Holding land in perpetuity

Community land trusts (CLTs) are the next generation of that vision. They extend the principle of permanence to a wider range of housing types, neighbourhoods and community uses, ensuring that affordability and stability are not just won but protected for generations.

A new report by my UBC colleague, Kuni Kamizaki, entitled A Case for Community Land Trusts in Canada: Promising Community Practices and Public Policy Options, shows how CLTs can reframe the housing conversation in creating a long-term, affordable housing stock. It’s not simply about how many homes we build, but who controls the land beneath them.

CLTs are membership-based, non-profit organizations that acquire and hold land in perpetuity for community benefit. People then purchase long-term leases in individual units.

This means that the land is removed from speculative markets, stewarded democratically and the housing is locked in as affordable, often for 99 years or more. Unlike situations where properties are sold and affordability disappears after 10 to 25 years, CLTs preserve it permanently.

This is not a distant dream. Kamizaki identifies roughly 45 CLTs operating or forming across Canada, more than 60 per cent of them launched in the last five years. They range from the Community Land Trust Foundation of BC to Toronto’s Parkdale Neighbourhood Land Trust, each committed to collective ownership, community governance and significant affordability.

Meeting local needs

CLTs flip the switch on the usual policy logic. Too often, publicly owned land is sold to private developers, representing — as Kamizaki puts it — “a long-term loss of public good and a lost opportunity to build non-market housing with deep affordability.”

Once sold, the land is gone, along with the chance to secure permanent affordability. CLTs keep that land in community hands, using it to meet local needs rather than feed speculative demand.

The benefits go beyond economics. CLTs can advance reconciliation and racial justice by challenging the real estate practices that have displaced racialized communities for decades. This treats land as a relationship rather than a commodity, an understanding rooted in stewardship, responsibility and belonging. In other words: turning housing into homes.

Vancouver’s Hogan’s Alley Society shows this potential in action. Once home to a thriving Black community, the neighbourhood was demolished in the 1970s in the name of urban renewal. The organization is now working to reclaim that land through a CLT, rebuilding a Black cultural hub grounded in long-term stewardship and land-back principles. This is housing justice intertwined with cultural restoration.

But CLTs cannot expand on good will alone. The National Housing Strategy Act recognizes housing as a human right, yet Canadian policies still treat it as a market commodity first and a necessity second.

Market-based “solutions” inevitably recreate the same conditions — speculation, gentrification, displacement — that produced the crisis.

---

Read more:
Housing co-ops could solve Canada’s housing affordability crisis

---

How to advance CLTs

Kamizaki’s report outlines several steps governments can take to make CLTs a central part of Canada’s housing strategy, including the following:

1. Prioritize permanent affordability over short-term targets;
2. Support CLTs led by racialized and marginalized communities as acts of reparation;
3. Transfer public land into community hands;
4. Create legal frameworks tailored to CLTs;
5. Provide stable funding and technical support through a national CLT hub.

These are structural commitments that address the core questions: Who owns land? Who decides how it’s used? Who benefits from public investment?

CLTs answer these questions by matching the permanence of the right to housing with the permanence of land stewardship. They take the volatility of the market out of the equation and put democratic decision-making into the hands of the people who live in and care for their communities.

---

Read more:
Canada’s housing crisis will not be solved by building more of the same

---

Many studies reinforce the conclusion that CLTs deliver lasting affordability, protect against displacement, and strengthen community ties. The real question is whether Canada has the political will to embrace them.

The housing crisis is urgent, and so is the opportunity. We can keep funding market Band-aids that expire in a generation, or we can take land off the speculative market, put it in community hands and make houses into homes. For good.

Alexandra Flynn receives funding from SSHRC and CMHC.

– ref. Turning houses into homes: Community land trusts offer a fix to Canada’s housing crisis – https://theconversation.com/turning-houses-into-homes-community-land-trusts-offer-a-fix-to-canadas-housing-crisis-264757

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By David J Finch, Professor and Senior Fellow, Institute for Community Prosperity, Mount Royal University, University of Calgary

Canada is facing a productivity crisis that threatens wages, competitiveness and long-term prosperity. Canadian productivity lags behind the United States by 28 per cent and ranks 18th among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.

Productivity is the economic value of the goods or services produced compared to the amount of work it took to produce them. Productivity should matter to every Canadian, because it directly influences inflation and income, and its effects are felt by all.

---

Read more:
Canada is falling behind its peers in terms of living standards — can it catch up?

---

Productivity emerges from the interplay of three forces: robust capital investment, a supportive business environment and, most critically, people with the competencies the economy demands.

People play a disproportionate role, as they not only drive investment decisions but also shape the business climate. Collectively, people are known as human capital: the knowledge, skills and capabilities embedded in the workforce.

Building this capital is a shared responsibility of families, educators, employers and policymakers. It begins early in life and continues throughout both formal and informal learning experiences. The question is whether Canada’s current approach to building that capital is fit for the challenges ahead.

We are researchers in management and economics who collaborated with a team of researchers and industry experts on The Productivity Project, concerned with how Canada develops its human capital. Partners in this project include the Alberta Centre for Labour Market Research, the Canada West Foundation, Mount Royal University’s Institute for Community Prosperity and the LearningCITY Lab.

Post-secondary education and its limits

In Canada, post-secondary education plays an oversized role in developing human capital. The percentage of the population that has completed post-secondary education in Canada is 63 per cent — 22 per cent higher than the OECD average.

Today, 15 per cent of the working-age population have graduate degrees, the same share that held bachelor’s degrees in 1997.

Canada also invests 20 per cent more in post-secondary education than the OECD average. Yet despite this, it’s also a global leader in graduate underemployment. The number of unemployed degree holders now exceeds the number of jobs requiring such qualifications by a factor of five.

Compounding this is a persistent mismatch between the competencies Canadian workers have and those the economy needs. Research indicates Canada’s most pressing shortfall lies in foundational competencies, not in job-specific expertise, as is commonly assumed. Chief among these is adaptability — the capacity to learn, unlearn and relearn.

Adaptability depends on literacy: the ability to comprehend, analyze and apply information to new problems. Canada scored above the OECD average in a recent international assessment, but the data shows that only slightly above half of the Canadian workforce can meet the increasing literacy demands of most jobs. Research suggests that a one per cent improvement in literacy can boost productivity by up to five per cent.

This gap between the competencies Canadian workers have and those the economy needs will only widen with the rapid rise of artificial intelligence and automation.

Canada’s demographic squeeze

Demographic shifts are heightening Canada’s productivity challenge. Like most developed countries, Canada’s education system has its roots in the Industrial Revolution, when life expectancy was just 40 years.

---

Read more:
In 2025 and beyond, schools need to teach more than just ‘the basics’

---

For individuals born in 2024, life expectancy is projected to be 83 years. Longer lives now mean longer working lives: 40-year careers are now the norm, and 60-year careers are fast approaching.

Yet Canada continues to spend $60 billion annually on a post-secondary education system optimized for a single stage of life — young adulthood — rather than a lifetime of learning. Eighty-three per cent of post-secondary students are 29 or younger, and 67 per cent under 25.

The human capital system that has sustained Canada’s social and economic prosperity over the past 150 years doesn’t possess the capacity to lead Canada into the future. The solution is not as simple as spending more money; the future demands a paradigm shift in how Canada develops its human capital.

The first step is to detach from the current model and ask a fundamental question: what is the most effective way to unlock the full productivity of all Canadians?

Rethinking the learning model

Over the past year, our multidisciplinary team of researchers and industry experts at The Productivity Project explored this question through a six-report series, Productivity and People. This series synthesizes interdisciplinary research, with new data to explore a new learning paradigm.

Two conclusions stand out. First, a true paradigm shift requires collaboration among policymakers, employers, credentialing bodies, learning providers and individuals.

Second, learning pathways are limitless and today, only a fraction of learning occurs in classrooms; the vast majority takes place in workplaces, community organizations, libraries, places of worship, on sports fields and stages, and through podcasts, blogs and books.

Accelerating this paradigm shift offers Canada a unique opportunity to improve its productivity by unlocking the value of existing learning assets.

From closed systems to open learning

Two decades ago, the technology sector faced challenges much like those confronting today’s post-secondary system. Its response was to embrace open innovation — harnessing ecosystem collaboration to accelerate innovation.

Open learning unlocks the full learning ecosystem, from the workplace to volunteering and self-directed learning. Open learning resembles a dynamic climbing wall, where learners are empowered to explore infinite learning pathways. The result is a far more inclusive and agile lifelong learning system, designed to drive innovation through collaboration and competition.

Open learning stands in contrast to the legacy higher education system. In Canada, public institutions control an estimated 90 per cent of the post-secondary marketplace, and often lack the incentives, culture and structures to deliver the dynamic and innovative learning the country needs. The result is a post-secondary experience resembling not a climbing wall of endless possibilities, but an inflexible ladder from a bygone era.

Unbundling learning and credentials

While post-secondary institutions don’t monopolize learning, they do monopolize recognition. As a result, at the centre of this paradigm shift is the unbundling of learning pathways from the recognition of learning.

Today, a bundled four-year degree composed of 40 courses costs about $75,000. Given this, it’s not surprising that almost one-third of students never complete their degree.

An unbundled system would allow individuals to select their own learning paths, with outcomes assessed and certified by an independent authority that has the support and legitimacy of the provincial government.

The importance of unbundling teaching from assessment is not new. In 2009, the European Higher Education Area released the Leuven Communiqué declaration that set priorities for the expansion of lifelong learning through the open recognition of all learning.

In Canada, governments applied the principle of unbundling when they introduced driver licensing more than a century ago. The driver’s license remains the country’s most extensive open learning system: individuals learn however they wish, and a standardized, independent assessment determines competence.

To confront Canada’s lagging productivity, the country needs to fundamentally change how human capital is developed. Canada’s future social and economic prosperity depends on leaders willing to champion a new human capital paradigm that aligns with today’s realities and anticipates tomorrow’s opportunities.

Janet Lane, a senior fellow at the Canada West Foundation, co-authored this article.

David J Finch receives funding from the Alberta Centre for Labour Market Research.

Joseph Marchand currently receives funding from the Government of Alberta to create and fund the Alberta Centre for Labour Market Research. He has previously received federal funding from the Canada First Research Excellence Fund and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

– ref. To close its productivity gap, Canada needs to rethink its higher education system – https://theconversation.com/to-close-its-productivity-gap-canada-needs-to-rethink-its-higher-education-system-264663