Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hamed Kazemzadeh, Adjunct Assistant Professor, Peace and Conflict, University of Calgary; L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

Canada is facing a new reality: Arctic security is no longer just about military presence. It’s increasingly about whether communities in the North have the people, infrastructure and capacity to sustain sovereignty in a rapidly changing region.

In February 2026, the Arctic Summit in Whitehorse brought together policymakers, defence experts and Indigenous leaders to address emerging challenges in the North.

Much of the discussion focused on rising geopolitical threats — particularly Russia’s military activity and China’s growing presence in the Arctic.

But a critical piece of the puzzle is often overlooked: the role of immigration and migration.

Security isn’t just military

A recent Canadian Senate report on Arctic security argues that the concept must extend beyond defence to include environmental, economic and social dimensions, especially the well-being of northern communities.

This reflects a broader shift in thinking. Climate change is opening Arctic waters, increasing shipping traffic and access to natural resources.

At the same time, new threats — including long-range missiles and cyber operations — mean geography alone no longer protects Canada’s North. Security also depends on something more basic: people.

Northern Canada faces significant labour shortages, limited infrastructure and declining or stagnant populations. These challenges affect everything from emergency response and health care to transportation and construction. Without a stable work force and strong communities, Canada’s ability to maintain a consistent presence in the Arctic is weakened.

Immigration/migration as a security tool

Immigration and migration are usually considered part of economic policy. In the Arctic, they’re also a security strategy.

Research shows that immigration can help address demographic and labour challenges in rural and northern regions. However, attracting newcomers is only part of the equation — retaining them remains a major challenge.

Statistics Canada data shows that retention rates vary widely across regions, with northern and smaller communities often struggling to keep newcomers over the long term.

This matters for security. A temporary workforce doesn’t build resilient communities. Long-term settlement does. If newcomers to the North stay, they contribute to infrastructure development, local economies and essential services. They become part of the social fabric that supports everything from search-and-rescue operations to climate adaptation efforts.

Geopolitical situation is changing

The urgency of this issue is rapidly growing. Russia has invested heavily in Arctic military infrastructure while China has declared itself a “near-Arctic state,” increasing its research and economic activities in the region.

---

Read more:
Chinese scientists are increasingly shaping the future of the Arctic amid China’s rising presence

---

At the same time, Canada is working closely with the United States through NORAD to monitor emerging threats, including hypersonic weapons.

In response, Canada is investing billions in Arctic defence, including surveillance systems and infrastructure upgrades. The federal government has also launched a new Defence Industrial Strategy aimed at strengthening domestic capacity and supply chains.

But these investments require people — skilled workers, engineers, technicians, health professionals and community members — to be effective. Without a strong population base, infrastructure cannot be built or maintained, and defence capabilities cannot be fully realized.

---

Read more:
Indigenous women in Northern Canada creating sustainable livelihoods through tourism

---

Indigenous partnership is central

Any discussion of immigration and migration in the North must also recognize that Indigenous Peoples are not stakeholders — they are rights holders.

Indigenous communities have lived in the Arctic for thousands of years and play a central role in Canada’s sovereignty. Policies that ignore this reality risk repeating past harms.

The Senate report emphasizes that Arctic security decisions must involve Indigenous governments and reflect their knowledge and priorities. This applies equally to immigration and migration.

Newcomer attraction and settlement must be aligned with Indigenous governance, local economic goals and community needs. When done properly, immigration or migration can support Indigenous-led development and expand opportunities without undermining existing communities.

From policy gap to opportunity

Canada already has some tools in place. Yukon and the Northwest Territories use nominee programs to attract workers, while Nunavut relies more heavily on federal mechanisms. But these systems are not yet fully aligned with Arctic security objectives.

A more co-ordinated approach could link immigration and migration policy with defence planning, infrastructure investment and regional economic development.

For example, new defence infrastructure projects could include workforce strategies that prioritize both local and newcomer employment. Settlement supports — such as housing, language services and community integration — could be expanded to improve retention.

---

Read more:
Canada’s Arctic defence policy update: All flash, no bang

---

Canada’s Arctic sovereignty has long been associated with geography and military presence. But sovereignty is now also about resilience — the ability of communities to live, work and thrive in the North.

The Centre for Immigrant Research, a Calgary-based Canadian think tank, argues in its recent work on the North that immigration and migration — when thoughtfully designed and implemented in partnership with Indigenous and territorial governments — can play a key role in strengthening regional resilience and national sovereignty.

Therefore, Canada has an opportunity to rethink its approach. While defence investments are essential, they aren’t sufficient on their own. In the Arctic, security ultimately depends on people — and on ensuring they are able to build and sustain long-term lives in the North.

Hamed Kazemzadeh does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Canada’s Arctic security depends on more than defence — here’s how immigration could help – https://theconversation.com/canadas-arctic-security-depends-on-more-than-defence-heres-how-immigration-could-help-281061

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Li-elle Rapaport, Doctoral Student and Private Practice Therapist, Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba

Amid a rapid, AI-driven technology boom and all the changes it’s entailed, mental health issues due to social isolation have been on the rise. Researchers in social and clinical psychology have documented this shift and coined it the “loneliness epidemic.”

Human connection is imperative to psychological well-being but the world is increasingly disconnected. With technology streamlining our lives, many report growing levels of depression, anxiety and existential dread brought on by the physical and emotional distance it creates between us.

And so psychologists have begun asking: “How do we stay connected to the here and now, and to each other?”

One facet of self-compassion theory — a concept developed by psychologist Kristin Neff that dictates treating ourselves with the same care and understanding as we would our friends — may hold the answer. “Common humanity” promotes the recognition that we are, in fact, not alone since all humans share the same fundamental experiences, emotions and struggles.

The loneliness epidemic

To begin finding a solution to social disconnectedness, it’s important to understand the vehicles that drive it. A 2024 Statistics Canada survey found more than one in 10 Canadians report often or always feeling lonely, a finding that aligns with psychological research on rising social isolation.

At the same time, studies indicate that heavy reliance on digital technologies can both reflect and reinforce this isolation.

Technology, AI and algorithms divide and capture human attention, often limiting exposure to interactions or varied points of view and perspectives. A study by clinical and social psychologists suggests that the motivation to escape everyday life and experience social gratification reinforces the relationship between mental health and AI dependence, especially for people with mental illness.

The more attention spent in the digital world, the less is available to spend with one another.

It’s easy to fall into a pattern of pessimism as we observe technology shifts toward automated entry-level jobs, addictive doomscrolling and students submitting AI-generated homework. These negative emotions, the attention we spend on them and the frustration we feel with ourselves for having these emotions can perpetuate a cycle of self-isolation.

Self-compassion and common humanity are evidence-based tools that can help stop this cycle by shifting attention back to what is important: each other.

Self-compassion and common humanity

According to Kristin Neff, an American education psychology scholar, self-compassion functions on three key tenets: self-kindness versus self-judgment, common humanity versus self-isolation and mindfulness versus over-identification.

Each facet emphasizes intentionality in our actions, both toward ourselves and others.

At its core, mindful self-compassion’s concept of common humanity is the belief that we are connected by familiar human experiences. Personal suffering is part of a shared human condition, for example, and in accepting this truth, we reduce self-judgment and weaken the tendency toward social withdrawal.

Research shows that self-compassion can be exercised like a muscle through interventions that shift awareness of our personal experiences to how these experiences connect us with others.

Appealing to the humanness of our present experiences reduces feelings of isolation and self-judgment and increases life satisfaction. Common humanity addresses our basic human need to belong.

Feeling down about not having plans with others this weekend? You’re not alone in this struggle. It is uniquely human to feel alone and want to self-soothe with a scroll on TikTok. Knowing this, it might be time to take the first step and reach out to that friend and invite them over.

From theory to practice

Demonstrating the principles of self-compassion and common humanity in the presence of others can create a positive feedback cycle. Three action-based practices help exercise control over our attention, centre community, empathize and attend to our “why.”

Invest in community. Allowing technology to seep into all corners of life is not inevitable. Self-compassion teaches that while this is human, we have the power to change our actions as an act of compassion. It is our choice to bring our attention back to the present.

This may mean making an explicit choice to unplug instead of following the urge to respond; leaning into sharing imperfect experiences and mutual not-knowing; talking something through instead of Googling it immediately; practising collaboration over outsourcing thinking.

Practise empathy. Excessive tech or AI use can leave us feeling depleted and disconnected. In order to interrupt the cycle of overusing technology, notice these emotions without judgment rather than feeling guilt and avoiding the guilt through more tech use.

To ground yourself, ask: “What do I need right now?” You may find your response involves uniquely human experiences: food, a cup of tea, calling a parent, fresh air or a walk.

Centre your ‘why.’ Think about why you choose to connect with others. Centre this “why” in your day-to-day life.

If you notice yourself opting for AI to write an email, pause for a moment and notice this reflex. It is human to seek shortcuts to preserve energy. Consider what you might gain from writing that email yourself. Notice any discomfort. Know that it’s human to feel it, and choose to write it yourself anyway. Theory suggests you might feel more connected to your people and to your own humanness in the process.

In this context, self-compassion functions as a psychological counterweight to the isolating tendencies of digital life. It helps reorient attention away from performance and productivity and back toward shared human experiences.

Li-elle Rapaport does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How principles of self-compassion help fight loneliness in the age of AI – https://theconversation.com/how-principles-of-self-compassion-help-fight-loneliness-in-the-age-of-ai-276574

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Madeleine Orr, Assistant Professor, Sport Ecology, University of Toronto

If it feels like everyone around you (physically and digitally) has taken up an affair with running in the past few years, you’re not imagining it. Since 2023, running has been the most uploaded activity on the exercise app Strava, according to their annual Year in Sport reports from 2023, 2024 and 2025.

For many of us, running is one of the most accessible forms of physical activity. It is something we can do on our own or with friends. It requires minimal gear and does not rely on a specialized training facility. All we have to do is lace up and go.

However, the seemingly simple practice of running is entangled with complex environmental dynamics. Rising global temperatures and air pollution are making it physically harder and unsafe to run outdoors, and some of the digital tools that many runners rely on carry their own environmental costs.

Strava’s 2023 Trend Report noted that: 75 per cent of athletes said extreme heat affected their exercise plans, while poor air quality affected 27 per cent. We now have to reckon with the reality that, due to warming temperatures, running will become less accessible and safe.

Add to that the rise of “runfluencers,” running fashion trends and a new market of consumer products designed to help runners cope with heat, and it becomes increasingly clear that the relationship between running, climate change and consumption is wickedly ironic.

---

Hobbies can bring joy, well-being and focus to our busy lives, but so many of us don’t have one. If you’re ready to replace scrolling with stitching, or hustle with horticulture, The Hobby Starter Kit (a new series from Quarter Life) will help you get going.

---

The dangers of heat

Running in the heat increases the risk of exertional heat illness and heat stroke. Additionally, running in the heat can increase the risk of acute kidney disease due to insufficient cooling and dehydration during exercise-related heat stress.

For those keen to hit new personal bests, running in hotter conditions can impair performance. For example, an analysis of race data uploaded to Strava identified the average finishing time of the New York City Marathon was approximately 12 minutes slower in 2022 — when the temperature was 23C (plus humidity) — compared to 2021, when temperatures were around 13C.

And that’s just a few of the temperature-related risks associated with summer running. In addition to extreme heat exposure, the safety of summer running is also compromised by smoke and poor air quality.

Runfluencer culture

In addition to the climate-driven shifts affecting our daily jogs, the recent running boom and surrounding culture is also shifting how we run.

As runners adapt to rising heat, poor air quality and smoke-filled summers, the pressure to buy, track and optimize intensifies, further entangling running with the very environmental forces that threaten it.

If your social media algorithm is anything like ours, you might have noticed some targeted ads and sponsored content from “runfluencers” highlighting their new favourite running-related products and apps, such as Runna, a British-based coaching app known for its personalized training plans and AI-assisted pacing.

Runna was first launched in 2022, and its online presence jumped significantly after the app was acquired by Strava in April 2025.

Apps like these can help provide structure and prepare for races. However, they have also faced criticism, with experts noting concerns about the intensity of the AI-assisted training plans in regard to training spikes and risk of overuse injuries. Runna has said they “don’t use AI to generate training plans” but to “monitor a runner’s progress throughout their plan.”

While these apps promise efficiency and personalization, they are part of a wider digital infrastructure with their own environmental footprint. GPS tracking, constant data uploads, cloud storage and AI-assisted analysis all rely on energy-intensive data centres.

As running culture becomes more data-driven and automated, even a traditionally low-impact activity becomes entangled with the emissions and the energy demands of digital technology.

Beyond apps, runfluencers are also using their platforms to share their running esthetic — trying out new shoes, participating in the latest running fashion trends and showing off race day outfits.

That, in turn, promotes a culture that normalizes over-consumption under the guise of self-improvement and dramatically increases the environmental cost of what should be a low-impact activity. Such a focus can make running feel less appealing and appear less accessible.

Staying safe on a run

If you are someone with the flexibility to choose when you participate in races, consider pivoting to springtime training rather than slogging through increasingly risky summer training blocks. Not only will your training runs leading up to the race be cooler, but you can also expect more optimal marathon temperatures (2 to 13C) on race day.

For example, in the Canadian province of Ontario, races like the Mississauga Marathon in April and Toronto’s Sporting Life 10K in May offer runners safer racing temperatures and, potentially, improved performance compared to summer training and fall races.

Think about how you engage with running culture and be a smart consumer. Avoid over-consuming products and programs that you don’t need. Remember, running is one of the most accessible forms of exercise we have. You don’t need a bunch of gear and apps to participate.

As climate change intensifies and summer temperatures continue to rise, running will become less safe on hot days. Runfluencer culture and over-consumption in running fashion are dramatically increasing the environmental cost of what should be a low-impact activity.

To counter these trends, opt for spring races, listen to your body, seek advice from human coaches and pick durable gear over following the latest fashions.

These choices matter not because individual runners are to blame, but because they push back against a running culture that increasingly equates health with optimization, constant consumption and digital surveillance, even as climate change makes the sport itself more precarious.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Hurdles to a hobby: How climate change and ‘runfluencer’ culture impact our daily jog – https://theconversation.com/hurdles-to-a-hobby-how-climate-change-and-runfluencer-culture-impact-our-daily-jog-279537

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jean-Laurent Domingue, Associate Professor, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

The Supreme Court of Canada has described the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment as “fundamental to a person’s dignity and autonomy, [including] in the context of treatment for mental illness.”

Nonetheless, legislative and policy shift in multiple provinces in the past year threaten this principle — with little meaningful political resistance. It is important to closely examine the conditions and public narratives that have made this renewed use of psychiatric coercion possible.

A legislative and policy shift

In 2025, in an explicit repudiation of harm-reduction principles, Alberta passed legislation enabling the forced treatment of people with addiction disorders on the basis that they are “likely to cause harm.”

Manitoba now allows authorities to detain people for up to 72 hours if, due to intoxication, they are considered a danger or are causing a disturbance.. In British Columbia, the government has opened involuntary care beds inside prisons for mental health and substance use purposes. The province has also expanded its Mental Health Act to allow longer involuntary hospitalization and compulsory treatment for people with substance use issues.

In March 2026, Québec introduced a bill allowing health data sharing and closer co-ordination between police and health services, with provisions to bypass consent for people deemed mentally “altered” or “distrustful” of institutions.

In all four provinces, professionals operating within these coercive frameworks are afforded immunity from legal proceedings.

‘Compassionate intervention’

These examples highlight an acceleration in overt coercive intervention provisions being added to provincial mental health and addictions legislation.

This acceleration, however, is simply a continuation of mental health and addictions legislation across Canada that makes it easier for citizens to be detained, treated and controlled without their consent (for example, Brian’s Law in Ontario, the Nunavut Mental Health Act and the Maureen Breau Act in Québec).

Across Alberta, Manitoba, British Columbia and Québec, parliamentary debates and media coverage consistently portray coercive intervention for addiction and mental health as an act of compassionate intervention.

Even governments with differing ideological orientations — like the NDP versus the Conservatives — converge around the argument that the state has a moral obligation to “protect the most vulnerable.”

This is especially true for people deemed incapable of making rational decisions due to severe addiction or mental health. In legislative debates, the notion of compassion is reinforced through narratives of urgency and failure. Existing harm-reduction strategies are described as insufficient or outdated, necessitating a decisive shift toward more interventionist models.

A disregard for science and ethics

Media coverage amplifies this messaging, emphasizing crisis conditions, public disorder and the visible consequences of addiction or mental health. This coverage legitimizes the need for new legal tools.

Coercion is articulated as care and involuntary treatment is presented not as a restriction of liberty but as a necessary response to incapacity and risk.

This appeal to compassion functions as a unifying political language, enabling cross-partisan support despite differing ideological stances.

By portraying these policies as pragmatic, humane and long overdue, policymakers limit opposition. They also reconfigure the boundaries of acceptable state intervention, illustrating how compassion can be mobilized to normalize coercion. After all, who could be against compassion?

This rhetorical focus on compassion allows governments to sidestep deeper ethical and empirical critiques, including the limited scientific evidence supporting forced treatment and the potential harms associated with it.

In fact, whether administered in closed settings or in the community, there is a striking lack of robust evidence, including an absence of Canadian research, that demonstrates clinical benefits. Instead, research points to significant adverse effects, including deaths due to forced treatments for opiate use, raising serious ethical concerns.

Police-medicine hybridization

Furthermore, this compassion-focused public discourse — and the legislation flowing from it — greatly expands the role of policing in medical matters, often with few limits. At the same time, it extends the reach of medicine and social services into policing.

This growing police–medicine hybridization is concerning for everyone, but especially for groups that have long faced disproportionate psychiatric coercion, including women and Black, Indigenous and other racialized communities.

It also signals a modern return of the asylum — not as a single institution, but as a system of confinement, surveillance and control spread across multiple sectors. Indeed, despite being presented as new, recent and proposed legislative changes are anything but. Forced detention, incarceration and treatment reflect older, deeply rooted correctional approaches with origins dating back at least to the 17th century.

These legislative developments do not suggest a novel policy response. Instead, they reconfigure longstanding patterns of confinement and control under the guise of compassion. If left unchallenged, they will normalize coercion as care and erode fundamental rights in the name of protection.

Canadian legislators should resist responding to complex social and health crises with coercive measures that lack a sound scientific basis and risk doing more harm than good.

Jean-Laurent Domingue is a Registered Nurse in Ontario, and receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Law Commission of Canada.

Axel Ounis is affiliated with the federal liberal party.

Emmanuelle Bernheim receives funding from the Canada Research Chair program, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Law Commission of Canada.

– ref. Coercion isn’t care, and new laws that enforce treatment and confinement are dangerous – https://theconversation.com/coercion-isnt-care-and-new-laws-that-enforce-treatment-and-confinement-are-dangerous-280193

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Chetan Dave, Professor of Economics, University of Alberta

Canada’s economic policy uncertainty index has climbed back to levels not seen since the COVID-19 pandemic, a sign that a more volatile period may be taking hold. Income inequality hit a record high last year, and youth unemployment reached 14.6 per cent in September 2025, its highest point since 2010, excluding the pandemic.

Most Canadians have had relatively little experience with major economic downturns. Since the early 1990s, Canada has largely been spared the boom-and-bust cycles common in the United States. The country avoided the worst of the 2008 global financial crisis, and until COVID-19, had not experienced a major economic shock in a generation.

In that long stretch of time, Canadians have grown accustomed to relative stability, which makes the current moment feel especially disorienting. We are, as the saying goes, living in “interesting times,” and that is rarely good news for prices, employment prospects, government budgets, business investment or productivity.

Many Canadian households are carrying a fair amount of debt while facing inflation and rapid changes in job markets. What is a typical Canadian household to do? As an economist, I have some practical advice to offer.

Why uncertainty is rising

This ongoing economic angst has several overlapping sources that are both global and domestic in nature.

Geopolitical conflicts, including the ongoing war involving the United States, Israel and Iran, are increasing the costs of everyday items like food and gas. These disruptions ripple through global supply chains, feeding into higher input costs for Canadian businesses and, ultimately, higher prices for consumers.

At the same time, tariff disputes led by the U.S. are causing inflationary pressure and discouraging long-term business investment. This, in turn, weighs on productivity and wage growth.

---

Read more:
Food prices are already high in Canada. Will the Iran war make them worse?

---

Some governments have responded to these shocks with industrial policies, attempting to support or protect specific sectors such as clean energy, manufacturing or technology. However, some economists warn against this approach, arguing that governments cannot reliably “pick winners” better than markets can.

Political fault lines are also contributing to uncertainty at home. Rising anti-immigration sentiment and the separatist rhetoric in Alberta are adding another layer of social turbulence. Without a social consensus, economic planning becomes more difficult and volatility often follows.

Canada’s safety net has limits

Canada does retain an important advantage: its social safety net. Canada spends roughly 18 to 20 per cent of GDP on public social programs — around the the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average. That’s below the levels of France, Germany and most Scandinavian countries, but meaningfully above the United States.

Canadians have access to relatively accessible employment insurance by North American standards. The country’s combination of publicly funded health care and income support programs provides important protection during periods of disruption that American households do not have.

But there are limits to that protection. While Canada’s federal net debt-to-GDP ratio stands at 13.3 per cent — the lowest in the G7 according to the International Monetary Fund — the same cannot be said about provincial governments. Large-scale bailouts of households or provinces are not guaranteed because there is no constitutional or statutory requirement for them.

Three things households can do now

Economic theory identifies three ways households can build resilience against a negative income or wealth shock. The first is cutting back spending. This includes spending on both durable goods (such as vehicles or appliances) and non-durable goods (anything with a short lifespan). This can involve delaying large purchases or scaling back discretionary expenses like dining out, travel or subscription services.

The second is shifting spending to lower-cost alternatives, even within the “needs” category. Households rarely have complete flexibility to cut essentials, but they can often substitute within them. This can involve switching to lower-cost brands, using public transit more frequently or seeking more affordable housing options where feasible.

The third — the toughest one of all — is aggressively reducing unsecured debt. Canadian households owe roughly $1.77 for every dollar of disposable income, the highest household debt burden in the G7. Much of that is mortgage debt, which at least builds equity. But revolving debt — credit cards, lines of credit, car loans and the like — carries higher interest rates and greater risk.

Households can do this by paying down the highest-interest balances first, consolidating debts into lower-interest products where possible or redirecting windfalls such as tax refunds toward repayment. Avoiding the accumulation of new high-interest debt is equally important.

Building a buffer

Once those balances are under control, households should build a financial buffer and maintain it even if the economic outlook improves.

A common guideline is saving three to six months of household expenses in case of an emergency. This typically requires setting aside 20 per cent or more of take-home income, depending on household circumstances and obligations.

Canadians have access to several tax-advantaged tools to support this process. The Tax-free Savings Account allows tax-free growth with no restrictions on withdrawals, while the First Home Savings Account offers first-time homebuyers an annual contribution room of $8,000 and a lifetime cap of $40,000. The Registered Education Savings Plan helps families save for post-secondary education.

If you are able to consistently put away funds and invest them based on your risk tolerance, these accounts can significantly improve long-term financial resilience.

Income risk in a changing economy

The harder challenge, of course, is income stability in an age of uncertainty. Canada is primarily a natural resources exporter, and rapid technological change — particularly the rise of artificial intelligence — is reshaping labour markets across other sectors.

Workers face growing uncertainty about which skills will remain valuable and how stable their employment will be.

Because of this, households may need to get creative about diversifying their income sources. This can include investing in additional training or certification programs, developing side income through freelance or contract work, monetizing existing skills through consulting, or building small entrepreneurial ventures.

The current period is unsettling. But households that reduce their debt exposure, build savings and treat the safety net as the partial buffer it actually is will be in a better position to absorb whatever comes next.

Chetan Dave does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Here’s how Canadian households can recession-proof finances as economic uncertainty climbs – https://theconversation.com/heres-how-canadian-households-can-recession-proof-finances-as-economic-uncertainty-climbs-281113

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sophie Webb, Postdoctoral Fellow,  Bridge Research Consortium, Simon Fraser University

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a familiar seasonal illness, but the tools to prevent it are new. Canada has recently approved vaccines for older adults and pregnant people, along with a long-acting monoclonal antibody that can protect infants through their first RSV season.

These innovations offer new ways to reduce hospitalizations and severe illness. Yet whether Canadians can access them still depends largely on where they live.

Across the country, provincial RSV programs vary widely in eligibility, scope and public funding — see, for example, Ontario RSV program updates and Alberta immunization program information.

---

Read more:
RSV FAQ: What is RSV? Who is at risk? When should I seek emergency care for my child?

---

An infant eligible for publicly funded protection in one province may not be eligible in another. Seniors with similar health risks may face different access depending on their province. These differences are often dismissed as routine features of federalism.

But with World Immunization Week upon us, RSV provides the opportunity to ask a broader question: who’s responsible for delivering equitable access to vaccines in Canada?

---

Immunity and Society is a new series from The Conversation Canada that presents new vaccine discoveries and immune-based innovations that are changing how we understand and protect human health. Through a partnership with the Bridge Research Consortium, these articles — written by experts in Canada at the forefront of immunology, biomanufacturing, social science and humanities — explore the latest developments and their impacts.

---

New tools, uneven access

RSV prevention now includes vaccines for older adults and pregnant people, and a monoclonal antibody (nirsevimab) that offers season-long protection for infants with a single dose.

National guidance exists. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization recommends universal infant RSV immunization, but allows provinces to phase this in based on supply and cost. But these recommendations are advisory. Provinces ultimately decide what is publicly funded and for whom.

The result is a patchwork. Some provinces have expanded infant coverage, while others have limited access to those considered high risk. Adult and maternal programs also vary in eligibility, delivery and funding.

Cost plays a key role in these decisions. RSV therapies are expensive, and provinces must weigh them against competing health priorities. Epidemiological differences also matter, as do variations in disease burden and the additional challenges of vaccination in northern and remote communities.

Not all variation is inherently problematic. But together, these factors mean that access to protection is shaped as much by provincial priorities as by medical need.

When equity’s a goal but not a guarantee

In immunization policy, equity generally means ensuring that those at higher risk, or facing barriers to access, are protected first, and financial or geographic differences don’t determine who receives care.

RSV programs often emphasize protecting those at highest clinical risk, such as very young infants and people with underlying conditions. This approach is understandable. But it also narrows how equity operates in practice.

In a system where provinces determine their own budgets and priorities, equity can become something negotiated rather than guaranteed. One province may fund broader access; another may limit eligibility based on cost-effectiveness or capacity. The same intervention is therefore available to some populations and not others.

This shifts responsibility downward. Families must determine eligibility, navigate different rules, and sometimes absorb costs or logistical barriers to access. Equity becomes something people experience unevenly, rather than a guarantee built into the system.

COVID-19 offers a cautionary example. Communities identified as highest risk were often vaccinated later than wealthier neighbourhoods during early rollout phases. This prompted provinces to introduce reactive “hotspot” strategies that in some cases replicated the same effect. Simply naming groups as “equity-deserving” did not ensure timely access.

Governance and accountability

Canada’s immunization system involves multiple entities. Federal bodies approve products and issue recommendations. Provinces decide what to fund. Public health systems implement programs within local constraints.

While each level plays an essential role, none is clearly responsible for national equity, creating a governance gap.

Equity is widely endorsed, but no single body is accountable for delivering it nationally. RSV demonstrates how this plays out in practice — variation in immunization is accepted as a feature of federalism, rather than treated as a policy problem to be addressed.

Procurement adds another layer. Vaccine pricing and contract terms are not routinely disclosed in Canada, and negotiations with manufacturers are often confidential.

During COVID-19, federal vaccine contracts were released only after parliamentary pressure, with key details heavily redacted. Limited transparency makes it difficult to assess whether differences in access reflect pricing, negotiation leverage or policy choices.

---

Read more:
Consulting firms are the ‘shadow public service’ managing the response to COVID-19

---

Why it matters

RSV is one of the first major post-pandemic tests of Canada’s immunization system. It’s unlikely to be the last. New vaccines and antibody-based therapies are increasingly tailored to specific populations, making decisions about access more complex.

As these technologies evolve, governance matters more, not less. Without clearer accountability, innovations risk reinforcing variation rather than reducing it.

---

Read more:
Flu, RSV and COVID-19: Advice from family doctors on how to get through this winter’s ‘tripledemic’

---

RSV highlights a broader challenge in Canadian immunization policy — equity is widely invoked, but responsibility for delivering it remains diffuse. Without clearer co-ordination, transparency and shared expectations, access to protection will continue to depend on where people live.

For families of infants and seniors, that distinction is not abstract. It determines whether immunity is treated as a public good, or as a matter of postal code.

Cora Constantinescu receives funding from bioMerieux, GSK, merck, Pfizer, Sanofi, with funds being transferred to her University organisation

Sophie Webb does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. World Immunization Week: Why postal codes shouldn’t determine RSV protection in Canada – https://theconversation.com/world-immunization-week-why-postal-codes-shouldnt-determine-rsv-protection-in-canada-278717

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Clare Warner, Director, Equity, Inclusion and Anti-Racism, Student Affairs, McMaster University

There is a rich history of Black graduation ceremonies in the United States focused on celebrating the unique experiences and achievements of Black university students.

In Canada, the tradition gained attention with the University of Toronto’s 2017 celebration.

Since then, annual Black graduation ceremonies have been embraced by many other institutions, including McMaster University, Toronto Metropolitan University and Concordia University.

These optional celebrations are complementary to faculty-based convocation ceremonies where students are awarded their degrees. As in the case of Toronto’s event, many are initiated by students seeking to celebrate their achievements in a culturally affirming way.

Their emergence are part of the introduction of Black-focused programs, services and spaces on Canadian campuses, which according to the available evidence, positively impact the well-being and academic success of Black students.

The principle of ‘Ubuntu’

The celebrations embody the principle of Ubuntu, a South African philosophy about interdependence.

Students, parents and family members are often joined by staff, faculty, alumni and community members in a communal celebration of achievement.

These community celebrations remind graduates they are powerfully networked and supported as they embark on their careers or further studies. They also offer a moment to reflect on the personal, familial and ancestral sacrifices, which have enabled the long-awaited day.

During the celebrations, students are often presented with a Kente Stole. The stole is a scarf-like garment inspired by kente cloth, a vibrant textile created in the 17th century by the Akan people of Ghana drawing on their longstanding traditional weaving practices.

Historically associated with royal gatherings, today kente-inspired stoles are featured in important community celebrations as a symbol of ancestry and cultural pride. Visually stunning, many students proudly wear their stoles during their formal convocation event, reinforcing their undeniable presence and contribution to the university.

Typically, Black graduation celebrations also incorporate cultural attire, music, speeches and awards, which together create the “magic” I’m so fond of.

Accusations of segregation

These celebrations are not without their critics, however, as accusations of segregation are not uncommon. Notably, predominantly white gatherings on campuses evade this criticism because whiteness is often constructed in non-racial terms, preserving for itself the privilege of being seen as simply human.

Accusations of segregation fail to acknowledge that Black graduation celebrations exist in the context of, and are an antidote to, the well-documented barriers Black students experience in the pursuit of higher education.

They are also troubling when situated within the history of segregationist policies in North America and South Africa, which systematically deprived Black communities of vital resources and opportunities as part of state-sanctioned efforts to maintain racial hierarchies.

Fostering belonging

In reality, Black graduation celebrations are inclusive, frequently welcoming non-Black campus allies and graduates’ family members and partners, suggesting accusations of segregation are rooted in ideological opposition rather than evidence.

Other criticisms focus on the potential for Black graduation celebrations to reduce the participation of Black students in their formal convocations.

This claim runs contrary to available evidence that Black-focused programming at Canadian universities increases students’ sense of belonging, which is a prerequisite for greater institutional engagement.

Based on this logic, Black graduation ceremonies are more likely than not to empower Black students to take up space in their formal convocations alongside peers from their programs.

Celebrating Black achievement

Black graduation ceremonies have also attracted negative comments in popular forums like Reddit threads. Amid the deliberations, profiles from different racial backgrounds sometimes demand equivalent ceremonies in the name of fairness.

This stance is disappointing because it denies the necessity of celebrating Black achievement in a world plagued by a specific, longstanding and deeply entrenched anti-Blackness. It’s also illogical because Black graduation celebrations do not occur at the expense of other communities.

Celebrating Black achievement does not preclude other, also valid, celebrations of success — which can and often do co-exist.

In fact, as is so often the case with innovation born out of Black resistance and creativity, Black graduation celebrations provide both precedent and a model for culturally grounded recognition events and celebrations on campuses.

Repairing reputations, building bridges

It would be a mistake to judge Black graduations as a single celebratory day, as their impact far exceeds one day. Months-long in the planning, they can nurture cross-campus relationships as departments and faculties collaborate in support of the proceedings.

It’s not an exaggeration to say Black graduation ceremonies, which symbolize inclusion, can enhance a university’s reputation among prospective students.

For enrolled students, Black graduation ceremonies provide motivation to continue working towards that long-awaited moment of proudly crossing the stage in the presence of community.

They also have less visible, but no less meaningful, effects. As an outward-facing symbol of institutional commitment to Black students, Black graduations contribute to the repair or enhancement of a university’s reputation with local Black communities. This can lead to meaningful partnerships with community organizations and attract donors who want to augment support for Black students.

Overall, Black graduation ceremonies demonstrate how far we have come since the days of discriminatory admission policies, which excluded Black students from some programs in higher education in Canada. They represent progress and should be a source of pride for universities.

Clare Warner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why I celebrate Black graduation magic: An anti-racist perspective – https://theconversation.com/why-i-celebrate-black-graduation-magic-an-anti-racist-perspective-279917

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kyla Tienhaara, Canada Research Chair in Economy and Environment, Queen’s University, Ontario

Delegates from more than 50 countries are gathering in Santa Marta, Colombia, from April 24 to 29 at the first-ever Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels.

The conference’s stated aim is to “initiate a concrete process through which a coalition of committed countries, subnational governments, and relevant stakeholders can…implement a progressive transition away from fossil fuels creating sustainable societies and economies.”

Emissions from fossil fuels are at the heart of the climate crisis. Coal, oil and gas are the largest contributors to climate change by a wide margin. This has been well understood throughout the three decades of multilateral negotiations at annual Conferences of the Parties (COPs) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Yet, the words “fossil fuels” do not appear in the text of the 2015 Paris Agreement — the global pact meant to steer the world to a cleaner and safer future. Petrostates and fossil fuel lobbyists have been effectively blocking serious consideration of fossil fuel phaseouts in global talks for decades.

Can the coalition of governments and other stakeholders gathering in Santa Marta make progress where other international efforts have failed? That is the key question for those attending the conference.

How did we get here?

The first mention of fossil fuels in an official UNFCCC output did not arise until the 2023 COP28 conference. The call to transition “away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner” was heralded as the “beginning of the end” of the fossil fuel era.

However, there was backsliding at COP29 in Azerbaijan, marked by controversies over the host’s promotion of fossil fuels. In the end, governments could not even agree to reaffirm the commitment to transition away from fossil fuels made the previous year. Frustration at the lack of progress boiled over at the most recent conference, COP30 in Brazil.

This led a group of countries to sign the Belém Declaration on the Transition Away from Fossil Fuels, with Colombia and the Netherlands co–hosting the first conference to further this initiative.

What should we expect from Santa Marta?

Unlike UN-organized COPs, the conference in Santa Marta is a smaller gathering of 53 countries and the European Union with no official negotiations. It includes an academic conference, a people’s summit and two days of high-level government meetings. Private sector representatives can attend, but only if they are “aligned” with the conference’s objectives and principles.

The main output from Santa Marta will be a report from the co-hosts, based on discussions structured around three pillars. The first pillar focuses on overcoming economic dependence on fossil fuels. It’s particularly relevant for countries in the Global South that face high debt, higher costs of capital and limited capacity to finance their energy transitions.

Many of these countries, including Colombia, rely on fossil fuels as a critical source of revenue to fund social programs. This pillar is essential to ensuring the energy transition is feasible and fair.

The theme of the second pillar is “transforming supply and demand.” On the supply side, the most contentious issue is the phaseout of fossil fuel production. Fossil fuel subsidies, which may increase as governments respond to the current energy crisis, are also up for discussion.

On the demand side, discussions revolve around scaling up renewable energy while ensuring energy security and universal access to energy. The petrochemical sector is also highlighted for its problematic role in driving future demand for oil and gas, which is supported by recent research.

The third pillar covers “international co-operation and climate diplomacy.” One issue where concrete progress could be made is on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). This mechanism in many international treaties allows foreign investors to sue governments for policies they see as harming their investments.

The conference hosts have identified ISDS as a legal barrier to the energy transition because companies use it to undermine climate action.

In late March, more than 220 experts — including Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz — sent a letter to Colombian President Gustavo Petro urging him to use the opportunity in Santa Marta to build “a coalition of countries working towards a world free of ISDS.” Soon after, Petro announced that Colombia would pull out of the system.

What does it mean for future climate talks?

The Santa Marta co-hosts have stressed that the conference is not meant to be an alternative or replacement for multilateral negotiations. Instead, it’s envisioned as complementary.

The Brazilian COP30 presidency, which is running a parallel process to create a road map for fossil fuel phaseouts that will be delivered at COP31 in November 2026, has indicated that it will consider the outcomes from Santa Marta.

This isn’t the first time governments have experimented with “minilateralism” in the climate policy sphere. Initiatives like the Clean Energy Transition Partnership have proven to be successful. Canada is a member of this partnership and a leader in the Powering Past Coal Alliance, another group of “early movers” coming together on a key issue.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has indicated he values these kinds of coalitions. In a speech to the World Economic Forum in January, he laid out a vision for middle powers like Canada to play a key role in building a new values-based global order.

Santa Marta is a critical moment for the government to begin enacting this vision. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has shown just how fragile global dependence on fossil fuels can be. Accelerating the energy transition could decouple our daily lives from volatile international markets.

Joining the efforts in Santa Marta is an opportunity for Canada to commit to transitioning away from fossil fuels while building environmental and economic resilience.

Kyla Tienhaara receives funding from the Canada Research Chairs program. She occasionally consults for/works with (on a not-for-profit basis) with a number of non-governmental organizations but is not currently working in such a capacity with any group.

Christina Frendo receives funding from Mitacs and the Flight 302 Scholarship (Transport Canada).

– ref. Here’s what to expect from the first Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels – https://theconversation.com/heres-what-to-expect-from-the-first-conference-on-transitioning-away-from-fossil-fuels-280894

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ronald W. Pruessen, Emeritus Professor of History, University of Toronto

Donald Trump still has the capacity to shock. The American president’s unauthorized war against Iran finds him in a vicious destructive mode, recently threatening to push Iran “into the Stone Ages” and to end Iranian civilization if Iran did not agree to “unconditional surrender.”

---

Read more:
Donald Trump’s apocalyptic and profane threats against Iran expose the unhinged language of war

---

Even as the passing weeks have left Iran still standing, Trump’s words and deeds have already inflicted severe damage on the global economy and regional peace in the Middle East.

Trump’s turn toward a wartime posture is striking, but not entirely unexpected. His second-term conduct shows a growing tendency to push an earlier taste for disruption toward outright destruction — at home and abroad.

He now routinely acts in the belief that those who dare to resist his plans deserve the severest forms of punishment that imperial presidential power can deliver.

But Trump’s conduct is grounded in centuries of American experience. The United States has an enduring tendency toward retribution and destruction.

Trump 2.0

Trump’s scorched-Earth proclivity was obvious before the war with Iran. Warning shots came on Jan. 6, 2021, with the assault on both the Capitol and constitutional provisions for presidential succession. Similarly bold efforts began in 2025.

Globally, Trump has been sweeping away leaders, regimes and multilateral systems, using both military and political weaponry: the special operations extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, for example, as well as the launch of illegal attacks on purportedly drug-running fishing boats in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific (now tallying more than 50 obliterating strikes and 163 deaths).

International ravaging has been a hallmark of Trump 2.0: dismantling highly integrated global trading networks; fuelling a surge in military recruits in allied countries like Canada and Denmark/Greenland; denouncing NATO.

There’s been destruction on the home front too: Elon Musk’s DOGE chain-sawed through congressionally authorized agencies and funding, for example, including the Environmental Protection Agency and 5,800 research projects at the National Institutes of Health. The anti-woke Trump administration has eviscerated diversity, equity and inclusion programs in government, the private sector and academia.

Trump has also literally bulldozed the White House East Wing.

American roots

Centuries of American history foreshadow Trump’s strategy of destruction. The precedents are complex for two reasons.

First, American personal and national interests have often mixed admirable aims with a more basic drive for wealth and power — combining genuine pursuits of democracy and civil liberties and ambitions for social welfare and community with less noble impulses.

Second, the scope and settings in which Trump-like behaviour appears have changed dramatically over more than three centuries — from a chain of Atlantic colonies to a continental nation and, ultimately, a global economic, military and cultural power. Yet across these shifting arenas, similar patterns of destructive and tragic outbursts have repeatedly surfaced.

Among countless examples, the most profound involved the treatment of Indigenous populations. White colonial appetites for land and resources always paired negotiation and repression, with superior weaponry leading to episodes of genocidal annihilation when forced migrations and “reservations” were deemed insufficient.

The names of ruthless slaughters pockmark American history: the Apalachee Massacre (Florida, 1704), the Sand Creek Massacre (Colorado, 1864), the Wounded Knee Massacre (South Dakota,1890), among numerous others.

Estimates suggest that in 1492, five million Indigenous people lived in what would become American territory, declining to 300,000 by 1900.

While the histories of Canada, Mexico and broader Latin America are also replete with such tragedies, the evidence of deep and specifically American roots beneath Trump’s virulent destructive impulses is clear.

Slaves and free men

The history of Black Americans is another heinous example of the American capacity for carnage. The experiences of Black slaves and their descendents are soaked in blood.

Prior to the Civil War, estimates suggest the brutality of chattel labour meant life expectancy that was half that of white Americans (21 years versus 43). When freedom came, life remained perilous as violence supplemented Jim Crow segregation laws.

Black homes and businesses burned — the 1921 Tulsa massacre, for example, saw 35 square blocks of Black businesses and residential neighbourhoods destroyed.

---

Read more:
A forgotten coup in the American heartland echoes Trump

---

Shotguns and hanging ropes for lynchings also ended lives, stretching from the post-Reconstruction era of the 1880s to 1968.

Racialized people were the most common targets of an American appetite for total destruction — but not the only one. The U.S. Civil War remains one of the most catastrophic in world history, with Union and Confederate deaths now estimated at 698,000.

Destruction abroad

American power in the 20th century saw the periodic unleashing of destructive impulses abroad, some within living memory. Examples include:

• Theodore Roosevelt’s attempt to crush rebellion in the newly acquired Philippines between 1899 and 1902; 120,000 U.S. forces were involved, with 4,300 American and 20,000 “insurrecto” deaths and the loss of as many as 200,000 civilian lives.
• The devastation produced by the Second World War’s “area bombing” campaigns, designed to sap enemy morale by targeting industrial and civilian sites. The campaign escalated into the 1945 “firebomb” assaults on cities like Dresden and Tokyo — and the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
• The ecological destruction produced by Agent Orange campaigns in Vietnam and the micro-level horror of the My Lai massacre in the 1960s.
• The Iraq War’s casualty figures: 4,492 American service men were killed and 200,000 Iraqi civilians.

No restraints

American episodes of wanton destruction are part of a broader global history marked by the cruelties of many nations and groups.

At the same time, U.S. leaders and citizens have often been guided — if not fully constrained — by countervailing ideals: respect for human rights, adherence to the laws of war and a desire for the security and opportunity that peace provides.

But how strong are those restraints in 2026? And how vulnerable are hard-won ethical and political norms to Trump’s chilling rhetoric and actions, especially alongside Republican conduct in U.S. Congress and a Supreme Court that has weakened limits on presidential power?

Rising gas prices may prove the least of the consequences.

Ronald W. Pruessen has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

– ref. ‘Bombing our little hearts out’ — How Trump taps into America’s enduring appetite for destruction – https://theconversation.com/bombing-our-little-hearts-out-how-trump-taps-into-americas-enduring-appetite-for-destruction-280699

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Mo Pareles, Associate Professor of English and Medieval Studies, University of British Columbia

How can Pete Hegseth, the United States defense secretary who claims to be a devout evangelical Christian, have placed Quentin Tarantino on the same footing as the word of God?

An example from the early 11th century explains how fake Bible passages can function smoothly in mergers of state and secular power.

Hegseth led a recent Pentagon prayer service with a fictitious Bible verse from Pulp Fiction. From outside the #MAGA ecosystem, this bold fabrication of a Biblical verse is confusing.

That’s because scripture is valued very highly by evangelical Protestants, and it may seem counter-intuitive or blasphemous for Hegseth, who has done so much to merge MAGA rule and militant Christianity, to proclaim Tarantino’s words as the word of God.

But he’s not the first Christian bureaucrat to write his own Biblical verse. In fact, the practice has a long tradition.

---

Read more:
Evangelical holy war: Why some Christians think Trump will end the world

---

Wulfstan of York

An early example is Archbishop Wulfstan of York, who did something similar in a sermon called Be Godcundre Warnunge (God’s Threat to Sinning Israel).

Wulfstan, who died in 1023, was both a public intellectual and one of the most powerful churchmen in England when the kingdom was under attack, initially, by non-Christian Danish forces.

His generation of literate, high-ranking clerics had found an unusual symbiosis with their secular rulers, often serving them as bureaucrats. Wulfstan, for instance, not only supervised the church bureaucracy and lands; he also wrote laws in the names of successive secular kings.

These laws were vast and ambitious. Among many other things, they categorized clerical ranks and rights, regulated widow remarriage, expelled witches and gave a three-day respite to enslaved people (for fasting and praying).

The laws placed many previously local or unlegislated matters under kingly sovereignty and declared the co-equality of king and God (represented on Earth by archbishops). As such, they both empowered the increasingly centralized state and merged it with, even subsumed it under, church authority.

Chastised citizens

In some of Wulfstan’s sermons he used a prophetic voice, chastising and threatening in God’s name like the Biblical prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel.

This was not usual in his milieu, although there are some medieval examples: the 14-century Swedish/Roman abbess St. Birgitta, for instance, openly rebuked the Pope in the voice of Jesus Christ.

Wulfstan’s most famous speech, Sermo Lupi (The Wolf’s Sermon) in 1014, excoriates the English for their sins, saying they’d invited the Danish invasion, and stresses the importance of tithing, praying and respecting the Church.

The 1,000-year-old speech uses surprisingly modern tropes: victimized nationalism, claims of mass sexual vulnerability and an authoritative voice that speaks clearly for both religious and secular power. (The Danes Wulfstan reviles in this sermon did successfully conquer England for a time, and Wulfstan then served the newly Christian King Cnut as a lawmaker).

Translation and forgery

There was at this time no ban on Bible translation; learned churchmen like Wulfstan often translated scripture into the vernacular for pedagogical or pastoral reasons. In Western Europe, the Latin Vulgate, largely translated by St. Jerome in the fourth century from Hebrew and Greek, was the standard scriptural text.

Wulfstan’s later sermon, Be Godcundre Warnunge, quotes the book of Leviticus, Chapter 26, first in Latin and then old English, the language most listeners could actually understand. The passage describes God’s devastating potential vengeance if ancient Hebrews break the covenant; in Wulfstan’s loose and stylish translation, it is transparently about the present-day English at the time.

There is nothing odd about translating the Bible, especially the part called the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament, into the vernacular in a way people can understand better.

What’s unusual is that while Wulfstan explicitly says that both passages are God’s words from the Bible, about half of the Latin is Wulfstan’s own composition: Leviticus 26:14-45 is summarized in his distinct barn-burning, hypnotically rhythmic style.

An example: In place of a more mundane verse about being overpowered by and fleeing enemies, Wulstan writes: “… et persequentur uos inimici uestri, et fugietis nullo persequente” (and you will be pursued by your enemies, and you will flee pursued by no one).

Enduring popularity

It’s likely other churchmen at the time noticed Wulfstan wrote these supposed Vulgate verses himself. But there’s no evidence anyone was bothered by it.

This vibrant Latin/English sermon was copied into other manuscripts and continued to be popular into the 12th century, even after the Norman Conquest had marginalized the English language in the church.

This was also not Wulfstan’s first “forgery.” As scholar Nicholas P. Schwartz, an expert in Anglo-Saxon history, notes, Wulfstan had earlier in his career authored The Laws of Edgar and Guthrum, which was presented as a 150-year-old political document.

On these occasions, as with Wulfstan’s ghost-written laws, he does not seem to have been trying particularly hard to cover his tracks. Wulfstan had in essence become the voice of God in England, authorized to interpret and convey God’s will. He had also been gifted with great creativity and inventiveness with which to do so. Attribution was clearly a minor detail.

The demands of Christian leadership

This merging of many forms of authority, both secular and religious (already so obvious in Donald Trump, who has imagined himself as Jesus) may well explain Hegseth’s creative borrowing, as well as for its general acceptance by his political allies.

As with Wulfstan, Hegseth sees himself as responsible for conveying and implementing what he sees as God’s revealed will — in this case, apocalyptic racial violence — through a militant, theocratic state apparatus.

Borrowing and supplementing the divine voice is a traditional aspect of what Hegseth apparently regards as his job.

Mo Pareles is affiliated with the Jewish Faculty Network.

– ref. From Wulfstan of York to Pete Hegseth, fake Bible verses have often been politicized – https://theconversation.com/from-wulfstan-of-york-to-pete-hegseth-fake-bible-verses-have-often-been-politicized-281064