SHAW: Canada is one of the most desired countries on Earth — so why are we told it's systemically racist?

Connor Shaw is a Saskatchewan-based writer who is seeking practical solutions for wide-spanning issues facing the country.If Canada is systemically racist — as the political establishment insists — why is it one of the most sought-after destinations on Earth? Year after year, demand to enter this country remains extraordinarily high. Over 400,000 people became permanent residents in 2023, and even after reductions, nearly 395,000 arrived in 2025.The vast majority of these immigrants come from countries which diaspora lobbies maintain Canada has historically prejudiced. Whether from India, China, or the Middle East, these groups frequently invoke past injustices inflicted by the Canadian state.Despite this, they still arrive in droves. Why would one willingly subject themselves to a country they claim is fundamentally opposed to them? The answer reveals less about Canada and more about how narratives of victimhood are constructed and deployed.The usual evidence is well-worn. Statements by Sir John A. Macdonald, the case of Viola Desmond in Nova Scotia, and the Komagata Maru incident — these are presented as proof of a deeply rooted system of oppression. From there, the argument expands outward, used to explain everything from police profiling to disparities in hiring and income.What these claims neglect is context — how these incidents came about, and what followed them. If they represented a systematized racism in any meaningful sense, we would expect continuity. We would expect the government to defend those actions or leave them untouched..Instead, the opposite has happened. The government has issued apologies, reversed course, and elevated these incidents into defining national moments. Viola Desmond now sits on the ten-dollar bill, replacing our first Prime Minister. These are not the actions of a country concealing a racist system.For that reason, the definition itself has to expand. The Canadian Encyclopedia defines systemic racism as the tendency of institutions to marginalize racialized people because the standards of the white majority are embedded within them. Under this framework, the conclusion is built in from the start. Disparities prove the system is racist, and attempts to correct them prove how deeply rooted the problem must be.If institutions built by white people entrench white standards, why do so many people willingly move to a country whose institutions have been predominantly constructed by white people for over 150 years?In 2023, tens of thousands of refugees from Afghanistan chose to resettle in Canada. Across the world, diaspora networks actively advertise and assist immigration to Canada. We consistently rank among the top destinations for asylum seekers, at times representing 25% to 42% of global intake. .They leave behind their homes, languages, and cultures to come here. Would you travel across the world to a country where you share none of those things — if it were actively prejudiced against you? I would not, and neither would most people. People do not flee oppression only to voluntarily enter it again.The same disconnect appears in how disparities are interpreted. Differences in income, education, and representation are presented as proof of systemic bias. In reality, they are entirely explicable. Culture, recency of arrival, and geography all play a role. Communities that arrived centuries ago will not have identical outcomes to those that arrived this year. Groups with different priorities will produce different results.Narratives of disadvantage generate sympathy, shape public opinion, and justify policy. Entire systems of grants, programs, and institutional priorities operate on the assumption that certain groups are persistently marginalized.For these systems to continue, that assumption must be maintained. Grievances are identified, elevated, and framed as ongoing. Minute historical incidents are kept in circulation and projected into the present. Guilt is induced, and from that guilt comes leverage — whether in funding, policy, or immigration itself..A population that believes others are being wronged will accept policies it otherwise would not. It will tolerate pressure on housing, infrastructure, and social cohesion under the impression that it is participating in something morally necessary.But there are limits. A nation can only bear so much guilt. The burden of an indefinite number of groups, each with claims that must be atoned for and accommodated. Pity begins to wear thin. In time, it gives way to frustration.People are beginning to notice the contradiction. They see a country whose population continues to grow, whose opportunities continue to draw people in. Opportunities that they lack. At the same time, they are told that this same country is disadvantaging these newcomers. If Canada were the country the media and academia claim it to be, it would not be the country the world flocks to.As long as Canadians are told that they bear the weight of past misdeeds against others, there will be pressure to admit more, accommodate more, and concede more. Immigration is framed as a moral obligation rather than a national decision. It is time to stop pitying others and begin respecting ourselves.Connor Shaw is a Saskatchewan-based writer who is seeking practical solutions for wide-spanning issues facing the country.

SHAW: Canada is one of the most desired countries on Earth — so why are we told it's systemically racist?

Related Stories