daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 41,778
- Points
- 1,160
Canadian Armed Forces apologizes for racial discrimination and harassment
- Thread starter daftandbarmy
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 3,051
- Points
- 1,040
I mean they aren’t wrong about systemic racism existing. It still exists and permeates our whole society. How else can you have a two tier system where some based on birth are granted more rights and freedoms than anyone else and everyone else can never have the same amount of legal rights and freedoms?
For sure there was systemic racism in CAF. It was reflective of society, sure, but it was there and it was poisonous. CAF as an institution has always had a need to do right by its people, and for a long time a lot of people weren’t done right by because they didn’t look like me, or like a lot of us here. Historically, plenty of CAF members were mistreated due to race.
In the vein of “you did the best you knew how to do, and when you knew better, you did better”- it’s right to take ownership of an historical wrong, acknowledge it, and pledge to be better. The CDS’ apology on behalf of the institution is an appropriate and necessary step in this ownership. Similar to comparable historical mistreatment of women, or of LGBT members. I’m out now, but to best of my recollection all CAF members were supposed to be treated equally as basic human, and assessed for the quality of their work for CAF.
I’ve never understood people who take a deserved apology as a sign of weakness.
In the vein of “you did the best you knew how to do, and when you knew better, you did better”- it’s right to take ownership of an historical wrong, acknowledge it, and pledge to be better. The CDS’ apology on behalf of the institution is an appropriate and necessary step in this ownership. Similar to comparable historical mistreatment of women, or of LGBT members. I’m out now, but to best of my recollection all CAF members were supposed to be treated equally as basic human, and assessed for the quality of their work for CAF.
I’ve never understood people who take a deserved apology as a sign of weakness.
As a PoC, I watched it and felt nothing but pride. It's a sign of strength that the CAF can admit mistakes and seek to be better. And as presenters pointed out during the ceremony itself, nobody serves for decades and acts as ambassadors for institutions they don't believe in.
Immature folks who build their identity around what they think of as strength as opposed to real strength and you know, caring for your people. I never seen any of these type of people be anything but toxic while in uniform. The louder they are, the more useless, generally speaking.
- Reaction score
- 10,785
- Points
- 1,160
It sounded like a few people were sobbing in the audience. The apology clearly impacted some that obviously needed to hear it.
Releasing racists, and other toxic people from the military is still very difficult. It takes years, and a lot of people are harmed along the way.
The apology should come with an action (not just an action plan) to more aggressively go after the these toxic people.
Releasing racists, and other toxic people from the military is still very difficult. It takes years, and a lot of people are harmed along the way.
The apology should come with an action (not just an action plan) to more aggressively go after the these toxic people.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 41,778
- Points
- 1,160
Yeah, it was noticed by more than a few ...
Oh, Canada! Defense chief crying on stage is pitiful virtue signaling – sending the wrong signal
Canada’s top defense officer cried on stage this week.
On Thursday, General Jennie Carignan, Canada’s first female Chief of the Defence Staff, the highest rank in the Canadian Armed Forces, stood in Ottawa and issued a tearful apology for what she called “systemic racism” inside the Canadian Armed Forces.
She wept as she declared that “racism has no place” in the military and promised a long list of reforms -anti-racism training, systemic bias reviews, and the dismantling of “institutional barriers.”
Let’s be clear: No one is defending racism. But what happened on that stage wasn’t strength, but rather weakness masquerading as virtue.
This wasn’t a commander leading her troops into battle. It was a bureaucrat reading a script designed by political consultants. The apology wasn’t even required by law. It was just part of the new virtue signaling political ritual in which the armed forces bow before progressive ideology instead of projecting power.
Carignan’s tears were broadcast across Canada, praised by the CBC, The Globe and Mail, and every other outlet that mistakes emotional display for moral courage.
If Canada wants to be taken seriously on the world stage again, it needs fewer tears and more backbone.
Because when your general cries on stage, your country looks weak. And weakness, in a dangerous world, is an invitation.
Oh, Canada! Defense chief crying on stage is pitiful virtue signaling - sending the wrong signal - Suzanne Downing
Suzanne Downing is a respected journalist, editor, and commentator who has shaped Alaska’s media and political conversation for years. She previously served as editor of the Juneau Empire and as a speechwriter for Governor Sean Parnell, where her ability to communicate with clarity and purpose...
suzannedowning.com
- Reaction score
- 10,785
- Points
- 1,160
That sours the apology.
- Reaction score
- 5,905
- Points
- 1,260
Yeah, it was noticed by more than a few ...
Oh, Canada! Defense chief crying on stage is pitiful virtue signaling – sending the wrong signal
Canada’s top defense officer cried on stage this week.
On Thursday, General Jennie Carignan, Canada’s first female Chief of the Defence Staff, the highest rank in the Canadian Armed Forces, stood in Ottawa and issued a tearful apology for what she called “systemic racism” inside the Canadian Armed Forces.
She wept as she declared that “racism has no place” in the military and promised a long list of reforms -anti-racism training, systemic bias reviews, and the dismantling of “institutional barriers.”
Let’s be clear: No one is defending racism. But what happened on that stage wasn’t strength, but rather weakness masquerading as virtue.
This wasn’t a commander leading her troops into battle. It was a bureaucrat reading a script designed by political consultants. The apology wasn’t even required by law. It was just part of the new virtue signaling political ritual in which the armed forces bow before progressive ideology instead of projecting power.
Carignan’s tears were broadcast across Canada, praised by the CBC, The Globe and Mail, and every other outlet that mistakes emotional display for moral courage.
If Canada wants to be taken seriously on the world stage again, it needs fewer tears and more backbone.
Because when your general cries on stage, your country looks weak. And weakness, in a dangerous world, is an invitation.
Oh, Canada! Defense chief crying on stage is pitiful virtue signaling - sending the wrong signal - Suzanne Downing
Suzanne Downing is a respected journalist, editor, and commentator who has shaped Alaska’s media and political conversation for years. She previously served as editor of the Juneau Empire and as a speechwriter for Governor Sean Parnell, where her ability to communicate with clarity and purpose...
Sorry are we supposed to know who this rando is and care what she thinks?
No and no.
A bit of digging has her as some sort of right wing blogger from Alaska. No clue who she is and no clue why she feels she has to weigh in on any of this.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 41,778
- Points
- 1,160
Blow by blow description .... and a surprise at the end from Scott...
Publisher Scott Taylor attended 'in person' the CAF's formal apology for Racial discrimination and racism, on. Thursday October 30th and it's time to target what this apology means and where the Canadian Armed Forces go from here.
CANADIAN ARMED FORCES: Emotional Apology for Racism
Publisher Scott Taylor attended 'in person' the CAF's formal apology for Racial discrimination and racism, on. Thursday October 30th and it's time to target what this apology means and where the Canadian Armed Forces go from here.
I went through this in the late 90's then again in early 2000's. Times were much different and some attitudes were even more so.
I witnessed many acts of discrimination, sexism and the whole gauntlet of what SHARP was trying to eliminate. But it made things worse, the actual bad people went into hiding. We had a generation plus of people not only in the military but society who were trying to find their way in the new way to conducted business.
I don't know how many times I heard blatant racial terms being used. They usually came from the likable drunks of a unit and or very popular ones. I know when I cautioned many of them on their language and behavior I was chastised and made fun of. Reporting and or dealing with things to the COC at the time was as useful as trying to fill a fuel tank with a strainer. Resulted in yourself fighting for your survival in the system.
The attitudes across the Military was not in my back yard. Those people were on both sides of the fence. The racists and the PC people.
Will it ever stop, "NO" How we deal with situations can be changed. Letting people know we won't allow these and similar behaviors go unchecked is more important then eliminating. The harder you fight to eliminate a behavior the more people fight to justify theirs. The Military once again is saying great words, but without actual actions will have little results in the positive direction. In fact will cause more divide.
I witnessed many acts of discrimination, sexism and the whole gauntlet of what SHARP was trying to eliminate. But it made things worse, the actual bad people went into hiding. We had a generation plus of people not only in the military but society who were trying to find their way in the new way to conducted business.
I don't know how many times I heard blatant racial terms being used. They usually came from the likable drunks of a unit and or very popular ones. I know when I cautioned many of them on their language and behavior I was chastised and made fun of. Reporting and or dealing with things to the COC at the time was as useful as trying to fill a fuel tank with a strainer. Resulted in yourself fighting for your survival in the system.
The attitudes across the Military was not in my back yard. Those people were on both sides of the fence. The racists and the PC people.
Will it ever stop, "NO" How we deal with situations can be changed. Letting people know we won't allow these and similar behaviors go unchecked is more important then eliminating. The harder you fight to eliminate a behavior the more people fight to justify theirs. The Military once again is saying great words, but without actual actions will have little results in the positive direction. In fact will cause more divide.
- Reaction score
- 4,186
- Points
- 1,160
While on PAT platoon doing boring base upkeep work, I can distinctly remember a very black member of the Navy- a reserve PO Bosun (a Quebecker known to us as O2O for “one tough ‘ombré”) - having his skin colour ridiculed. By an army officer from Work Point. It took an incredibly filthy mouthed CWO to diffuse that and I thought for sure there was going to be a homicide. But then he asked me what reserve I was from, and that completely surprised me so I replied AOK (Aundeck Omni Kaning) thinking he meant Indian Reserve. Turns out he meant Navy reserve, and when the CWO with his shiny black boots and ridiculous looking army garrison dress turned on me and got in my face I thought I would be the one committing homicide as I was installing a fire extinguisher. I mean hell, I like to think the military is now different. None of that was anything to cry about 40 years later. We were all men, young tough men in the 80’s yes, but military service types nonetheless. Low expectations on treatment were set and met, and that you can work with.
But to be denied promotion, or sent someplace shitty due to stereotyping, that’s shitty. Not worth the CDS shedding grandma Trudeau tears and causing the ridicule directed at the institution today, but still shitty.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 41,778
- Points
- 1,160
Appalling behaviour ... and I assume he was not dealt with by his regiment ...
QV
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,631
- Points
- 1,040
This article hits right.
nationalpost.com
This past week, Gen. Jennie Carignan, Canada’s Chief of the Defence Staff, tearfully apologized for what she called “systemic racism and racial discrimination” in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). The intention was noble. Yet the sweeping assertion that the CAF is “systemically racist” demands closer scrutiny.
Such declarations, made without clear evidence or definition, risk distorting truth, undermining morale and eroding one of our most vital national institutions. Our military is not perfect, no organization is, but branding it as “systemically racist” is conceptually lazy and historically unjust.
Article content
To claim systemic racism, one must show that racial or ethnic identity consistently predicts poorer outcomes; that policies or structures inherently disadvantage specific groups. No credible data has been released to demonstrate this. The defence backgrounders accompanying the apology offered no evidence of pervasive inequality in recruitment, promotion, pay, or retention. Without transparency, the claim rests on assertion, not analysis.
Historical wrongs, such as the exclusion of Black volunteers from front-line units during early World War I are undeniable. They deserve acknowledgment and remembrance. But those injustices were addressed long ago through reforms, legislation and cultural change. To conflate them with today’s military is intellectually dishonest.
The phrase “systemic racism” implies a structural bias embedded in an institution’s very DNA. Yet the CAF operates within a rigid, codified framework. Promotions are governed by objective evaluation grids and education standards. Recruitment follows national protocols. Discipline is enforced under military law.
If outcome disparities exist, are they truly caused by discrimination, or by differing regional demographics, career choices, or retention patterns? Stretching “systemic racism” to cover any statistical difference empties the term of meaning.
Apologies of this magnitude have consequences. They shape morale, recruitment and public trust. When senior leaders tell serving members their institution is “systemically racist,” many hear that they are part of a morally corrupt system. That message alienates honourable men and women who have sacrificed deeply for their country.
The CAF depends on cohesion, on shared belief in merit, fairness and mutual respect. Once members suspect advancement is tied to identity rather than performance, professionalism erodes. When diversity becomes an end in itself, it risks supplanting the military’s true purpose: readiness, discipline and victory in combat.
Racism by individuals exists, but that is not the same as a system designed to oppress. The CAF has, in fact, been a powerful engine of integration, offering Indigenous peoples, immigrants and visible minorities pathways to education, leadership and social mobility. Its core values — duty, loyalty, integrity and courage — are colour-blind. When misconduct occurs, it is investigated and corrected. That is the opposite of systemic racism.
Importing the polarized language of identity politics into the military does not advance justice; it weakens unity. Canada’s Armed Forces need confident leadership grounded in truth, not slogans. If inequalities exist, let them be addressed through professionalism, mentorship and opportunity, ensuring that every Canadian can rise as far as talent and effort allow.
The CAF remains one of the few institutions where discipline, honour and sacrifice still matter. Let us defend those traditions, not dilute them through ideological guilt.
Since Confederation, over 118,000 Canadian service members have given their lives and 500,000 have been wounded. That is not the record of a racist institution — it is the legacy of a disciplined, professional and honourable force that reflects the best of Canada.
That is a legacy worth defending.
Special to National Post
Dr. Bryan Brulotte is a Canadian business leader and philanthropist. He served for four decades as an officer in the Canadian Armed Forces, both overseas and in Canada. He is the founder of MaxSys, one of the country’s largest HR firms, and currently serves as Chairman of Sterling-Trust Capital. He recently completed his tenure as Honorary Colonel of the Governor General’s Foot Guards.
Bryan Brulotte: The Canadian Armed Forces are not systemically racist
Importing the polarized language of identity politics into the military does not advance justice; it weakens unity
nationalpost.com
This past week, Gen. Jennie Carignan, Canada’s Chief of the Defence Staff, tearfully apologized for what she called “systemic racism and racial discrimination” in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). The intention was noble. Yet the sweeping assertion that the CAF is “systemically racist” demands closer scrutiny.
Such declarations, made without clear evidence or definition, risk distorting truth, undermining morale and eroding one of our most vital national institutions. Our military is not perfect, no organization is, but branding it as “systemically racist” is conceptually lazy and historically unjust.
Article content
To claim systemic racism, one must show that racial or ethnic identity consistently predicts poorer outcomes; that policies or structures inherently disadvantage specific groups. No credible data has been released to demonstrate this. The defence backgrounders accompanying the apology offered no evidence of pervasive inequality in recruitment, promotion, pay, or retention. Without transparency, the claim rests on assertion, not analysis.
Historical wrongs, such as the exclusion of Black volunteers from front-line units during early World War I are undeniable. They deserve acknowledgment and remembrance. But those injustices were addressed long ago through reforms, legislation and cultural change. To conflate them with today’s military is intellectually dishonest.
The phrase “systemic racism” implies a structural bias embedded in an institution’s very DNA. Yet the CAF operates within a rigid, codified framework. Promotions are governed by objective evaluation grids and education standards. Recruitment follows national protocols. Discipline is enforced under military law.
If outcome disparities exist, are they truly caused by discrimination, or by differing regional demographics, career choices, or retention patterns? Stretching “systemic racism” to cover any statistical difference empties the term of meaning.
Apologies of this magnitude have consequences. They shape morale, recruitment and public trust. When senior leaders tell serving members their institution is “systemically racist,” many hear that they are part of a morally corrupt system. That message alienates honourable men and women who have sacrificed deeply for their country.
The CAF depends on cohesion, on shared belief in merit, fairness and mutual respect. Once members suspect advancement is tied to identity rather than performance, professionalism erodes. When diversity becomes an end in itself, it risks supplanting the military’s true purpose: readiness, discipline and victory in combat.
Racism by individuals exists, but that is not the same as a system designed to oppress. The CAF has, in fact, been a powerful engine of integration, offering Indigenous peoples, immigrants and visible minorities pathways to education, leadership and social mobility. Its core values — duty, loyalty, integrity and courage — are colour-blind. When misconduct occurs, it is investigated and corrected. That is the opposite of systemic racism.
Importing the polarized language of identity politics into the military does not advance justice; it weakens unity. Canada’s Armed Forces need confident leadership grounded in truth, not slogans. If inequalities exist, let them be addressed through professionalism, mentorship and opportunity, ensuring that every Canadian can rise as far as talent and effort allow.
The CAF remains one of the few institutions where discipline, honour and sacrifice still matter. Let us defend those traditions, not dilute them through ideological guilt.
Since Confederation, over 118,000 Canadian service members have given their lives and 500,000 have been wounded. That is not the record of a racist institution — it is the legacy of a disciplined, professional and honourable force that reflects the best of Canada.
That is a legacy worth defending.
Special to National Post
Dr. Bryan Brulotte is a Canadian business leader and philanthropist. He served for four decades as an officer in the Canadian Armed Forces, both overseas and in Canada. He is the founder of MaxSys, one of the country’s largest HR firms, and currently serves as Chairman of Sterling-Trust Capital. He recently completed his tenure as Honorary Colonel of the Governor General’s Foot Guards.
