Canada

Five years ago, on May 25, 2020, Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in the United States and set off international protests against anti-Black racism and police violence. This was supposed to be a turning point in the fight against racism. Institutional leaders across Canada pledged to address anti-Black racism. It began with statements of solidarity that morphed into task forces, initiatives and strategic plans which permeated almost every sector and level of government. The federal government has since committed $45 million to an anti-racism strategy, which promises to focus on how anti-Black racism and the unequal treatment of Black people is ingrained in our society. As well, nearly 50 universities and colleges have committed to promoting the academic flourishing of Black students, staff and faculty by signing what’s known as the Scarborough Charter. And yet, as hostility against equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) gains momentum and spreads across Canada — and as a full-blown EDI-backlash is dismantling civil rights throughout the U.S. — Black Canadian scholars are growing increasingly fearful that these minimal commitments are being abandoned. The electoral platform of the Conservative Party of Canada was rife with dog-whistle rhetoric about “ending wokeism” and even though the party ultimately did not form government, the constituency for a return to explicit and continual institutional discrimination is growing by the day. Moreover, the return of Parliament may mean a resumption of hearings in the House of Commons about the criteria for awarding federal funding for research excellence in Canada. The hearings have largely focused on claims by university faculty called as witnesses that the criteria related to research funding for social and natural sciences, humanities, engineering and health are unfair as they seek to address extensive inequities in funding competitions. Multiple witnesses, without concrete evidence, accused recent EDI initiatives meant to support women, racialized minorities and other equity-seeking groups of lowering standards of research. The hearings gave voice to easily debunked, yet often-heard rhetoric pitting diversity and research excellence against each other. These arguments suggest that an emphasis on equity “divert(s) attention” from the quality of projects or equates EDI considerations to a “religion” where being a white man is an original sin. The orientation of the new government towards economic priorities may mean that committees and hearings such as these veer even further away from equity-oriented work.