This is a collaborative zine, definitely a work in progress. We (the authors) are anarchists who live in areas that will likely end up on the proposed Alto high-speed rail route in Eastern and Central Ontario. Some of us live rurally and some live in Peterborough, the one small city that will likely have a train stop and will be affected in many ways.
We wrote this for the 2026 Constellation Anarchist Festival in Montreal with the goal of connecting with other anarchists who are thinking about opposing high-speed rail and/or other megaprojects in our region. We also wanted to start a conversation, make other anarchists aware of how sweeping the Alto proposal is, and hear from others who might have ideas about how we should proceed or experiences with similar struggles. People where we live are really fired up about this issue and this text is also just part of our process of figuring out how we as individuals want to engage with the proposed Alto High-Speed Rail project and the various anti-Alto groups and movements that are popping up in our area. We would especially like to hear more about what this opposition looks like in Quebec.
Some parts of this text are more finished than others, and we definitely still have more questions than answers, more research to do and more thinking and analyzing to work on. For now we’ve chosen to focus on a few of the reasons we as anarchists are interested in engaging with this project, and an exploration of who the players are and/or will be in this conflict. We hope to at least start a conversation and connect with others who are thinking about Alto or about whether and how to fight massive projects like it.
Alto plans to run from Toronto to Quebec City, with two route options through eastern Ontario
The Project
In February 2025, then-PM Justin Trudeau announced the Toronto-Quebec City High Speed Rail Project, and established a federal Crown corporation under the name of Alto to own and oversee the project’s “vision and planning.”
Alto is planning to construct ~1000km of electrified track dedicated to passenger trains operating at up to 300 km/hr. At a projected cost of 90 billion dollars, Alto would be the most expensive infrastructure project in Canadian history.
The project will require a 60 m wide tract of land all the way along its route. For reference, this is 2/3 of what is allocated to Highway 401 at its widest point in Southern Ontario.
Stations are only planned for Toronto, Peterborough, Ottawa, Montreal, Laval, Trois Rivières, and Quebec City.
The initial phase of public consultations was completed in April 2026 and a “precise corridor” is expected to be announced in the Fall of 2026. Landowners in South Eastern Ontario have already been notified of exploratory visits to their properties and expropriations could begin next year.
The fenced-off Alto corridor will be 2/3 the size of Highway 401 at its widest point in Toronto
The Cadence Consortium
Alto will be designed, built, operated and maintained by a private consortium calling itself Cadence.
Members include:
CDPQ Infra: Lead developer of Cadence, owned by the Quebec’s public pension fund
AtkinsRéalis (formerly SNC Lavalin): Large Canadian engineering and construction firm, high-profile scandals tied to the Liberal Party of Canada
SNCF Voyageurs – French state-owned operator of the TGV (high speed rail network)
Keolis: French public transit operator owned by SNCF and CDPQ
SYSTRA: Engineering and consulting firm owned by French rail operators SNCF and RATP
Air Canada: Canada’s largest airline with logistical and intermodal integration expertise
Timeline
2022: The Government of Canada announced The High Frequency Rail Project between Toronto and Quebec City, and established a dedicated Crown corporation under the leadership of Via Rail.
February 2025: HFR project is converted into high speed rail project and Alto is established.
March 2025: Cadence is selected to be Alto’s private partner. Mark Carney becomes Prime Minister, replacing Justin Trudeau.
June 2025: Carney Government passes Bill C-5 “One Canadian Economy Act.Part of this bill empowers federal cabinet to designate “projects of national interest” and creates a “Major Projects Office,” intended to fast-track said projects.
January-April 2026: First round of public consultations along the possible corridors – this is the first time most people in the affected regions became aware of the project, leading to the first large-scale public campaigns to oppose the project.
March 2026: The “High-Speed Rail Network Act” is passed with the federal budget, exempting Alto from certain regulatory processes in order to speed up project approval, and granting Alto extraordinary powers in order to take control of privately-owned land along the corridor.
2029-2030: Targeted start of construction of track section between Ottawa and Montreal, billed as the project’s “test phase.”
Early 2040s: Targeted completion of project.
We oppose this project for many reasons both personal and ideological.
Alto would bring immense ecological devastation to forests, wetlands, fields, rivers. It would ruin the soil and water along its route and downstream. All this destruction from now to 2040 when we’re already staring into an abyss of ecological catastrophe.
Alto would be a major attack on local wildlife through disruption of migratory paths, habitat destruction and disturbance.
Alto is a land grab. It represents a massive colonial expansion materially through land expropriation, and likely the expansion of police and surveillance infrastructure along its path. It also represents a new colonial expansion in the realm of hearts-and-minds and culture. High-speed rail has long been posited as an important “nation-building” and “modernizing” project for Canada, and trains have always been an important part of Canada’s expansionism both physically and on the level of the idea of Canada.
Alto would make any small city that gets a stop (currently Peterborough and Trois-Rivières) into commuter cities, accelerating gentrification in those places and making them even less habitable for poor and working people who live there already.
The Major Projects Office
Liberal Carney government announcing Bill C-15
The MPO, headed by former Trans Mountain CEO Dawn Farrell, is a new body created by the Liberal Carney government to designate major infrastructure projects in the “national interest” and push them through quickly (2 year timeline).
Its purpose is to centralize approval authority in order to neutralize resistance to “nation-building” projects and minimize bureaucratic red tape. The MPO signals a decisive shift away from the Trudeau years of apologies, crying and endless sham consultations.
Alto is a very classically Liberal government megaproject: electrification/greenwashing, transit, developer-friendly. Others on the list include a mix of infrastructure required to support other extractivist projects (mining “critical minerals” and transporting oil and gas via pipelines) and green energy projects like large-scale carbon capture and wind farms.
The MPO is meant to make us feel like resisting these projects is impossible. But as we engage with the megaproject in our own backyard, we want to consider the opportunities to connect with and extend solidarity to those affected by the other megaprojects that the state is attempting to ram through.
Ecology
We are already experiencing ecological collapse. Extreme weather, destructive winds, torrential rain followed by drought, massive forest fires. Feedback loops devastate entwined ecologies and produce waves of further devastation. Water is also warming up, becoming too polluted with persistent chemicals, pharmaceuticals and microplastics. Soil is eroding and becoming depleted of nutrients necessary to sustain vegetation, which animals (including humans) depend on. Species are going extinct due to habitats destroyed by the damaging sprawl of colonial, capitalist society and infrastructure.
Within the Left and anarchism, there exists a kind of a green urbanist imaginary: walkable, dense neighbourhoods; green-energy-powered smart cities; accessible public transit; fruit trees lining the streets; cycling infrastructure; the perfect population size to benefit from supply/distribution efficiencies. The green urbanist imaginary is premised on green technocracy, whether grassroots, decentralized, or centralized.
Aside from entrenched culture-war camps, the biggest barrier to liberals, Leftists and anarchists opposing Alto is the misapprehension that it is an eco-friendly megaproject. Some imagine that building politicians and corporate commuters an electrified high-speed train will reduce carbon emissions. But that doesn’t account for the embodied carbon in the massive amounts of concrete required to build the track, the increase in new development spurred by the train, or the increased traffic due to detouring around the walled-off track. Not to mention that accounting for ecological devastation by counting carbon emissions is hopelessly inadequate and bleak.
Beyond that, another lie Alto’s proponents are trying to sell us is that the sparkly green electrified future can be powered by wind and solar. Electrification will require land-grabbing hydroelectric projects or potentially world-ending nuclear power, with its uranium mining and radioactive waste. Hydro and nuclear alike are extremely destructive to Indigenous lands, waterways and communities, in particular. There is nothing “clean” about sacrifice zones for the sake of a high speed train.
Canada
Canada itself is a megaproject. This megaproject is a settler colony founded on the genocide and dispossession of Indigenous Peoples and lands, primarily for the sake of resource extraction. This enclosure and extraction of so-called “natural resources” leaves a trail of social and ecological devastation in its wake. Canada also, like all states, expropriates agency from a mystified or estranged mass “electorate.”
Alto will grab a lot of actual land, a 60 m tract all the way along the Quebec City-Toronto corridor. This is the most densely settled area of Canada as well as home to a number of thriving and fighting Indigenous communities. It’s the historic “heart” of Canada, where business and government live. This corridor is already relatively easy to travel across by bus, train, car or plane. Making it even easier does not fulfill a real need – it’s about ideology.
Alto wants to sell us the idea that the space in between urban centres is empty, that we should feel like the physical world is as frictionless as the online world, that someone in Toronto could be neighbours with someone in Ottawa or Quebec City. That we are not rooted in specific places anymore, that living in one place is a thing of the past and we can actually “live” alongside whomever we “belong” with. The business class of Toronto, Montreal, and Quebec can all be one thing. So, we imagine, can the artists of all of those places, the architects of all of those places, the weirdos and radicals and youth of all of those places. We can think of a friend or a meeting or a project somewhere thousands of kilometers away tonight and be there with them tomorrow morning, home again by dinnertime. That the actual train may be too expensive for most to afford, and that the actual land in between Toronto and Quebec has people living on it already is irrelevant because it’s not about who will actually use the train – likely only the business class! – it’s about selling a story. This is the way with all megaprojects – their proposals sound ridiculous and impractical, so they need myths to prop them up. The actual purpose of the Alto project is the profits that will be generated by its construction.
There is also the matter of myths the state tells about itself. In Canada this has always been a challenge because its claimed land mass is so large. The idea of railroads has always been a major way that Canada sells itself as a coherent, reasonable state. John A. MacDonald’s Canada Pacific Railroad manifested Canada in the minds of many from sea to sea, even when the vast majority of that land was not settled by Europeans or controlled by any government. Alto sells us the idea that Canada is in fact a modern, rational, urban state “like those in Europe” when in reality it is basically still a resource colony, a playground for mining and forestry corporations propped up by the myth of an inclusive, liberal place for settlers to live.
Canada can be experienced as complete or total, but it’s not. Its attempts at totality are always unfulfilled. It’s a project that exists in tension with the resistance it faces. For example, the survival and ongoing resistance of Indigenous Peoples in the context of ongoing genocide. A project as ridiculous as Alto may or may not get built, and the moves people (including anarchists) make to oppose it will be an important determining factor in that.
Commuter Towns and Gentrification
Transportation infrastructure has contributed to rapid gentrification and increasing unaffordability in a lot of towns and cities.
Consider Hamilton, a city that was once relatively affordable, a working-class city, now a desirable location for commuters and totally unaffordable for most people. Light rail and real estate marketing have brought it into the orbit of Toronto to the extent that we now say GTHA (“Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area”) instead of GTA.
Politicians have been promising for years to connect Peterborough by rail to Toronto. Previously, this was conceived as a Go Train connection that could link commuter workers and travelers to the Lakeshore East line.
Peterborough is a fairly small city that has seen an explosion of homelessness and now dire poverty since 2020. During the pandemic, real estate drastically increased in value as folks with stable incomes and newly-virtualized work responsibilities from big-city Ontario turned their gaze to less densely populated areas with houses for sale a lot cheaper than in the big city. With investment properties, or properties intended to be shared with residential tenants, this put pressure on tenants as well. As real estate increased in value and price, the terms of these mortgages necessitated higher rents to make purchase viable. The new purchasers required vacant possession and the tenants had to go…
At the same time, working people on better-than-nothing wages, folks on social assistance, may have found themselves struggling to meet ends. The province allowed a break for paying rent and a moratorium on evictions. But then the moratorium ended and those months of back-rent became due. There was a proliferation of evictions for arrears, but also landlord’s own-use, subdivision/renovation, etc. Vacancy rates have now increased, meaning that apartments have been freed up, but they are not affordable and homelessness now seems like a permanent feature.
Politicians and capitalists love a rail connection for Peterborough for the very reasons that anarchists and activist types should hate it. It could make Peterborough a viable, green-space tourist destination for GTA folks to spend weekend money. It could also make Peterborough viable for people who are professionally employed in the GTA to commute to work.
The idea of Alto takes this idea and makes it even more threatening because it could make it viable for politicians and professionals who work in Toronto or Ottawa to live in Peterborough and commute. Alto is being compared to VIA Rail, which is not even affordable, and being conceived as a green alternative to jet travel.
Whether it causes local-regional suburban development sprawl, skyrocketing real-estate prices, or gentrification of the rental housing stock, the impact would be a trickle-down of displacement due to unaffordable rents and increasingly unaffordable cost of living generally for those who currently live here. We don’t know who else will be affected in this way yet, and we especially don’t understand if this will have a similar impact in Quebec, but we suspect that any city that got a stop on the train would rapidly become a tourist and commuter city, the next Guelph or Hamilton.
Anti-Alto Forces
In rural Eastern Ontario, where some of us live, opposition to Alto has become a virtual consensus during the last four months of public consultations, almost regardless of political affiliation. Heterogenous Facebook groups have formed in every township, environmental organizations have mobilized their members, demonstrations have occurred in the middle of nowhere, and municipal councils have passed resolutions opposing the project in its current form. In our limited experience living in this region, we have never seen this level of concern or mobilization around any other issue.
No Alto demonstration at a rural intersection in Camden East, Ontario
The primary grievance being aired is definitely centred around landowners (especially farmers) threatened with expropriation. Of course, this makes the movement vulnerable to capture by the Conservative Party and/or the far right.
There is also a significant bloc of people who are primarily motivated by environmental concerns about impacts to land, water and wildlife. While these concerns better align with an anarchist position against Alto, established environmental groups (even grassroots ones) are more vulnerable to pacification through the false promises of “consultation” and other “official channels.”
There are also various NIMBY groups pushing alternate routes, speeds or plans. For example the “Coalition For Better Rail” is advocating for a route along the 401 corridor, potentially with more stops to “serve” more cities. The City of Kingston is calling for a similar plan because they would like a stop in their municipality. Alto has said that such a route is not possible and is not being considered.
Tractor demonstration in Chute a Blondeau
The Rural-Urban Divide and the Far Right
It’s no accident that this project would cost 10s of thousands of dollars per Canadian citizen and yet benefit only a fraction of the population of 3-4 cities along the Quebec-Windsor corridor. The urban-rural divide and the regional “alienation” experienced by Canadians outside of that corridor are some of the oldest stories in Canadian politics. Since its inception, Canada has been a struggle by elites from Quebec, Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto to keep the rural people in between them and in the vast “rest of the country” looking and acting like willing participants in the story of Canada so that the resources they live alongside and on top of can continue to be extracted. That this is now a talking point of the political right and Alberta oil enthusiasts does not make it any less true. In fact, the Canadian nation-building/resource-extracting machine has long benefited from the idea that it is urban and its opponents are rural, conservative and backward.
Liberal elites from Ontario and Quebec” are both the strawman political opponent of Conservative movements past and present and the actual people behind the Alto project. Unfortunately for us, this makes opposition to the project appear to be the natural domain of Conservatives, and especially of what remains of the populist, libertarian and proto-fascist movements and communities that emerged during the first few years of the COVID-19 pandemic. These people are experiencing something that many anarchists and radicals know well, the emptiness felt in the years after a movement peak. They are itching for something to do, disillusioned by/bored of the idea that backing Pierre Poillievre’s Conservative Party is the right thing to do next, excited to use newly-gained organizing skills learned during the convoy movement, fired up about land rights and opposition to land expropriation in general, and pissed off already at the current government, which is championing the Alto project. Many of them also live in Eastern and Central Ontario, where the convoy movement was strong, and are rural landowners who stand to gain absolutely nothing, and in some cases actually lose their own land to Alto.
The so-called Freedom Convoy against COVID mandates peaked in Winter 2022
Of course there are liberals and leftists in rural Canada, even in the whitest communities. There are longtime land-owning families who don’t fit the stereotype of rural conservatism and there are more recent transplants from cities who now suddenly care about protecting rural land because they live there. There are many environmentalists who live there because they love nature or have come to love nature because they live there. But there are also a lot of conservatives, because a lot of them are reactionary landowners and a lot of them see that Liberals and the mainstream left in Canada only care about the interests of people in the largest cities. The push for high-speed rail and the constant talk about “electoral reform,” which would take voting power away from the rural right and put it in the hands of Canada’s urban (presumed liberal) majority are two of the promises that best demonstrate the Liberal Party’s total lack of interest in gaining back rural voters. They’ve literally been abandoned by the Liberal Party and often by urban progressive movements too, and now it looks like high-speed rail, which for a long time looked like a total pipe dream thrown around more to signal liberal values than to actually build any train tracks, might actually get built in their back yards. Conspiracy theories about 15-minute cities being fed to Conservatives and the vaccine-hesitant by Meta’s algorithms aren’t helping either.
Land ownership is a terrible basis for a political identity. The land does not and should not actually belong to white settlers and it’s not surprising that calls for governments to “back off my land” are left to the political right. But neither does small-scale land-ownership by farmers and other rural residents of this type make someone “the enemy.” Their identities are neither the problem nor the solution, and their desire to not have the land they live and farm on expropriated for a train to rush business travellers from Toronto to Montreal is valid. The political right has expanded its base in Canada in ways that 6 years ago seemed unimaginable to many of us, and as people who are also settlers and also live in these areas it does not make sense for us to abandon the entire context in which we live simply because the people there are more conservative than liberal. To do so will only help the Trumpist, populist and proto-fascist project that currently occupies many of our opposition movements. We would suggest that Liberals who have the capital and capacity to actually build megaprojects are greater enemies than misguided rural conservatives and the rank-and-file of the convoy movement anyway. Plus the train is a stupid idea and it must be possible to oppose it on our own terms, and perhaps connect with new friends and neighbours who can still be nudged away from the myth that they have to identify with conservative politics if they wish to continue living where they live.
Closing Thoughts, Open Questions
One of the main question we’re asking ourselves as anarchists is to what extent should we channel our energies into engaging and intervening with the existing opposition vs. developing a parallel struggle with other anarchists and radicals.
If we do engage with citizen or environmental groups, what can lead to more solidaristic and liberatory positions and projects? For example, linking Alto to other megaprojects being resisted by indigenous land defenders, framing the project as extractivism, etc.
What will happen to properties targeted for expropriation? If they are unsellable/removed from capitalist circulation or speculatively purchased by Alto and sit vacant for years, what opportunities might that present for us?
What have other anarchist struggles against HSR looked like around the world? How can we learn from those struggles while acknowledging very different contexts?
What did resistance look like to other very large government projects in the same regions, like Highway 401, Mirabel airport, the Trent-Severn Waterway, the Saint Lawrence Seaway…
How can we keep track of, if not join, existing opposition movements, both to see when they have potential and join in and to keep tabs on the fascists and populists who are definitely treating this as an opportunity?
How can we best counter progressive urbanists and techno-utopians who are supporting the train on grounds that may appear “of the left”?
The authors can be reached at friction@riseup.net
People have been fighting a high speed rail line in Italy’s Susa Valley for more than three decades.
This text was produced by the Montréal Antifasciste Collective and printed in zine format to be distributed for a voluntary contribution at the Constellation Anarchist Festival in Montréal on May 16 and 17, 2026.
On the international stage, Russia’s war of aggression is bogged down in Ukraine; the Israeli government, controlled by the country’s most fanatical elements, has carried out a genocide in full view of the entire world, taking advantage of the active complicity of the United States and the pitiful inaction of the rest of the Western world; seventy-seven million Americans re-elected a fascist pedophile rapist as president, plunging their country and the entire world into a state of chronic instability, of which the brutal Israeli-American aggression in Iran and Lebanon is merely the most recent grotesque manifestation. At the same time, the caste of technofascist oligarchs has tightened its grip on the instruments of algorithmic capitalism, including “artificial intelligence,” the consequences of which are impossible to predict.
Almost everywhere, far-right political movements have continued to gain ground, including the Rassemblement national (RN) in France, Reform UK in the United Kingdom, and the AfD in Germany. Giorgia Meloni’s “post-fascist” government is firmly in control in Italy. The chainsaw-wielding nutjob, Javier Milei, was elected on an ultra-neoliberal platform in Argentina. In India, the Hindu supremacist Narendra Modi has been in power for over a decade. And on it goes.
The far right is not on the verge of power in Canada or Québec, but its influence is nonetheless clearly felt in both the political arena and mainstream culture, including across the media landscape—notably on Radio X and in the Québecor media group—while militant “alternative” media outlets are proliferating online.
At the federal level, Pierre Poilièvre’s national-populist gambit backfired in the wake of Donald Trump’s election in the United States. The Canadian electorate opted for a safe bet by re-electing the Liberal Party, now led by a career banker presenting himself as the savior of the people in the face of the Trumpist threat. Since coming to power, however, Mark Carney has consistently confirmed the resolutely conservative nature of his government, as evidenced by the series of defectors from the Conservative Party of Canada, who delivered him a parliamentary majority. At the grassroots level, white supremacist movements are more numerous and better organized in English Canada than they have been in at least a generation, with the proliferation of “nationalist” organizations, including Diagolon, the Second Sons, and the neo-Nazi network of Active Clubs.
In 2023, we observed that small-scale far-right groups (Atalante Québec, Fédération des Québécois de souche, La Meute, Storm Alliance, Soldiers of Odin, etc.) were on the decline in Québec, but that, on the other hand—or, more precisely, because—many of the ideas put forward by the far right regarding immigration and identity were being echoed increasingly explicitly in the rhetoric of the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) government and the opposition Parti Québécois (PQ), as well as in the commentary of certain media outlets. This major trend, which reflects a “cultural” consolidation of the conservative nationalist bloc—coupled with a constant and sustained demonization of progressive ideas—has not abated but has, in fact, proliferated.
Éric Duhaime’s Parti conservateur du Québec, for its part, espouses a reactionary conservatism focused primarily on dismantling public services and preserving the material privileges of a middle class preoccupied with its own narrow interests. Using “autonomist” arguments, it advances ethnic and identitarian nationalist positions, with a particularly Islamophobic bias. This is often done in the name of the secular majority, demanding that this majority’s will take precedence in the name of a democracy that tramples minority rights, using the infamous notwithstanding clause if necessary.
The visible—and completely mainstream—face of this far right is the conservative/reactionary identitarian nationalism embodied by figures like Mathieu Bock-Côté (MBC). Bock-Côté has had considerable influence with the CAQ government throughout its two terms and will likely continue to influence any potential PQ government. He and others like him flood the newspapers and television programs of the Québecor group with a steady stream of petty editorializing that blames immigration for all the ills that are objectively attributable to the decisions of the political class over the past few decades, repeating like a mantra that Québec has exceeded its “capacity to welcome” immigrants.
Immediately below the surface—on social media platforms, in podcasts, and in private chat rooms—this (putatively) civic and liberal brand of conservative nationalism takes on a more belligerent form, morphing into ethnic nationalism tinged with xenophobia, Islamophobia, anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment, anti-feminism, and increasingly explicit white supremacist views.
At the risk of repeating ourselves, it is, as a result, best not to view the far right as a monolithic bloc with clearly defined boundaries but, rather, as a heterogeneous ecosystem within which a spectrum of radicalism exists.
The chic and fashionable conservative nationalism of the carefully coiffed MBC and his followers spills over into ethnic nationalism (ethnonationalism), which almost always includes an element of “scientific racism,” leading it to feed into various forms of bona fide fascism, including, in extreme cases, neo-Nazism and accelerationist nihilism with genocidal tendencies. It is important to understand that all of these categories exist in one form or another in Québec, that there is a significant degree of overlap among them, and that it is impossible to predict the extent to which any one of them might grow at any point or the speed at which that growth might occur.
As a gateway, the “youth” organization Nouvelle Alliance (NA) now represents the identitarian nationalist/ethnic faction: an extension of the rhetoric of MBC and others like him, largely stripped of its worst verbal excesses. This does not prevent its activists from regularly pushing the limits of what is acceptable, with repeated references to “migration overload” and other euphemisms or dog whistles that implicitly echo the “great replacement” conspiracy theory. NA openly advocates for a national priority (or “preference”) based on the defense of the interests of the historical French-Canadian majority, projecting in its propaganda a retrofuturistic image of an idealized independent Québec, where this majority can impose its cultural will and, above all, its ethnodemographic dominance unchallenged. In this context, immigration is de facto presented as a threat to the survival of the French-Canadian nation.
This brings us to the “alternative news” project Nomos-TV and the online community that has formed around its main hosts. Proudly ethnonationalist and very often openly racist (see the Montréal Antifasciste article exposing the violent language used in its private forum), the Nomos project serves, in a certain sense, as a conduit between the various factions of the local far right. Its primary host, Alexandre Cormier-Denis (see the article Montréal Antifasciste dedicated to him and excerpts about him below), is undoubtedly an heir to the neofascist tradition that, since the 1970s, has worked to culturally rehabilitate historical far-right themes. This tradition adopts a so-called “metapolitical” approach, with a view to eventually seizing political power. Is it necessary to point out that this is precisely the dynamic we have been witnessing at an accelerated rate for several years now in Europe, the United States, and even here at home?
Acting as useful idiots, many public figures choose let this project profit from their renown, even inviting the hosts onto their platforms. This is particularly true of Radio X in Québec City, where Nomos-TV’s Philippe Plamondon and Sébastien de Crèvecoeur host a show, of Richard Martineau, who regularly shares their propaganda on his social media, and of Benoît Dutrizac, who has invited individuals clearly associated with the far right—including Alexandre Cormier-Denis—onto his QUB Radio show.
There is also a whole constellation of influencers, “alternative” media outlets, and lesser-known podcasters who are carving out a place for themselves in this ecosystem and constantly feeding into Islamophobic, xenophobic, and transphobic echo chambers. The combined influence of all of these actors is helping to significantly expand the far-right sphere, amplifying the voices of its most strident spokespeople, and driving this movement forward to the point where many claim they are winning the “battle of ideas” against the left.
Coming full circle, based on a cynical calculation, some politicians no longer hesitate to court the segment of the electorate that is influenced by the far right. This is particularly true of Paul Saint-Pierre Plamondon, who agreed to a Rebel News interview in April (see the relevant excerpt below). Even former members of the National Assembly and ministers from his own party secretly worry that their leader maintains “a troubling ideological closeness to Mathieu Bock-Côté,” according to Québec political analyst Michel David.
Finally, on the fringes of this toxic ecosystem, we find groups like the Frontenac Active Club, which openly espouses white supremacy and shamelessly revels in neo-Nazi ideology. The Active Clubs, like the White Lives Matter network that preceded them, as well as the entire constellation of Canadian “nationalist” groupuscules, e.g., Second Sons, Diagolon, and the Loyalist Pioneers, clearly fit into a continuum of North American neo-Nazism (see, for example, the Patriot Front). These groups combine bonehead codes (white nationalism 1) with those of the alt-right (white nationalism 2) and certain elements of European identitarianism, similar in style to the now-defunct Atalante Québec groupuscule, which was linked to the so-called “revolutionary nationalist” tradition.
The ideas and values of the far right are so widespread today that it is impossible for us to cover everything in detail. We could, for example, have discussed at length Romain Gagnon (eng.), a racist and masculinist author and the vice-president of the Sceptiques du Québec, for whom he writes articles denouncing women wearing the hijab and the alleged Islamic “ideological entryism” within the Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec. The Sceptiques du Québec’s intolerance toward trans identities is so severe that the association was expelled in 2022 from the Fédération des Initiatives pour le Développement de l’Esprit critique et du Scepticisme Scientifique.
Without necessarily labeling these groups as “far right,” one can still observe strong tensions and intolerance toward trans people and Muslim communities within the feminist collective Pour le droit des femmes (PDF) and the Réseau éducation, sexe et identité (RÉSI), for example. Nonetheless, both these groups present themselves as progressive.
As this introduction suggests, precision and distinctions matter, and as anti-fascist activists committed to convincing as many people as possible of the reality of the danger, we would not be doing ourselves any favors by oversimplifying a complex reality or by lumping all these different actors together in an unnuanced way. In our view, it is counterproductive, for example, to label a conservative nationalist a “Nazi” as a shorthand, because this does not correspond to reality and risks blunting the semantic force of both concepts, as well as undermining the impact of our actions. Therefore, we encourage our supporters to be discerning and precise when discussing the far-right ecosystem. This is part of our goal in producing this overview.
What follows serves both as an update—three years after the publication of our last report on the state of the far right—and as an overview of the current militant far right in Québec. Furthermore, this text aims to analyze the various manifestations and repercussions of far-right themes in political circles, media commentary, and the online ideological and propaganda ecosystem.
///
An Assessment of the CAQ and Nationalist Rhetoric
The shift toward identitarian politics among a segment of Québec’s political class is nothing new. As many people see it,[i] the pro-independence movement began moving in an identitarian direction immediately following the defeat of the 1995 referendum, a trend that accelerated in the 2000s with the “reasonable accommodation” crisis, stoked for electoral gains made by Mario Dumont and the Action démocratique du Québec (ADQ), and which continued with the “Québec Charter of Values” initiative led by Bernard Drainville, then a minister in the Parti Québécois government. This shift from a more civic nationalism (“anyone who lives in Québec is a Québécois”) to a primarily ethnic nationalism (“we,” the majority of French-Canadian origin, versus “them,” the minorities) was confirmed with the victory of the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) and the implementation of its legislative agenda, which intentionally undermined a number of established rights and freedoms.
We have already demonstrated how the CAQ brought La Meute’s demands into government: this has been evident throughout its two terms in office, with the lowering of immigration thresholds and the manufactured panic over “integration capacity,” the demagogic insistence on the risks immigration allegedly poses to Québec’s social cohesion and identity, the introduction of new integration requirements, and the targeted discrimination against religious minorities under the guise of a distorted and grossly instrumentalized form of secularism through Bill 21, followed by Bill 94. For the government, every problem is seen to have a single cause: immigration. The housing crisis: immigration. Problems in schools: immigration. Sexism in Québec: immigration. Whatever it is: immigration. Is it any wonder that during the party leadership race Bernard Drainville openly referred to the “national preference,” a discriminatory concept lifted straight from the French far-right playbook? And then we have the ongoing neoliberal dismantling of social supports and the CAQ’s increasingly unabashed use of authoritarian tactics to impose its rancid agenda, particularly the use of the notwithstanding clause at the expense of fundamental individual rights.
Thanks to the constant manipulation of public opinion by certain mainstream media outlets (more on this later), and following the CAQ’s apparent successes in this regard, the issue of identity has become so central that it now often takes precedence over fundamental economic issues and largely determines the tone of debates and the direction of the parties as the next election cycle approaches. Québec’s political class in 2026 is caught up in a race to the bottom, namely, who will be the most nationalist and, among the nationalists, who will be the most reactionary. This debate completely overshadows a large number of issues of major importance for the future of the nation in question.
Of all the politicians involved in this race to the bottom, the leader of the Parti Québécois (PQ), Paul Saint-Pierre-Plamondon (PSPP), is perhaps the least subtle and the most irritating. He, who just a few years before taking the party’s helm was still extolling the virtues of openness and inclusion, has done a complete about-face and in his thirst for power is now openly courting the far-right vote. Why hold back from being racist if that’s the way to become the premier? For example, he knew exactly what he was doing when he granted an in-depth interview to Rebel News and, a few days later, when he answered a question from Léo Dupire, the spokesperson for Québec Fier (a close associate of the Parti conservateur du Québec), during a town hall hosted by the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), squawking about the threat that “brotherhoodism” (in reference to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood) poses to Québec. This delusion is straight out of the European far-right playbook, which didn’t give Le Devoir columnist and former PQ leader Jean-François Lisée a moment of pause when he echoed it shortly afterward to justify PSPP’s questionable remarks. PSPP’s recent positions and increasingly strident rhetoric betray his intention to scrape together votes from disillusioned right-wingers for whom the CAQ has not gone far enough on anti-immigration policies, Islamophobia, and all-out anti-wokeness. The PQ continues to promise a referendum on independence during its first term if elected, but one has to wonder what a sovereign Québec would look like under this leadership.
The race to succeed François Legault as leader of the CAQ made the tension within the party between its identitarian nationalist wing—embodied by Bernard Drainville—and its more moderate “autonomist” wing, which is focussed on a neoliberal economic agenda, more starkly obvious. The latter camp won the race, but it would be naive to believe that Christine Fréchette and her inner circle will cede identitarian rhetoric to the PQ during the election campaign, especially since Drainville, who, it is said, “has many supporters among the political staff,” still exercises significant influence within the party.
As for Éric Duhaime’s Parti conservateur du Québec (PCQ)—the only party that the mainstream media regularly describes as “right-wing”—it appears that after cracking down on the nationalist faction within its own ranks, it is now working to challenge the CAQ’s “autonomist” line by focussing on consolidating the support of its “libertarian” base in the Québec City region as the elections approach, rather than engaging openly in an identitarian bidding war. It is worth noting that the PCQ entered the Québec National Assembly with its April 2026 recruitment of Maïté Blanchette Vézina, a former CAQ member who defected to sit as an independent MNA.
In any case, the upcoming election cycle seems guaranteed to be an unparalleled shitshow, from which the far right is likely to emerge stronger—at the very least in terms of visibility and the hearts and minds battle being waged by its leading ideologues.
Mathieu Bock-Côté and Conservative Nationalism
Mathieu Bock-Côté (MBC), whose stock-in-trade has long been to slander Islam, immigration, “neo-feminists,” and transgender people, has continued his drift toward fascism, notably by publishing a new book last year (Les deux Occidents, 2025) to denounce—once again—the diabolical “diversity regime.” In it, he criticizes liberal states like France, which he compares, without a hint of irony, to the totalitarian system of the USSR—a claim he had already made in his previous book, Le totalitarisme sans le goulag (2023), but which he reiterates in his recent book with even greater vitriol and hyperbole.
He also champions the authoritarianism of Trumpism, which he claims reflects the aspirations of “real” people. As such, this pompous socialite continues to present himself as a “dissident” and tirelessly sings the same song he’s been singing for nearly thirty years: the far right simply does not exist (his critics, he claims, would be incapable of defining it) and labeling someone as such serves no other purpose than to disqualify them from the public sphere using dishonest means.
In the same vein, he defended a large xenophobic rally in Britain in September 2025 organized by the British activist Tommy Robinson, at which Éric Zemmour (who served as a mentor to MBC in the French media landscape) was invited to speak. According to MBC, none of this has anything to do with the far right, because the good people of England were simply defending their identity. He went as far as to say, “There was nothing shameful about the London demonstration. Linking it to the ‘far right’ is nothing but a smear tactic.” Yet even the media outlets he collaborates with in Québec—Journal de Montréal and TVA—and in France—CNews and Le Figaro—describe Tommy Robinson as a “far-right” activist!
To fully grasp MBC’s mindset, it is also worth recalling his defense of Nigel Farage, a British far-right politician who led the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and is now the head of Reform UK. According to Mathieu Bock-Côté, he is “a thoroughly honorable man whom it is scandalous to label as far-right; he was a major player in the long campaign for Brexit and the restoration of British sovereignty. . . . A true orator, a man of culture, witty and eloquent, a combative activist with unshakable convictions, he has succeeded in transforming the public debate.” However, the Guardian revealed in March 2026 that this “utterly honorable man” agreed to record videos in support of the actions of leaders of the Canadian white supremacist group Diagolon, including its “Road Rage Terror Tour,” and did so for pay.
While he insists on repeating that one must never, under any circumstances, associate anyone with the far right—a so-called “phantom category”—Mathieu Bock-Côté, for his part, has no qualms about regularly labeling “antifas” as “ultra-leftists” and ultra-violent (and apparently very wealthy) “psychological wrecks,” even referring to them as the “true fascists,” echoing a phrase whose profound absurdity has not prevented it from becoming a ubiquitous cliché in reactionary circles. As many others have noted before us: part of MBC’s modus operandi consists precisely in he himself doing what he constantly criticizes his opponents of doing.
Bock-Côté regularly promotes leaders of the French far right, e.g., Éric Zemmour and Marion Maréchal Le Pen (with whom he was recently spotted at a chic Paris restaurant). It’s worth noting that he is not only the darling of billionaire mass media owners but also the favorite of far-right magazines, appearing, for example, on the cover of the January 2026 issue of the magazine Éléments: Pour la civilisation européenne, founded by Alain de Benoist and described as a journal of the “Nouvelle Droite,” now closely aligned with the Nouvelle Librairie, a far-right establishment based in Paris.
MBC is also grooming the next generation of leaders, of whom Étienne-Alexandre Beauregard (ÉAB) is undoubtedly the most prominent figure after Philippe Lorange. Notably, MBC invited ÉAB to promote his book on “the collapse of Western civilization” (due to left-wing values, of course) on his show on CNews in October 2025. He also had the opportunity to be interviewed, during the same tour of France, by far-right newspapers such as Frontières and Causeur. In Québec, ÉAB also served as François Legault’s speechwriter for several years. Notably, he was recently invited by the PQ committee at Laval University to speak at a conference “on the Québec nation.”
There can be no doubt that MBC and his protégé have influenced the CAQ’s policies and that, as a result, the conservative nationalist trend represented by Bock-Côté and Beauregard—which has one foot in authoritarian liberalism and the other in the far right—has left its mark on Québec’s political culture. It is undoubtedly partly this political rift—or at least this ideological landscape—that opened the way for the emergence of Nouvelle Alliance.
Nouvelle Alliance and Company
Over the years, we have published a number of articles and commentaries about the identitarian nationalist groupuscule Nouvelle Alliance (NA), which also received some media attention in the spring of 2025. In May 2024, we described NA as “separatist, ultranationalist political organization” whose founding members were former members of the “now defunct” groupuscule the Front canadien-français (FCF), “a faithful emulator of Québec’s fascist ultra-Catholic circles.”
In the same article we wrote:
“a quick examination of their social media platforms . . . reveals a very large number of sympathizers (groups and individuals) identified with the far right, displaying, for example, symbols of fascism, European identitarian currents, ultranationalism or white nationalism, the alt-right, etc.”
Although it remains a presence in Québec, Nouvelle Alliance has not experienced significant growth over the past three years, and it appears to be more or less stable at around fifty members and close supporters. Its leadership has, however, worked very hard to develop a coherent platform and to strengthen the group’s base of support.
Once or twice a year, NA launches a recruitment campaign, which largely takes the form of putting up posters in several cities—Montréal, Québec City, Sherbrooke, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Valleyfield, etc.—mostly around CEGEPs and universities. Since anti-fascist groups have organized in opposition to NA in recent years, these posters never stay up for very long and are only useful to the organization insofar as photos of its activists “in action” can be shared online.
It should be noted that while the Montréal chapter of NA is theoretically the largest, few members actually live in the city or in downtown neighborhoods, which are very hostile toward them.
An Increasingly Unapologetic Alignment with the Right
Presented at its founding as a sort of Frankenstein’s monster of a coalition of separatists from across the political spectrum (the famous “neither right nor left but nationalist”), the organization gradually abandoned this stance, finally admitting in 2025—during François Gervais’s appearance on Alexandre Cormier-Denis’s podcast—that this was merely a façade, and that NA was, in fact, positioned on the far right of the political spectrum.
In the same vein, Gervais gave a very lengthy interview—in the form of a manifesto—to the magazine Le Harfang for the final issue of this propaganda organ of the now-defunct Fédération des Québécois de souche (FQS). It should be noted that this organization was founded in 2007 by neo-Nazis and later rebranded itself as an umbrella group for all factions of the far right in Québec.
Nouvelle Alliance organized a public event at the office of Société Saint-Jean Baptiste in Trois-Rivières in September 2025, featuring guest speakers David Leroux, an illiberal essayist (and avowed admirer of Carl Schmitt and Julius Evola) particularly concerned with rehabilitating the term “fascism,” and François Dumas, who in the 1990s led the Cercle Jeune Nation, a far-right think tank inspired by the French Nouvelle Droite that has served as a model for both the Fédération des Québécois de souche and the current generation of ethnonationalist fascists, key among them Alexandre Cormier-Denis. It should also be noted that Le Harfang’s Telegram channel now serves exclusively as a platform for posts from the Jeune Nation blog.
The Cult of the Leader
Future anti-fascist mobilizations need to pay attention to François Gervais’s role as the supreme leader of his organization—it was his brainchild, and he reportedly funds out of his own pocket. Several former members of Nouvelle Alliance have confided in us: it seems that a cult of the leader is taken to the extreme within NA. This is a fairly common trait for this type of group, which favours a strict hierarchy (La Meute was another example).
The Sovereigntist Cordon Sanitaire
The various factors mentioned above undoubtedly played a key role in precipitating NA’s isolation within the sovereigntist movement. Its increasingly overt far-right positions, combined with its leader’s (or, by extension, its executive committee’s) obvious ideological rigidity, as well as the efforts of anti-fascists, have led to a number of doors slamming in NA’s face.
On May 19, 2025, activists from the Nouvelle Alliance were prevented from gathering for their Journée des patriotes rally at the Dollard des Ormeaux statue in Lafontaine Park in Montréal. Beginning early in the morning, a “People’s Festival against Fascism,” organized by an ad hoc group that would soon come together under the banner of the Front antifasciste populaire, drew more than three hundred people and occupied the area all morning.
That same afternoon, OUI Québec and the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste informed NA that its contingent would not be welcome at the traditional parade starting at Carré Saint-Louis. The fifty or so NA members and supporters tried to join it anyway but were prevented from doing so by an impromptu anti-fascist security detail, after which they were kept at a distance by the police.
On September 20, 2025, NA made another attempt, this time announcing a demonstration beginning at the Jeanne d’Arc statue in Québec City. To no avail, as the fifty or so activists and supporters were surrounded and besieged by approximately two hundred left-wing sovereigntists and anti-fascists. NA was blocked and never left its starting point, and its members were reluctantly forced to beat a retreat.
On October 25, 2025, NA was again clearly excluded when OUI Québec organized a demonstration to celebrate the thirtieth anniversary of the 1995 referendum. This time, the official call to demonstrate stated: “In accordance with Québec’s fundamental values—gender equality, secularism, and civic nationalism—we affirm that individuals affiliated with ethnic nationalist, religious fundamentalist, royalist, or misogynist organizations will not be welcome at the activities or on governing bodies of the Société Saint-Jean-Baptiste de Montréal or OUI Québec.”
The day before the demonstration, posters targeting the leadership of OUI Québec were put up around Carré Saint-Louis and signed by “La Flèche Nationale,” the one-man groupuscule of a certain Vincent Lewis, a crackpot who latched onto Nouvelle Alliance and regularly sends letters to left-wing figures revoking their Québec citizenship in anticipation of Québec’s independence. He lives in a fantasy world.
Following this series of setbacks to their mobilizing efforts, in March 2026, NA retreated to Beloeil to launch its new magazine Le Franc-Renard. This “public” event was held under tight security, with attendees required to register and provide their name and phone number and even some form of ID! Unfortunately for them, anti-fascists located the venue, and the restaurant owner kicked them out when he was informed of the true nature of the event. NA members were forced to retreat in disgrace and quietly relocate to another establishment, providing yet another great opportunity to snap photos of them.
ASLN and Billy Savoie
When it moved to the far right, NA needed a “left wing” to save face and maintain its false “neither-nor” posture. In 2025, the organization began to show signs of a rapprochement with the Action socialiste de libération nationale (ASLN). This is the former Communist Party of Québec (PCQ), which been taken over in an ideological coup led by two individuals, Sébastien Paquette and the now infamous Billy Savoie, to whom we dedicated an article in October 2025. Embarking on a more or less overt shift toward National Bolshevism, these two “brown shirts” (that is the color they chose for their cringe-worthy scout uniform, adorned with a logo combining a fleur-de-lis and an AK-47 assault rifle) took control of the organization and expelled all dissenting voices. Meanwhile, a faction of the organization that remained loyal to left-wing ideals eventually coalesced around the newspaper Le Partisan québécois.
In May 2025, NA and the ASLN organized a “leaders’ debate,” at which, as it ends up, not much was actually debated, since the “leaders” found themselves in broad agreement on all the issues. Rumour spread that the two groups were considering a merger, but the merger never took place. The two groups did, however, join forces in a single contingent in several of the failed actions detailed above.
Following the publication of our report on Billy Savoie in the fall of 2025, he was suspended from his position as a high school teacher at the Centre de services scolaire du Pays-Des-Bleuets pending an investigation and lost his thesis advisor at UQAC. After briefly being reinstated, the school terminated his employment following a “repeat offense on his part,” a major setback that has not prevented him from continuing his career as a solo hate influencer on social media.
The “Traditional Catholic” Factor
We noted above the connection between NA and the Front canadien-français, which was explicitly ultra-Catholic in nature. NA has somewhat distanced itself from that image to adopt a more secular tone—at least a “Catholic-secular” in nature—but some of its members are practicing Catholics and incorporate Catholicism into their activism. This is the case, for example, with Jean-Philippe Warren, who has aligned himself with Academia Christiana, a traditionalist Catholic organization linked to the French far right. Other figures in NA’s orbit belong to this tradition, including David Leroux, who was a speaker at the September event in Trois-Rivières, attended the launch of NA’s magazine in Beloeil, and says he intends to write for coming issues of the publication. The traditionalist Catholic element remains, as such, very much present within NA.
This is also evident in social media interactions with a number of well-known figures in the ultra-Catholic community, including Nicolas Roseberry-Verreault and Philippe Letellier-Martel, activists from the media project Action Vitale—the former of whom was spotted in the NA contingent on May 19, 2025, in Montréal—as well as other individuals and groups close to the Fraternité sacerdotale Saint-Pie X (FSSPX) [Society of Pius X], e.g., Éditions Avant-Garde and its director Simon Demers. Demers notably published Cormier-Denis’s book, participated in the aborted NA demonstration in Québec City on September 20, 2025, contributes to Libre Média (see below), and is strongly suspected of being one of the organizers of the RIXE combat training club (with an online presence) in which Raphaël Lévesque of Atalante Québec participates.
Nous avons rappelé ci-dessus le lien de filiation entre NA et le Front canadien-français, lequel avait un caractère explicitement ultracatholique. NA s’est quelque peu défait de cette image pour adopter un ton plus laïc, ou du moins catho-laïque, mais certains de ses membres sont pratiquants et intègrent cette dimension à leur militance. C’est le cas par exemple de Jean-Philippe Warren, qui s’est affiché avec les couleurs de l’Academia Christiana, une organisation catholique traditionaliste rattachée à l’extrême droite française. D’autres personnages gravitant dans l’orbite de NA appartiennent à cette même tradition, dont David Leroux, qui était conférencier à l’événement de septembre à Trois-Rivières, était présent au lancement de la revue de NA à Belœil, et dit vouloir écrire pour les prochains numéros de ce journal. L’élément catholique traditionaliste est donc encore bien présent chez NA.
Elsewhere in the Cathosphere
The Campagne Québec Vie, led by Georges Buscemi, is an anti-abortion organization that has been active in Québec for nearly forty years and has been facing strong anti-fascist opposition since in the early 2000s. For many years, this group organized an annual anti-choice march, generally turning out only a handful of people. In 2024, the march changed its tone and rebranded as the “March for Life,” drawing its first significant turnout in Québec City. In May 2025, the second edition of this march was completely derailed by a very strong pro-choice contingent from the Québec City region, as well as by the of the sabotage of buses from Montréal at their departure point. The campaign recently organized a “Génération Vie” conference in Montréal at the Église évangélique restauration, which also hosted the American con artist and preacher Sean Feucht during his Canadian tour in July 2025.
In October 2024, in Gatineau, anonymous posters adorned with anti-abortion, homophobic, and transphobic rhetoric—presumably from a Christian group—appeared near the Brault and Taché campuses of the Université du Québec en Outaouais (UQO). The university community, alerted by the UQO Alliance Queer and the Association générale des étudiant·e·s (AGE-UQO), reacted quickly, tearing down the posters and distributing a pink sticker reading “Pas de fachos à l’UQO.” The UQO administration subsequently filed a complaint with the police. In the same region, “Stop immigration” stickers bearing the “Action française” logo appeared in April 2026.
Another place where Catholic traditionalism finds a welcoming space is in the online community that has formed around Nomos-TV.
Alexandre Cormier-Denis and NOMOS-TV
In September 2025, we published an article on our website about Nomos-TV and Alexandre Cormier-Denis. Although this attention came more than a bit (too) late in Nomos’s history, this ethnonationalist propaganda and training project has now become a focal point for the local anti-fascist community.
As a reminder, Nomos-TV is a web-based television channel focused on providing ongoing commentary and analysis of current events, with a particular commitment to advancing far-right ideas in the conservative nationalist sphere:
“According to its creators themselves, Nomos-TV is part of a metapolitical‘re-information’ project, i.e., an effort to transform the dominant values within society, through what is also known as ‘culture war,’ with a view to creating conditions conducive to the exercise of power by the ultraconservative ethno-nationalist right, a subset of the far right that those most involved euphemistically refer to as the ‘national right.’”[i]
Its main hosts are Alexandre Cormier-Denis (ACD) and Philippe Plamondon, who are also co-founders of the political group Horizon Québec Actuel (2016). They are supported by a handful of collaborators, including Sébastien de Crèvecoeur, and benefit from technical infrastructure provided by Aleck Loiselle of Loiselle.solutions (which also provides services to André Pitre’s Lux Média project; see below).
As a result, up to three or four shows are produced each week, generally broadcast live either from the studio set up in the building owned by Plamondon on Saint-Urbain Street in Montréal (at least until April 2026) or, most likely, from Cormier-Denis’s home. Every Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day, Nomos organizes a live webcast titled “Saint-Jean de la Race.” The web TV’s activities are funded by subscriptions and the sale of merchandise online.
Over the years, ACD has interviewed a large number of figures from Québec’s conservative and far-right political landscape at the Nomos studio, including Raphaël Lévesque of Atalante, members of the Front Canadien-français, and, more recently, Action Vitale, which is part of the same Catholic traditionalist milieu. Léo Dupire of Québec Fier and the essayist Philippe Sauro-Cinq Mars from the same circle, David Leroux, who is close to Action Nationale, Nouvelle Alliance’s François Gervais, and a number of others have been featured on Nomos-TV. ACD has also collaborated on several occasions with the magazine Le Harfang, published by the Fédération des Québécois de souche.
In addition, ACD hosts a regular segment on the YouTube channel of the French far-right media outlet Frontières and is frequently invited to contribute to other projects that are part of the same ideological milieu. In particular, he regularly collaborates with the French white supremacist Daniel Conversano, whose special guest he was at the Paris launch of Conversano’s book on the history of anti-Black racism on April 12. During that same visit to Paris, he participated in a symposium at the Institut Iliade (Nouvelle Droite) and gave a number of interviews on various far-right digital media outlets, including Radio-Courtoisie and the channel run by media activist Vincent Lapierre.
Nomos’s entire ideological project can be summed up in a few sentences. It is imperative that we break away from the Canadian federation and achieve Québec’s independence as soon as possible (and that we do so by unilateral decree rather than through a referendum, since the democratic process carries a risk of failure). The survival of the French-Canadian “race” depends on a complete halt to non-European and non-white immigration, which is both the instrument for and result of the “great replacement.” People of colour or those of immigrant backgrounds, considered inferior by default, foreign by definition, and consequently incapable of assimilating or participating in the building of the Québec nation, must be expelled en masse (through “remigration”) without delay. At the same time, we must denounce the “replacementist” multicultural liberals, “leftists,” and the “woke” individuals who are undermining our national vitality from within.
In private, it’s even worse, as we demonstrated in an article documenting our infiltration of the private chatroom for Nomos subscribers on the Telegram app. That’s where the true nature of the project is revealed most clearly. “Foreigners,” “Arabs,” “n*****s,” “subhumans,” “scum” are just a few of the charming epithets regularly found in the private “Nomasian” community discussions. Everything—absolutely everything—is interpreted and analyzed through the lens of ethnic nationalism, the “migrant invasion,” the clash of civilizations, and the inherent superiority of the French-Canadian “race.” Unsurprisingly, the vitriolic rhetoric about “degeneration,” the supposed inferior intelligence of Black people, the “monstrous” nature of trans people, and the civilizational threat of feminism is completely unrestrained and knows no bounds. This establishes Nomos-TV as a central far-right hub in Québec in 2026. Anyone who still claims otherwise is either naive or is being dishonest.
Nonetheless, when Cormier-Denis was invited to Télé-Québec in 2019, Sophie Durocher did not hesitate to come to his defense when the comedian Mehdi Bousaidan called him a racist. He has also appeared on QUB Radio, Radio X, Radio Ville-Marie, Rémi Villemure’s podcast, and several other platforms. François Fournier from the Ian & Frank channel interviewed him, as did Livre Média’s Jérôme Blanchet-Gravel. Plamondon and Sébastien de Crèvecoeur, for their part, have been hosting a regular show on Radio X for over a year. ACD was even the subject of a lengthy profile in the newspaper Urbania in October 2025, which claimed it was being “objective,” an idea ACD himself found very welcoming. It must be said that the journalist chose to conclude his report by suggesting that ACD “exposes the authoritarian temptation lurking within our democracies and, perhaps, deep within each of us.”. . . We have to give it to them; that is as close to normalizing him as you can get.
Following the April 23, 2026, action by the Front antifasciste populaire—a festive gathering in front of Plamondon’s recording studio—all these media figures, including Benoit Dutrizac, graciously gave him the opportunity to cast himself as a victim by demonizing the Front Pop’s nonviolent action as effectively an act of “terrorism.”
In short, hateful individuals like ACD are welcomed, and their views are amplified in conservative—and even so-called centrist—circles, which clearly demonstrates the extreme permeability between mainstream conservatism and the far right—a permeability facilitated by a whole range of “alternative” media outlets, influencers, and public figures who act to amplify the far-right’s message, as well as a number of complicit or complacent actors within the established mainstream media.
“Alternative” Media, Pseudo-Journalists and -Intellectuals, and Influencers
In recent years, a whole constellation of pseudo-media outlets has sprung up on the web in Québec, claiming to defend freedom of thought “beyond dogmas and taboos.” In reality, these outlets merely regurgitate the dogmas of the hard right—even the far right—especially regarding immigration, Islam, and transgender issues, while also attacking the progressive and radical left, lumping them all together under the catch-all category of “wokeness.”
Rebel News Québec
Rebel News Québec is a local branch of the far-right organization Rebel News (formerly Rebel Media), founded in 2015 by Canadian lawyer and activist Ezra Levant. The Québec branch was launched in April 2017; as of May 2026, it had produced 430 videos, had 27,000 subscribers, and claimed 2,700,000 views. Its main activists are Alexandra “Alexa” Lavoie, who serves as a field “reporter,” and Guillaume E. Roy, who acts as her cameraman.
On its website, the activist group describes itself as follows:
“At Rebel News Québec, we follow the facts wherever they lead—and when they run counter to the establishment’s narrative, it’s our mission to show you the other side of the story! We tackle the sociopolitical issues that will affect the lives of the Québecois(e) in the years to come, without filters or censorship.”
However, its name is misleading in two ways, as this project is neither rebellious nor is it a genuine news outlet. Initially fairly marginal and obscure, it has gained influence in recent years on social media, and even on the political scene during pro-Palestinian demonstrations, which it forcefully sought to discredit.
In April 2025, during the federal election, Rebel News activists also drew attention by disrupting the press conference following the French-language leaders’ debate, asking questions that it would be polite to call biased. For example, they asked the NDP leader what he thought of the “repeated attacks on Christians” and the “churches targeted by vandalism.” This situation led the Debates Commission to cancel the English-language debate. Radio-Canada and even the Journal de Montréal then described the group as belonging to the “far right,” as did the Press Council, which stated in a decision issued in March 2026 [#D2025-12-193] that Rebel News “does not constitute a news media outlet as defined by the Québec Press Council. The Rebel News platform can instead be described as an activist organization with ties to far-right circles.” The Journal de Montréal also reported at the time that Rebel News had received approximately $200,000 to influence the election campaign, specifically to encourage mobilization against the Liberal Party of Canada.
Rebel News Québec recently capitalized on QUB Radio’s appetite for far-right views by securing appearances on shows hosted by Benoit Dutrizac (April 16, 2025) and Richard Martineau (December 1, 2025). Pseudo-journalist Alexandra Lavoie notably claimed that she “fears those wearing keffiyehs with only their eyes visible. . ., as they often become violent.” Richard Martineau lamented that Rebel News was “the only source” reporting on Muslims praying in the streets of Montréal (April 9, 2026).
The activists at Rebel News lack even the rudiments of basic decency. To cite just one example, Alexandra Lavoie chased Liberal MP Nathalie Provost through the streets to ask her if her goal in government was to “push the agenda of the Poly-se-souvient lobby” for gun control, citing the alleged crackdown on members of the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights (CCFR). Unbelievably, Lavoie then accused a political aide accompanying the MP—who was raising her hand to block the camera lens—of being a “fascist.” For the record, while Nathalie Provost has certainly advocated for gun control, it should also be noted that she is one of the Polytechnique students who survived the December 6, 1989, anti-feminist shooting and still has bullet fragments in her body.
In the same spirit of “tasteless” disruption, on September 27, 2025, Lavoie and his cameraman showed up behaving disgracefully at the silent march for Nooran Rezayi, the young man murdered by the Longueuil police, clearly intent on harassing the participants. Their hysterical reaction to the anti-fascists who tried to push them back provoked a police crackdown on the grieving marchers.
The modus operandi of Rebel News’ leading members consists of “ambush journalism,” harassing their ideological opponents under the guise of freedom of the press, and then portraying themselves as victims when people push back. This tried-and-true formula (which is, incidentally, very widespread in Europe and the United States), exploiting the algorithmic appetite for sensationalist shock value, allows them both to gain popularity on social media and to collect ever-increasing donations by capitalizing on the gullibility of their base. We feel that the best approach is to keep them at a distance from our activities and mobilizations, using carefully considered tactics and strategic means to achieve that objective.
Libre Média
This news outlet, founded in 2022, describes itself as “Francophone, free, and independent.” It currently has nearly 40,000 followers on Facebook and more than 25,000 on X. Since 2023, its editor-in-chief has been Jérôme Blanchet-Gravel, a conservative columnist and polemicist, author of a book-length essay titled La face cachée du multiculturalisme (2018), and contributor to the far-right French magazine Causeur, who has become known in particular for his frequent misogynist and anti-progressive outbursts. Blanchet-Gravel is backed by an editorial board featuring a fine array of shady characters. Anne-Laure Bonnel, in particular, who produces pro-Russia propaganda—and generally serves Russia’s interests—gained notoriety by spreading false information on CNews (the French TV channel where Mathieu Bock-Côté regularly rants) regarding alleged massacres of civilians by Ukrainian forces. Another Frenchman on the editorial board, Alexis Brunet, has contributed and continues to contribute to French media outlets, including Michel Onfray’s Front Populaire and Causeur, which published an enthusiastic review of his first novel, Grossophobie, in which he attacks “wokism.” Francis Denis, for his part, is the director of the documentary Omerta scolaire (2025), co-produced by Libre Média and the Legal Center for Constitutional Freedoms and dedicated to protests against trans identities in schools. The president of the latter organization, attorney John Carpay, compared the rainbow flag to the Nazi flag during a conference organized by Rebel News and was disbarred in Manitoba for following and filming a judge during the COVID-19 health crisis. It should be noted that Francis Denis was also invited onto Nomos-TV by Alexandre Cormier-Denis to discuss his film when it was released. Philippe Labrecque, a highly educated scholar and author of Comprendre le conservatisme en 14 entretiens (Liber Publishing, 2016), also serves on the editorial board of Libre Média and writes articles in which he expresses concern about the “demographic, linguistic, and political drowning of Québec,” as well as lambasting “wokism.”
Libre Média’s preferred topics leave little doubt as to the political values of its hosts. Take, for example, an article about teacher Amanda Kakihi, who claims that “staring and inappropriate glances” on the street “always come from men from certain cultural communities.” It is worth noting that on the very day this article was published (May 8, 2026), Richard Martineau invited her to discuss this very issue on his QUB Radio show. The concern here is that “Québec is dooming itself to extinction” due to its declining birth rate, always pointing the finger at Muslim immigration whenever the topics of masculinism, homophobia, and transphobia in Québec arise—all while simultaneously defending anti-LGBTQ+ activists.
Indocile média
Indocile média, for its part, is a bit unusual. While it presents itself as a “media outlet,” it is in fact nothing more than a magnifying mirror reflecting the narcissism of Julien Garon-Carrier, the founder and, most importantly, sole (!) contributor. This individual’s ego is so outsized that it wouldn’t fit on a single social media page, so he had to create a “media outlet” just for himself. Claiming to offer “free and uncompromising news,” Julien Garon-Carrier does nothing but regurgitate the usual right-wing and the far-right platitudes: subsidized “mass immigration” is going to “replace us,” society is being feminized, and the “woke virus” threatens to destroy everything. Garon-Carrier also takes offense at the alleged violence of the far left, trans activism, and, of course, the “antifas” (all while quoting George Orwell, no doubt forgetting that he was a socialist and. . . an anti-fascist). Although he has very few followers on social media, his product placement strategy—featuring himself—seems to be working fairly well, as this platform has given him enough visibility to be invited onto Benoît Dutrizac’s show on QUB Radio. This allowed him a wider audience for his criticisms of the Fédération autonome de l’enseignement (FAE) report, which documents the resurgence of sexism, homophobia, and transphobia in schools.
As we recently revealed (see “Nomos-TV’s Private Chat Room: A Look Inside Alexandre Cormier-Denis and His Acolytes’ Racist Safe Space”), Garon-Carrier is one of the most active members of Nomos’s private forum, where he candidly discusses his media strategies with other members who use explicitly racist pseudonyms. There, for example, he rejoiced at having had “two or three moments of camaraderie” with Dutrizac and at having “at least been able to take a swipe at the university and leftist social sciences.” In private, however, he lets loose, bragging that “the day we can deport the foreigners and immigrants, I’ll volunteer to contribute to the national effort.” He also boasts of offering “political intelligence services,” explaining that he uses a chatbot to merge government and municipal files with media articles, then has it generate a 120-word email that he sends “to the potential client.” Almost as clever as James Bond this Julien Garon-Carrier.
Québec Fier (Léo Dupire)
Québec Fier is a “libertarian”-oriented conservative advocacy group that Radio-Canada describes as a “content factory” for the Parti conservateur du Québec. It is primarily active on social media, particularly on Facebook, where its page has nearly 240,000 followers. One of the slogans on its website’s homepage is “A Québec PROUD of its origins, its language, its culture, and its traditions,” which clearly anchors it in the conservative—and even reactionary—current of Québec nationalism. Its “mission” is to oppose the state, which “stifles private enterprise,” “union corporatism,” and the “environmental lobby.” The “Impliquez-vous” section presents a hodgepodge of causes to champion, including gasoline-powered cars, the right of an “honest citizen” to defend “his family against an intruder” without risking jail time, the abolition of the carbon tax, and, of course, freedom of speech. It also opposes the federal government for transferring “our tax money to Hamas jihadists,” immigration, which must be reduced “immediately,” and, finally, the intrusion of male athletes (read: trans women) into women’s sports. The group is led by Léo Dupire, who also contributes to Libre Média, where he writes articles against immigration and the “Montréal jihadists,” trans women (whom he refers to as “trans men”), and women who practice medicine thanks to the “positive discrimination that weakens our society.”
Stu Pitt and Lux Média
Lux Média (formerly Stu Dio) is the project of André Pitre, aka “Stu Pitt,” and his cronies, including the obnoxious Yann Roshdy. It collaborates with Nomos-TV and has hosted their despicable “Saint-Jean de la Race” in its studio at least twice. Maxime Bernier, of the People’s Party of Canada, has been a guest, along with a whole host of figures more or less associated with the conspiracy theory milieu and the far right. Once a propaganda outlet for La Meute, the project now serves as a megaphone to amplify not only far-right ideas but also the entire modern repertoire of conspiracy theory fantasies. It is worth noting that Lux Media counts among its contributorsJean-François Gariepy, an extremely creepy alt-right white nationalist, who it has been proven was funded by Jeffrey Epstein, and who is strongly suspected of being involved in the unsolved disappearance of his former partner.
A Couple of Far-Right Intellectuals
David Leroux is a low-profile influencer within the identitarian nationalist movement. He aligns himself with the same ideological current as Nomos-TV (to whose private chat room he is, incidentally, still subscribed) and draws on the same intellectual influences, including Carl Schmitt and the Nouvelle Droite. He published an essay in 2018 in the journal L’Action nationale, with which he currently collaborates. A traditionalist Catholic, he draws upon the fascist intellectual Julius Evola’s “rejection of modernity,” advocates for a form of “illiberal democracy,” and wishes to see Québec nationalism redefined along ethnic and identitarian lines. Mathieu Bock-Côté praised Leroux in a 2020 column, and Leroux was interviewed at length by Alexandre Cormier-Denis in 2025. Over the past year, Leroux has grown closer to Nouvelle Alliance, notably contributing to the groupuscule’s journal Le Franc-Renard, suggesting that his influence will soon be felt within NA.
Philippe Sauro-Cinq-Mars is another intellectual influencer in the aggressively anti-progressive nationalist sphere. As well as being interviewed by Nomos-TV in June 2025, he has connections in the mainstream media, notably at 99.5 (QUB Radio), and is a Libre Média columnist.
The Marginal Parties
As far as political parties are concerned, the picture is not a pretty one for right-wingers.
The Parti patriote (federal), led by Donald Proulx and Carl Brochu was disbanded in 2022 for failing to submit an expense report to the chief electoral officer.
The l’Union nationale (provincial) led by the flamboyant Jonathan Blanchette (aka “Jo L’Indigo”) is also on the verge of being disbanded, as its leader has been fined nearly $120,000 for producing false receipts, leading to the freezing of the party’s funds.
The Parti nationaliste chrétien (PNC), led by neo-Nazi Sylvain Marcoux, has never managed to gain official recognition, as Élections Québec determined that the party existed only to incite hatred.
This review also gave us the opportunity to learn about the existence of the Parti libertarien du Québec (registered in 2022), which has apparently been led by the aforementioned Yann Roshdy since September 2025, and whose official representative is Charles Olivier, a crackpot from Saguenay.
At the municipal level, the Action Montréal party is led by Gilbert Bilodeau, a longtime contributor to Lux Média, where he hosted the program “Le Candidat” for a number of years. In the November 2025 municipal elections, he managed to come in third with 10.16 percent of the vote.
A Panoply of Influencers, Crackpots, and Misfits
The Québec fachosphere, which operates mainly on social media, includes so many figures—a lot of them full-on crazy—that it would be impossible for us to name them all. A small sample follows.
Éloïse Boies is the host of the podcast “Élo Veut savoir,” one of the many “alternative media” outlets that emerged from Québec’s conspiracy theory milieu during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. She is, however, among those who have managed to professionalize their work and reach a wider audience. Her Facebook page now has 63,000 followers. Under the guise of genuine intellectual curiosity, she maintains a hard line anti-woke and transphobic stance and regularly hosts guests associated with the far-right, typically with a “conspiratorial” slant. Éloïse Boies was interviewed by Nomos-TV in July 2025.
Matt Tremblay (pseudonym) is a new figure in Québec’s far-right scene. He emerged in recent months on social media, particularly on Facebook and TikTok, where he has been posting a steady stream of videos that include reactionary commentary. Among other things, he echoes the anti-immigration themes of the most extreme elements of the fascist-leaning “identitarian” movement, including Nomos-TV. He recently helped found a new far-right youth organization, the Corporation du Front National, which describes itself as “a corporation dedicated to advancing nationalist interests through the strategic development of products, the creation of nationalist factory-communities, and the deployment of our advanced operational capabilities to support and empower groups and organizations aligned with nationalist interests.” On May 3, he announced that he had been visited by the RCMP, reportedly to tell him to “watch what he says.” It’s worth noting that Julien Garon-Carrier of Indocile Média more or less endorsed this initiative in Nomos’s private chat room, stating that he was in contact with the project’s initiators.
Mandana Javan is a “pro-secularism” nationalist and Islamophobic activist of Iranian origin who has become a prominent public figure over the past year, as a result of organizing a series of protests “against street prayer” in front of Notre-Dame Basilica. She is also a rabid Zionist and appeared draped in an Israeli flag at demonstrations supporting the Israeli-American war of aggression against Iran. In her constant search for attention, she announced on Twitter/X in December 2025 that she had submitted the paperwork necessary to become a Parti Québécois candidate (in the Taillon riding), for which she is actively campaigning; at the time of writing, it remains unclear whether the PQ will dare to risk taking her on. Mandana Javan is a regular guest on QUB Radio.
Annie-Ève Collin is a teacher at Collège Ahuntsic and an anti-trans feminist activist who has gained significant prominence in conservative and conspiracy-theory circles in recent years. She is an activist with the secularist and transphobic feminist organization PDF Québec and has been invited onto QUB Radio several times, notably on shows hosted by Benoît Dutrizac and Sophie Durocher.
Yves Claudé is a former CÉGEP sociology professor whose book on the skinhead movement in Québec garnered some critical acclaim in the 1990s, including within left-wing circles. He was also active on the fringes of the Ligue antifasciste de Montréal (LAM). For several years, he wrote from a decidedly left-wing perspective for l’Aut’journal and Presse-toi à gauche. He has since become a mouthpiece for local far-right political groups and organizations (La Meute, Front patriotique du Québec, etc.) and, more recently, French ones, compulsively sharing posts on his social media from the Rassemblement national, Reconquête! (Éric Zemmour’s far-right party), and the far-right media outlet Frontières. Like a good little Orwellian foot soldier, he loves to wield the most absurd newspeak and relishes twisting facts. Thus, anti-fascists become the “new post-modern fascists,” hyper-violent, allies of the Islamist militias allegedly infiltrating political and social movements to promote the “great replacement.” Although he doesn’t enjoy much popularity or a large audience, these bitter and compulsive posts are often shared by other figures in the far-right milieu and are sometimes even by particular media personalities. Yves Claudé’s life story is sadly symptomatic of a certain nationalist left whose paranoid fear of Islam and outdated patriotism have driven it into the arms of the far right.
“Roxanne Labanane” (Roxanne Gareau) is an influencer and podcaster who uses relentless sarcasm to promote transphobic and anti-progressive ideas, usually in crass, lowbrow, flash-in-the-pan videos. Nonetheless, she contributes to the far-right echo chamber with her podcast Grille Neurones, where she has hosted, among others, Alexandra Lavoie of Rebel News.
Requiem for the Farfadaas— the Farfadaas movement, led by Steve “l’Artiss” Charland, a former La Meute lieutenant, made headlines in 2021 and received significant media attention in 2022 during the so-called “Freedom Convoy” movement. Accused of misconduct during that mobilization, Charland received a six-month suspended sentence in May 2025. By late 2023, Charland was being accused of cult-like leadership by some Farfadaas members, who walked away, and the group went in decline, only to be eventually dissolved and not heard from again. To our knowledge, its former members are not currently involved in any far-right group activities, but we still need to keep an eye on this small circle.
The Mainstream Media
As we have seen throughout this overview, some mainstream media outlets have a genuine “fascism problem.” This is certainly the case for Radio X, as well as for QUB Radio (99.5), whose star hosts (Benoît Dutrizac, Richard Martineau, Sophie Durocher, etc.) regularly host many of the figures discussed in this document. As for the Journal de Montréal, it features a fair number of columnists (Bock-Côté, Joseph Facal, Richard Martineau, Sophie Durocher, Nathalie Elgrably-Lévy, etc.), who constantly harp on the usual reactionary obsessions, including anti-wokism.
Jacinthe-Ève Arel is a former CAQ member who ran for the PCQ in 2022. She has become a media figure regularly called upon to comment on current events from the perspective of the “libertarian” conservative right, particularly on Radio-Canada. Since February 2025, she has hosted her own show on 99.5 (QUB Radio), where she serves as a mouthpiece for the “economic right” and Éric Duhaime’s PCQ. She also co-hosts a weekend show with Rémi Villemure.
Christian Rioux—as the sole Paris correspondent for the Le Devoir newspaper, Christian Rioux spent years promoting the ideas of the French far right, including virulent Islamophobia and vicious criticism of “mass immigration”—which he portrayed as a “migrant flood”—and attacks on feminists and trans people, as well as denouncing “anti-fascist theater.” He was finally let go in December 2025, only to be immediately hired by the Journal de Montréal, where he published his first column in February 2026 . . . against halal food! You can take a look at the quality of his excessively repetitive and predictable columns here.
Despite Rioux’s departure, Le Devoir remains a leading voice in anti-woke commentary, notably through the writings of Patrick Moreau (a teacher in Ahuntsic and contributor to QUB Radio) and the PQ’s perennial éminence grise Jean-François Lisée, who also serves as a commentator and analyst on Radio-Canada’s “Mordus de politique.”
The Nazis
Frontenac Active Club (FAC)
The main neo-Nazi group in Québec—or at least the most visible—is the Frontenac Active Club (FAC), whose figurehead and leading militant is Shawn Beauvais MacDonald. This white supremacist groupuscule—a local chapter of the international Active Clubs network—never seemed to fully recover from the publication of our August 2024 report. Original posts on the group’s Telegram channel have become increasingly rare, with the few remaining posts consisting solely of reposts from other neo-Nazi accounts and channels (including Pagan Heritage, see below). The publication last March of an article by freelance journalist Rachel Gilmore on The Tyee website exposing former Olympian Giulio Zardo as a member of the Frontenac Active Club, who had made the gym where he was employed available to the group, certainly didn’t help the project’s cohesion, nor does the mental instability of its leader, who is regularly spotted around town dressed in Nazi clothing, hurling insults at people of color, and who had the brilliant idea of publicly intimidating Rachel Gilmore after her article was published. We continue to monitor the FAC and Beauvais MacDonald, but it appears that this project has stagnated and shows little sign of life.
Pagan Heritage
After the neo-fascist group Atalante Québec (which we have covered extensively on our website) effectively ceased to exist around 2023—a process brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, internal strife, and relentless attacks by anti-fascists—we lost track of most of its members. Only Jonathan Payeur, leader Raphaël Lévesque’s former lieutenant, remains on our radar. Under the name Pagan Heritage, he launched a small clothing printing company in 2025, and more recently began gathering together a few boneheads to carry out typical far-right activities: boxing training, leafleting, pagan ceremonies inspired by Viking folklore, etc. Based in the Québec City area, they maintain clear ties with Shawn Beauvais MacDonald and, by extension, Montréal’s Frontenac Active Club.
Jonathan Payeur is in a relationship with Adrienne Bernard, a tattoo artist and screen printer from Leclercville, who, it’s worth noting, prints the Nomos-TV rag. Speaking of Leclercville, it was in the rectory of this small town in Lotbinière that Jo Payeur organized an event last March aimed at “kicking off a new year of Pagan Heritage activities.” A group to watch.
Messe des Morts 2024
In autumn 2024, Montréal Antifasciste and its allies launched an information campaign and mobilized to denounce the participation of several bands with neo-Nazi (NSBM) ties and/or themes in their songs that were participating in the black metal festival Messe des Morts (MDM), held on November 28–30. Since 2017—a year after an antifascist mobilization against the presence of the band Graveland at the festival—MDM had been held at Théâtre Paradoxe in Montréal’s Ville-Émard neighborhood. This campaign sparked a significant backlash within Québec’s black metal scene, with many fans highly resistant to acknowledging the “Nazi problem” and another significant segment resolutely part of the problem. Despite all of our efforts to persuade the theatre’s administration to cancel its contract with the promoter Martin Marcotte of Sepulchral Productions, the festival took place as planned at the Paradoxe, leading to a demonstration (heavily policed by the SPVM) outside the theatre on November 29. Although this campaign only partially succeeded in preventing the neo-Nazi groups from performing, the protracted pressure brought to bear by anti-fascists forced Théâtre Paradoxe to sever its business ties with Sepulchral Productions, which was forced to relocate its festival the following year.
An Uptick in Graffiti in Hochelaga-Maisonneuve
In the winter of 2026, dozens of neo-Nazi and white supremacist symbols (swastikas, Celtic crosses, etc.) and Islamophobic, antisemitic, and anti-migrant slogans appeared on walls in Montréal’s Hochelaga-Maisonneuve neighborhood. The reaction was swift, with activists from the Front antifasciste populaire and other local grassroots initiatives quickly removing them whenever they appeared. Some of this hateful graffiti is believed to have been created by three neighborhood residents in their twenties, who were spotted by passersby. One of them is reportedly Olivier Brisson, an aspiring MAGA rapper in the orbit of the Islamophobic influencer Mandana Javan. This is proof that history repeats itself and vigilance must never cease, even in a historic stronghold of the anti-fascist left like Hochelaga-Maisonneuve.
Youth and Nazi Salutes at School
A recent study on sexist, homophobic, and transphobic students reported that students are giving Nazi salutes at school with alarming frequency. The media documented this phenomenon in 2023 at Les Chutes School in Rawdon, where six students stood up on their chairs in the middle of class to perform the Hitler salute while singing “Erika,” the famous SS military march. The testimony in the study is shocking, to say the least: the students involved are reportedly “always young white men, mostly prior to tenth grade—when the Holocaust is covered in greater detail in history classes—who are on a sports team or in the Cadets [a National Defense program for ages twelve and up] or who are part of a predominantly male social circle. The school does absolutely nothing” (testimony from the Montérégie region). It is obviously difficult to know if these students actually identify with Hitler and Nazism or are merely acting out to be provocative, but according to a teacher who participated in the research, “groups of students . . . are fans of Hitler, and they do Nazi salutes and draw swastikas; they even find Nazi songs from that era and sing them in the hallway.”
According to another account: “Yes, there are students who openly give the Nazi salute. Who are they? Young white boys, more or less popular, gamers. These kids follow masculinist accounts on social media. Examples? When a ‘person of color’ who is ‘popular’ walks past a small group of white boys and makes a joke to tease them, one of the white boys might give a Nazi salute behind their back. . . . A number of swastikas have been drawn on classroom walls, desks, and lockers. One student drew a swastika on the locker of a young Black student.” In 2024, the media also reported that teenagers in Rimouski had posted photos or themselves giving the Nazi salute on social media.
The Atomwaffen Division in Canada and Québec
A trial in Ontario concluded in March 2026 with a twenty-year prison sentence for Matthew Althorpe, 30, who pleaded guilty to three counts of terrorism committed in Ontario and Québec from 2018 to 2022. Althorpe allegedly “facilitated a terrorist activity, advised third parties to commit an attack, and committed an offense for the benefit of a terrorist group,” namely the US-based group the Atomwaffen Division, which Canada designated as a “terrorist organization” in 2021. He also produced and distributed hateful propaganda texts and videos, including for recruitment purposes. His accomplice, Kristoffer Nippak, 32, is still on trial at the time of this writing. The prosecution links him to Active Club Canada and identifies him in photos showing an individual with his face concealed under a skull-and-crossbones mask performing a Nazi salute next to a portrait of Adolf Hitler.
In Québec City, another trial began in February 2026: a sixteen-year-old is accused of spreading propaganda for the Atomwaffen Division. The teenager identified with the Kernatium Division, an antisemitic and xenophobic group that posts anti-immigration messages such as “your invasion of our country will fail.” At the time of writing, the trial is still ongoing.
As for the Montréal neo-Nazi Gabriel Sohier Chaput, alias “Zeiger”—about whom we published a comprehensive report in November 2020—his appeal of his guilty verdict for incitement of hatred was heard in Montréal on May 6. Let’s hope that if he is granted a new trial, it will be conducted more competently than the first one.
Conclusion: Toward a New Anti-Fascist Consensus
As we constantly repeat: the only real defense against the rise of the far right is solidarity, grassroots mobilization, and the strengthening of the movement for freedom on all fronts.
The main objective of a project like Montréal Antifasciste is providing information. When necessary over the years, we have also actively contributed to mobilizations and other interventions against the most overt far-right manifestations.
However, once the movement goes mainstream, these tactics are no longer sufficient. The entire progressive movement—whether radical or not—must organize to reaffirm, and if necessary redefine, the anti-fascist consensus and put it into practice at a grassroots level. This is precisely the mission of the Front antifasciste populaire (Front Pop), founded in 2025.
We will soon know what the main themes of the upcoming election cycle will be, and it isn’t looking good. The Liberal Party will spew its usual liberal and superficially progressive rhetoric, the CAQ and the PQ will vie for dominance in the nationalist camp, and the PCQ is poised to make significant gains by capitalizing on the hyper-individualistic ethos that has made it so successful in the Québec City suburbs. As for QS, a progressive party founded on a compromise it never strays from, we can only hope that it will pull itself together and adopt a combative stance, but, at this point, there is nothing to indicate that a shift of that sort is in the offing
Regardless of how the electoral process unfolds, our mission remains the same: to block the rise of fascism and the far right and to stand against all those who pave the way for them through complacency or complicity—every day and by any means necessary.
In the struggle that lies ahead, we must demonstrate moral clarity and never lose sight of the horizon of our most radical hopes. For example, we must remember—and constantly remind those around us—that hatred is never acceptable and must be fought wherever it rears its ugly head.
Finally, in an international context where the very notion of “antifa” is demonized by the scum of the earth, never, ever ask for permission to be anti-fascist, here and now.
///
[1] See, in particular, Francine Pelletier, Au Québec, c’est comme ça qu’on vit, Montréal, Lux, 2023.
[2] Nomos falls within the tradition of the French Nouvelle Droite, which, ironically, draws inspiration from the teachings of the Italian communist and anti-fascist theorist Antonio Gramsci.
An anti-fascist source infiltrated the private chat room of Nomos-TV subscribers. What’s on the agenda and within the comfort zone of this “safe space”? The answer is: unbridled xenophobia and Islamophobia; open contempt for the people of Québec, seniors, civic nationalism, and progressive sovereigntists; misogyny and transphobic hatred; and, of course, a constant stream of degrading remarks about migrants and people of color. In a context where certain reactionary elements of the mainstream media, particularly the Québecor empire, play into the hands of these racist activists by offering them a platform, using the pretext of free speech, we are taking the opportunity to present some of the findings from this undercover operation, reminding everyone—once again—that we will never accept the spread of hate speech in our communities, no matter what the useful idiots and apologists may say.
Subterfuge And Complacency: How Hate Speech Is Normalized
It will soon be eight months since we published a detailed exposé about Alexandre Cormier-Denis (ACD), in which we demonstrated the key role played by this ethnonationalist ideologue in Québec’s far-right ecosystem and the deeply racist and xenophobic nature of his political platform. After ten years of this sort of activity, you would think that anything remotely connected to Cormier-Denis and Nomos-TV would be persona non grata in the mainstream media.
While in Québec in 2026 the intense hatred of left-wing voices has become widespread in mainstream culture, the mass of hate speech that ACD pumps out is completely ignored by certain reactionary media personalities, who still choose to hand him the microphone and amplify his message rather than acknowledge what is going here or recognize in any way the work of anti-fascists and progressive journalists.
As a result, ACD and Nomos-TV continue to benefit from an outrageous degree of tolerance—even open sympathy—in certain corners of Québec’s media ecosystem, including Radio X (which has long since become the main mouthpiece for the entire right wing), as well as on platforms such as the YouTube channel Ian & Frank (which leans toward “libertarian” conservatism, and which “Nomosians” openly despise in private) and Radio Ville-Marie, whose director openly displays his affinity with ACD. On April 27, we witnessed a striking example of this complacency. QUB Radio host Benoît Dutrizac invited Cormier-Denis to give his account of what had happened a few days earlier,[1] when a Front antifasciste populaire mobilization at the Nomos-TV studio in the Plateau Mont-Royal neighborhood prevented ACD’s live broadcast.
COME TO OTTAWA MAY 28th, 7AM AT THE EY CENTRE TO SHUT DOWN CANSEC
CANSEC is an annual weapons trade show that has taken place in Ottawa since 1989 as ARMX and as CANSEC since 1998. CANSEC is promoted as “Canada’s leading defence, security and emerging technology event” when in reality, it is a marketplace for mass death. The companies invited to this event fuel genocide, occupation, theft and destruction of land from Palestine to Lebanon, Iran, Yemen, Sudan, Congo, the Philippines, and Wet’suwet’en territory.
DATE: May 28, 2026 TIME: 7:00 A.M. LOCATION: EY Centre, 4899 Uplands Drive
Make arrangements now to join us in Ottawa (Only 2.5 hours by bus or car from Montreal) to stop the genocidal supply chain and SHUT DOWN CANSEC. As we approach 1,000 days of genocide, we cannot continue to allow companies to conduct business as usual. Stand up against the companies and elected leaders at CANSEC who are there for one thing: to defend an industry of genocide.
Comments Off on We Gave Us This Day Our Daily Bread: Refusing Mamie Clafoutis’ Pain-opticon
May022026
Anonymous submission to MTL Counter-info
In the spirit of all those May Day expropriations that came before, we entered Mamie Clafoutis’ St. Denis location and filled our bags this morning in total rejection of the encroaching gaze of surveillance and and the false gods of capitalism.
Partnering with retail tech startup Leav, Mamie Clafoutis boasts that it is “pioneering a new era of automated smart stores.” This is the beginning of the same Amazon Go model that has already infected other cities, praised by media as innovation. Registering with a facial scan on their app can get you the ‘privilege’ of buying bread 24/7 in these automated, cashless bakeries.
Unmanned and always on, the Scan & Go system at Mamie Clafoutis enlists you in your own surveillance. We will not accept this shrine of control and enclosure chiseling away at us under the guise of a few moments of convenience. Here it must be cut off at the root, before this yuppie tech-slop lifestyle spreads not only to every bakery, every marketplace, but every moment of exchange of time, attention, and consent in our lives. We easily rushed this bougie store which turns daily necessities into luxury items that you need a face scan and a credit card to access.
These acts are not feats of legend, rather, they are simple, within reach, and ours to perform forevermore. Subsistence is not a product to be scanned. We aim to inspire those under the boot of capital to take whatever their hands, bags and minds can carry.
Comments Off on Announcing the 9th Annual Halifax Anarchist Bookfair
Apr292026
Anonymous submission to MTL Counter-info
Saturday September 12th {rain date September 13th} Location TBA
In every corner of the globe, in every culture, in every language, across time and place, there have been freedom-seeking peoples. They have been labelled fugitives, rebels, revolutionaries, abolitionists and anarchists. Like them, we seek to build social and political projects that speak to the needs of our communities, that weave our joy, grief and resistance into a basket that can hold enough for all to share. History does not remember well people like us, because we build homes and communities that feed each other, care for the land and are a threat to power. Those who seek to rule us build pyramids, cathedrals, skyscrapers, prisons and AI data centers in their vain quests for immortality & domination.
In our quest for autonomy, we recognize that there is no end point to the practice of building and rebuilding, because we know that as soon as one puts trust in a leader and elevates that leader above people – oppression is seeded. We are not capitalists, though we live in a world brutalized by capitalism, colonialism, and Victorian sensibilities of cis-heteropatriarchy. We are not communists, though we live under the oppression of state-nationalism, we dream of communal futures free of authoritarianism, and organize within unions. We are anarchists, even if that word can’t fully describe our diversity. We know that curiosity, solidarity, love, internationalism, mutual aid, and direct action is how we build the world we desire and deserve, even if it doesn’t come quickly.
If you think you or someone you know might be an anarchist, come on down to the Halifax Anarchist Bookfair!
On Saturday, September 12th, 2026 we invite you to join us for K’jipuktuk/Halifax’s 9th Annual Anarchist Bookfair to convene, scheme & dream a liberated world together. All ages are welcome to cultivate curiosity, solidarity & mutual aid through sharing books, zines, art, music, discussion, and skills.
We are specifically looking for workshop proposals and content around the theme Autonomy Beyond Borders. Some potential topics include: – Autonomous & anarchist movements in the Global South – International solidarity – Antifascist resistance in North America/Turtle Island – Migrant mutual aid and solidarity / anti-border struggles – Critiques of AI and the techno-fascist project – Critiques of nationalism, campism, Communism – What sets anarchism apart from electoral politics of the left – Indigenous solidarity & sovereignty
In short, we’ve put a lot of effort to share our self-defense advice as widely as possible so that anarchists and other rebels can protect themselves against repression. And it’s not over yet, since translations into Arabic, Italian, and Danish are underway, and our door is always open to anyone who wants to help us to diffuse it or to reach other formats and linguistic-geographic areas.
During this adventure, we’ve gathered three unusual anecdotes we wanted to share publicly —taking this opportunity to remind you once again: protect yourselves from the police; read our book.
1 – The cops
In autumn 2024, during the occupation of the University of Neuchâtel (Switzerland) in support of Palestine, people became suspicious of the strange behavior of one individual present. When confronted, the man admitted to being a police officer, undercover.
Several people at the scene then recognize the person in question. A few weeks earlier, he had gone to the local anarchist library to borrow a book. Not just any book, but our book “How to protect yourseld during a police interrogation”.
When the police officer, still undercover, came to return the book, he reportedly said he found it “interesting, but not really useful and too long.” We can well imagine that, from a police officer’s perspective, it is not really useful to learn how to defend oneself against the police manipulations used during interrogations.
So who knows, maybe our next book will be about attempts by the police to infiltrate our social movements. We promise to keep it as short as possible. We know that police officers don’t like to read.
2 – The Neo-Nazi
March 2026 in France. Intelligence agencies discover that several neo-Nazis are planning to assassinate another neo-Nazi. The information is passed on to the police, who rush to intervene. “Too bad,” some might say, while others will count the instances where the police failed to take seriously or simply ignored alerts regarding plans for attacks or murders targeting people of color or queer individuals.
In any case, what interests us in this story is what the police found during a search of one of the would-be murderers’ apartments: a manual on how to behave when dealing with the police, particularly during an interrogation1.
That far-right extremists read our book is, unfortunately, nothing new. The PDF of the book was already archived under the “resources” section of a far-right website a week after we published it online. We hope they choke on all the passages that highlight anarchist, decolonial, and queer-feminist perspectives.
Depending on how the investigation unfolds, we’ll see whether reading the book was useful to them or not. In any case, if they don’t end up in prison, they might get murdered by their own comrades. It’s well known that those who sow a macho culture of ultraviolence reap knife wounds in the back.
3 – The Elephant
One could define war as the moment when kings, emperors, governments, and other powerful figures send the poor to slaughter each other. But that would boverlook the enormous number of non-human animals that are forcibly conscripted by humans. Notably, war elephants. These animals—which, believe it or not, are non-war elephants before their capture—are trained in a way that will surely remind you of certain interrogation strategies described in our book.
Every possible means offered by the conditions of captivity will be used to mentally break the elephant. Disruption of sleep and food, loss of the ability to make daily decisions, physical and psychological violence, uncertainty about its future and the duration of this treatment, social isolation, and severing of ties with its family. Once the elephant is deemed completely broken, the trainer—known as the mahout—appears. The mahout brings with him a significant improvement in treatment, thereby creating an empathetic bond that gradually allows him to gain control over the captive elephant and lead it to submit to the trainer’s will.
The same approach, then, as the one used by the police in their “Life Preserver” strategy. In this strategy, everything is set up—through the conditions of detention—to weaken and break down the imprisoned individual as much as possible before their interrogation. The same arsenal of tools offered by detention, adapted for humans. Then comes the cop, bringing a glass of water with a smile, kindly offering to let them make a phone call to the outside world, creating an emotional hold over the detainee, making them feel indebted and thus lowering their defenses. The “Life Preserver” strategy begins.
Within the Evasion Project, we advocate an anarchist analysis of the dynamics of oppression. We believe that these dynamics build upon one another and reinforce each other. Authority deployed against one social group will, in fact, strengthen the domination suffered by another social group. Hence the need to fight them on the same basis: a hatred of all forms of authority and domination, regardless of whom they target—human or otherwise.
1«Le guet-apens de néonazis ciblait un militant… d’extrême droite radicale», Mediapart, 22 mars 2026
Comments Off on With Ambulance Chasers Like These, Who Needs Enemies?
Apr142026
Anonymous submission to MTL Counter-info
Or: Ambulance Chasing All the Way to the Xenophobia Hospital (On Identity Politics in Montreal)
Prologue
On March 9th, 2011, in Midan El-Tahrir in Egypt, the Egyptian military arrested an estimated 18 women. They tortured them and carried out “virginity tests” to be able to prosecute them for “prostitution” – a charge any unmarried woman who is not a virgin faces in most of the Arab world. In Egypt “prostitution” carries a punishment of up to seven years, and obviously social and cultural death if not an honor killing by the families. Women faced persecution for taking part in protests and various occupations of the square because of this case, combined with horrendous sexual assaults by security forces in the Midan. This story on its own reflects the severe consequences of conservative society. Conservatism is anti-insurrection, developed and encouraged by states to control ‘the crowd’ and ‘the people’. When every random aunty is an informant, and every random uncle is a prosecutor, who needs the state anyway? In the fight for freedom across these conservative communities, the fight against the state is one and the same with the fight against the dogma of religion and culture. In essence, a rebellion against “community”, the watchdogs of the state, cannot be separated from the fight against the state.
During the first intifada, Gaza was both the flame and the land of the intifada, it was a feminist intifada, a Palestinian women’s Intifada. The Islamists, including so-called feminists, and their allies, people who just learned to use the word revolutionary, freedom fighter, or even martyr, do a better job rewriting the intifada’s history than Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, or any Israeli propagandist could ever dream of. The intifada started in December 9th 1987, and ended in 1991, when it was sold out in negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and the Israelis in the Madrid Conference. More than 65% of Palestinian women in Gaza and the West Bank were active in the intifada in consistent commitment and capacity.
A brief run-through: in 1987 most of the Palestinian Authority and political parties were in exile. The men who did not manage to be in exile were either in prison or killed. When an Israeli vehicle ran over four Palestinians in Jabalia camp (the largest Palestinian refugee camp in Gaza and the one that just got leveled to the ground in Israel’s most recent genocide), riots broke out immediately. Issac Rabin ordered the Israeli military to use unlimited force to crush the riots, which led to the largest demonstrations, strikes, boycotts, and civil disobedience that Palestine had ever witnessed, all led by Palestinian women: feminist unions, Palestinian women militants, and Palestinian women in all the different political parties. They organized the marches, the riots, mutual aid, educational campaigns, neighborhood security, prisoner supports, prison riots, checkpoint riots, border riots, student and worker strikes.
When the Madrid Conference happened, women were still in “the streets” when they heard the news of the conference – they did not know that it was unfolding. Some of the women organizers boycotted the conference because they were fundamentally against negotiations and felt they could go further by not submitting to them. Some boycotted them for not being included, and others felt that they were betrayed by their comrades – because they didn’t share with them their plans of starting negotiations. To their total dismay and shock, the Palestinian comrades in exile initiated the negotiations in hopes of the return of “the men” from exile to “govern” and establish the Palestinian Authority in both the West Bank and Gaza.
Most of the Palestinian women who took part in the Intifada and ended up serving time left prison to a completely different reality than when they entered. They were shunned by the political scene and a conservative community that could no longer recognize them.
Within months of “the men” being back from exile, Palestinian women’s unions, affinities, and community organizations were shut down or had their role diluted because the “gun-waving real revolutionary militants” were back from exile. They had just sold out the Palestinian refugees in the camps in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria and jumped into the new project of fighting from “behind enemy lines”.
The negotiations were a sellout not for excluding Palestinian women, but for the delusions of supposedly winning a right to govern territories that are still getting swallowed whole by the Israelis. ‘Stop the Intifada and you get the right for political parties to enter the territories armed and all, with elections and a government.’ Who stops a rebellion to earn the right to govern over occupied colonized territories? Fools and traitors.
A hard truth to reflect on, in the face of the history of resistance and blood spilled with pure courage and a belief in freedom. That’s what authoritarians will always do though, and it’s not unique to the Palestinians. Some idiots on the “left” think pointing out this history will only benefit ‘the right’, as if ‘the right’ and Zionists need help with their work. As if any narrative ever managed to stop a genocide or liberate an olive tree. So we are shushed in times of peace and in times of war. Sometimes, I get to be shushed by random white people for not committing to Hamas revolutionary doctrine (the thawabet). To be clear, this history (women organizing the Intifada and the contradictory outcome of authoritarian governance) is needed to imagine a revolt or to claim the abilities to resist and fight, beyond the anti-insurrectional powers of Hamas — or other political parties who came to rise by negotiating on the back of what the Palestinian movement and Palestinian resistance managed to establish. Since their fight is for authority over Gaza, their first enemy is not Israel, but the people, just like any wannabe state. Acknowledging how political parties use resistance movements to claim authority is not a dismissal of affinity for freedom fighters, for those that show us how to resist from the bleakest of places. The spirit of rebellion does not emerge from Hamas or the PA and will exist beyond them and oftentimes despite them. To critique the authoritarians is to increase the capacity for the fight. Freedom cannot come to be by practicing what you are fighting against. Authoritarians are not the voice of the rebellion, they are the leeches that steal its soul.
During the Syrian revolution, every Friday’s mass demonstrations saw political debates with the Islamists who pushed to start every demonstration at the mosque. The Sunni saw the repression of the Assad regime against the Muslim Brotherhood and any religious organizing as an attack on freedom. And thus, a fight for freedom is a fight for religious affiliation. It was suddenly an established fact that the Sunni, the religious majority in Syria, were the most repressed under Assad – regardless of class, or proximity to governmental and economic power. So people who have never seen the inside of a mosque used to wait outside it for Friday prayers to end so they could start the march. Another debate: as allahu akbar became a chant in the streets — ‘God is the greatest’ — leftists still found a way of swallowing it – because if you squint your eyes enough, you will see that it is a revolutionary chant, since it is dismissing the power of the state and military by stating that God is greater than all.
I don’t want to go into what came of the Syrian revolution, but rest assured a new term was invented as the response to the aftermath of Assad’s fall and the ISIS takeover, it’s called Al-Mathlomiye Alsunnia as in the victimized Sunni mentality. It is inspiring all the ethnic cleansing, the religious repression, the political repression, and the push for absolute control over women’s bodies. You see, it was never established in the Syrian revolution that authority is the enemy, or that oppression is wrong. What was established and cemented is that the Sunni should rule, and they should not be oppressed. That’s it, that is the reality we live in in its wake, the reality that was crystal clear within 6 months of the Syrian revolution. The Syrians with all their sacrifices, with all their courage, with all their pain, remind us yet again of a lesson as old as time: pain does not make truth, pain and suffering and the overcoming of that suffering doesn’t always lead to revolution, to freedom, or even to justice. I mean just look at the Zionist project with its weaponizing of Jewish history and the Holocaust. Beyond the idea that pain in itself is not enough to make a path of justice or truth, courage in itself (while venerated) should not be a truth teller, the Joulani government winning the Syrian crown as an award for the sacrifices of the Syrian Sunni. The motto of this failed kingdom of God is “those who liberate decide”. The Syrian revolution with its protesters facing live ammunition with their bodies, as people created neighborhood councils, liberated areas, and shut down infrastructure, put your average anarchist in North America to absolute shame. That courage alone was not enough, and could never be enough. The revolution and its ideal is essential. No authority should be gained as a reward for the revolution: making the revolutionaries themselves into emperors just gives us another enemy.
Racism evolved its claws to become identity politics, so the first story about Egypt is to point out the obvious: community is not a static unit, community is ever-evolving and made up of its people with all their social conditions and their contradictions. Community, when we essentialize it as a unchallenged, protected category, will often be the voice of hetero-normative, conservative, male and religious authority. The second story about Palestine is to challenge the idea that resistance is based on command: that authoritarians are those who plant the seeds of resistance rather than those who suppress it. Highlighting the voices of authoritarians is a betrayal of all those who fought and will continue to fight. The words of the resistance and its people will not be found in the mouths of those who rule them. The third story about Syria is to point out that learning from each other and having empathy with all of this wretched earth’s pain should never be a ticket to impose one’s will or control. Those with the deepest wounds are not cleansing our sins the more they bleed, and they are not liberating us with their pain. Perhaps if we stopped the fantasy of Jesus on a cross for our salvation, we will see their humanity and we will fight for freedom rather than be busy worshiping those who fight or suffer. The embarrassment of having to say any of this is not because I don’t mean what I say, it’s because I don’t believe the participants in identity politics believe what they say. They are the ones who define who is the voice of the community after all. They are the ones who choose which is the voice of the resistance, and they are the ones who choose which pain we should acknowledge, because none of these social categories will ever have only one voice. The identity politicians are not concerned with listening, they are the playwrights, and they cast the actors based on an aesthetic, then justify their cast by attacking your identity, like dogs with rabies that do not ever want to be challenged. This prologue is an insult to my brain, because I engage with the idiotic excuses of identity politicians. As if they come from a place of logical thought, rather than pure lust to be rulers.
II
Montreal, October 2023: Early on, the demos for Palestine started rolling, after hesitation from many anarchists. When they finally started to show up, they saw their role precisely as one of representation. In one instance, a bunch of Arab kids took up some space and started getting rowdy at an action. Some anarchists walked up to their comrades asking them to support the kids. The response: we, anarchists, are there as guests, this is not our place. With another banner team responding with a no because the banner had their organization’s name on it. One kid got arrested. I don’t know why anyone would feel like a guest at a demo, I’ve never suffered from that mental illness, but for anarchists in Montreal to feel like guests they must have divorced themselves from the role of their empire in genocide and settler colonialism. I guess the point is you stop being a settler if you are just a guest, you stop being a part of the empire if you change your identity. Just a badge you have to wear, and there you are, absolved from any consequences that the system that serves you imposes. You don’t have to fight it. You just need to identify as an anarchist. As if it’s a descriptive identity not a practiced one.
At a meeting where we discussed not wanting to organize with an Islamist DJ bro wannabe political group, a comrade mentioned that they found it very important not to work with them, due to past history, and experiences with the bros (who were organizers and agitators of an anti-trans march). An anarchist who was present at the meeting as a representative of an anarchist queer group, jumped to assert that “as a queer person I don’t mind marching with transphobes, because this is not about me this is about Palestine”. A friend and comrade who I’m quite sure looked “white passing” at least to this brain-rotten comrade mentioned that the two issues are not separate, and it’s a simple question of not platforming them, rather than kicking them out. Another queer white anarchist jumped in, “we need to listen to the community, and not center ourselves”. The friend who is a Palestinian lesbian and a recent immigrant started shedding tears in silence, tears of an anger she would like me to clarify. My comrade did not go to another anarchist space or meeting, and the two white comrades burned out two months later, my wager is that they were exhausted from not centering themselves, and went back to their “usual spaces”. I don’t think they ever developed the brain power to realize how xenophobic they are, they essentialized homophobia and transphobia as cultural phenomena of the Arabs. A cultural heritage they must respect because it is not their community or their fight. They get to go back to their insufferable, curated, and safe tenderqueer white spaces, because we all know that homophobia is not part of the white settler culture! The Palestinian queers “if they existed” must stay within the voting bloc of these homophobes, because how many fucking caucuses under these identity politics can they get? Dare they one-up the “as a queer person” by saying “as a queer Palestinian” oh the pure horrors! You must protect the voting caucus at all cost. First rule of identity politics is to establish the uniqueness of your own identity in ways that reserve you a platform. After all, you are so unique, as a white person. The colored as they are must remain just colored, otherwise you will never get to speak as a white person. Protect your identity and its uniqueness at all costs, and diminish the complexity of others. You must rule.
Those who were getting bombed were represented by those who are mostly upper-middle class brown kids facing an identity crisis, they are conservative, pro-capitalist, and were leading figures in a political debate just because of their identity. Many immigrant communities tend to be conservative and pro-capitalist with insecure identity attachment that makes their claim of belonging to their home country as authentic as Dubai chocolate is to Middle Eastern desserts. But the booklet of identity politics for dummies does not allow such nuances by design, because identity politics is not there to start a discussion or promote understanding, identity politics is there to institute authority and shut down conversations. Your identity is just a claim for a speaking turn at the big revolutionary mic.
Then there was the camp, where the DJ bros had a big dick to swing now, thanks to the stroking of the queer and femme white allies. They started manipulating prayer times to make excuses for missing general assemblies, imposed halal zones (no gender mixing) and collaborated with cops openly and shamelessly. Any critique they received was Islamophobic. Any challenge they got was a challenge to the Palestinian voice. Did they want to take risks? No, they were there to represent. Other white allies also saw the camp as a place to LARP as a Palestinian refugee, some even saw that they got to be in a new category. They were the ones who are struggling for Palestine now, their body is on the line! They are sleeping in the camp, they are on the front line. Gaza’s borders moved to the lawn at McGill. Isn’t it so beautiful? Gaza is everywhere, the bombs are everywhere. How beautiful, they are no longer settlers of Canada, they are Palestinians! We are all Palestinians! Therefore those sleeping in the camp must get a bigger say on Palestine. At a general assembly, PYM announced that their legal fund will only cover those who get approvals for their actions from PYM. When I challenged it, a white comrade held me back, reminding me that we the anarchists have our own resources. I disagreed because my people in that moment were anyone in the camp, and an open challenge to idiotic decisions was needed if not for me, then for other less experienced people who were going to get fucked by identity politics. The unchallenged submission to the idiotic takes of PYM, M4P, SPHR, and finally anarchists for hire made it less of a political scene and more of a theater. The fact that the anarchists allowed themselves to participate in this clownery of general assemblies diluted both their politics and the quality of their actions. When finally there was a push to leave the encampment, two other immigrant women took offense at my vote because it differed from that of a Palestinian woman. I was told that “if my opinions were worth anything, I would see it as my duty to be supportive of the Palestinian woman”, yet ironically the same was not told to her. Because the two actually agreed with her, hence my opinion became a betrayal of my identity, and I am sure if they had agreed with me, that poor fellow Palestinian would have been at the receiving end of the weaponized tears (actual tears!) instead, until they made her submit to my opinion.
I would love to add here that I foolishly thought the moronic stands and shameless takes of many anarchists were due to a lack of experience in internationalist struggles, entrenched Zionism in Canadian culture, classic racism, and perhaps lack of clarity on worthy targets or projects to engage in. However, thanks to an onslaught of challenges, intentional feedback and conversations, the lack of success in even making a dent in the killing machine pushing us to review methods, and genuinely quick burnout from allies, I thought we were arriving somewhere. You see naively I thought the constant weaponizing of identity politics made people resentful of it. I assumed we were all able to clearly point it out as counter-insurgent and counter-revolutionary. Who am I though if not just another fool?
When Abisay was shot by the police, the identity politics came back in full force. Was it the first-ever police violence any of these so-called comrades had heard about? No. Was it about far-away people who they cannot understand? No. Was it about a system they have never lived under and forces that operate in ways they don’t know? No. Nonetheless, we were swamped with accusations of ambulance-chasing (or being “opportunistic”). White voices were the loudest to say that it’s not our place, it’s not our people, it’s not our neighborhood. You would think that if someone hears themselves othering people as a weird foreign species, they would realize that they sound more like fascists than allies, but that was not the case. You see? We had to submit to the idea that anarchists never interact with the police, anarchy is for whites only, and we all are middle-class or wealthy white college kids. We exceptionalize anarchy so much, and we spend years analyzing why we are not connecting with others, or why the space is so white. Perhaps because you yourself define it as a white space? But what do I know, I am just a stupid angry brown woman. The family, which had a clear and honest split between angry escalation and passive voices, saw the anarchists center the passive voices, bad-jacketing other anarchists and even threatening them if they engaged in what seemed like escalation. We are just there to grieve. As if grieving someone you don’t know, even more, who you would never want to know, because anarchy is only for whites, is a more honest position than attacking the police that you have your own vendetta against.
The white people who benefit from the system did not find it ironic that their vote was to be passive, to attack nothing, to burn nothing. They were the justice warriors waving the white flag to announce times of mourning. The community who live with daily police violence were cast as non-fighters, whose culture of passivity is now platformed by the pure souls of the white anarchists. We “the warriors of justice for hire” are just listening in on what the people want from us. We echoed the lines that the police issue in their statements after every killing, that if people are cute and obey the law, no one would die. That police violence is predictable and can be worked with in logical ways, we control the police violence. How fucking shameful. Escalated or not, burning a police station or not, these communities will always be hunted by the police, we are not bringing danger to them, if anything we could have managed to give them a breather by pushing the police for once to chase someone else. (But don’t take my word for it. Look at a few months later when they killed Nooran Rezayi and respected our politics by thinking we will lose our shit, and once nothing happened, they came back to reign terror on his friends with house raids at nine addresses. It is kind of sad that the police take us more seriously than we take ourselves!)
Pardon my digression, back to the far-away lands of Saint-Michel. When escalation arose, and the no-fucks-to-give among us were there to be active, to offer maalox, de-arrest, or simply reroute a confused brutalized crowd, we were seen as opportunistic adrenaline junkies who came to the suburb to put the community in danger. Those accusations were from comrades not the community. I don’t remember hearing it from people who I held hands with, who protected me and I them, when we had each other’s back. But I did hear it from white comrades who chose to come unmasked and unready, who could not even help a brutalized person up off the pavement, because they had “no masks on”. Those who came to the suburb to do virtue signaling as the good grieving white people. Forget escalation. Who is looking for an opportunity here? Why was it so important to you that a grieving racialized community see your ugly ass white faces? Did you want a hug from the angry brother? Did you want to be seen in pain? Were you trying to say that not all the white people are bad? Did you want to see them, or did you want them to see you? Alas, I the opportunist who cannot get my adrenaline anywhere else. You are the honest ones!
The anarchists and activists who have lived in the city for god knows how many years decided that you cannot act without social ties, so now is the time for community barbecues and relationship building. They could not have thought of the community-building projects before the shooting. When did the idea of connecting with the racialized community come up? After the killing, when it was trending on the news. That’s exactly what those dumbass, fool community members will see as the basis of an honest, reliable and truthful relationship. Well let me tell you my friend… Growing up in the slums of the camp made me immune to the NGO-y breath of allies arriving with their exciting plans and hot projects, those onlookers who came to visit us like they visit the zoo. Those who needed us for their project grants, those who needed us for their case study in the academic hall of fame, and those who down the line will mention how they connected with us on a date when they are trying to pursue the bleeding heart of a white woman. We smell you, no amount of raggedy clothes will cover your stench. No tears will make our pain one. To act from a place of honesty is the only thing you can do. Can I bring back Abisay with a riot? No. Can I stop future killing from happening if I learned about his favorite color or his route to school? No. Was he a unique special case? No. The idea that police violence can be taken as anything less than a systematic force that needs to be fought, whether or not one can testify in detail to how they’ve been personally impacted, will only benefit the police. Can we disagree on strategy? Sure. So: I think that police should be scared of us, we as a community can show force and anger, submission comes to you piece by piece stealing your soul until you are nothing but an obedient cog in the machine. Anger and vengeance make us connect with one another, anger makes us a threat so maybe the police will kill less, at least until we take them down. I just want to make them run away scared. That’s it, that’s my objective, I don’t want people to feel alienated, or that somehow, something could have been different about how they lived or acted that could have prevented the inevitable — the police are there to kill. Did I reach my objective? Not really I mean no police station was burned and no weeks of riots started. Was I there to play my hand and suffer its consequences? 100%. Did I run away? No. Did I only look out for or identify with the anarchists? Absolutely not. I was high-key embarrassed. Am I able to opt in and out of the fantasy of being able to limit police violence? No, and nothing will ever give me that protection.
Well then, how about you my friend? When was the second barbecue? Did your initiative end when the media left? When did you last speak to the mum? Did you drop her a fruit basket this month? Check on her? Are you able to name one new friend from the community? No. Because you are not there for a fight, but also because although you fetishize the community, and infantilize them, they are not fools. They don’t trust you, they know you won’t be there during a crackdown, and you will never be them. Your experiences with the police are lab-made in scheduled protests and fun graffiti runs. Maybe some drugs here and there, a speeding ticket. This will never change, at least not while you hold tight to your separation and unique category. Maybe when they finish killing all those of us that are colored, the immigrants, and the refugees, they will come for you the whites. Maybe only then will you not be too stressed about looking opportunistic, and you will fight and win a world safe for the white people. My wager is in that far-off future, the Irish will again not be white, the Italians will become Middle Eastern and the “us” will become smaller and smaller until you are swallowed whole. Do not worry that is not a sad end, it’s the only fantasy that helps me not punch you in the face.
This second part is an insult to my soul. For betraying my instinct and intuition, for choosing to act like I believe that people are held back from the fight by any myriad of these pretend reasons. The truth is, those who want to fight for something will always find a way, and those who look for an easy way out will always find it. Some seem to think that we should be suspicious of those who are enraged, the restless souls. That somehow we need to prove our anger, our sadness, and the place we want to fight from. How can you sleep at night though? How are you not angry? Stupid as I am, why is it suspicious when I try to practice my politics? How come it is not suspicious that you never practice yours? Are you so used to consuming the news, that you feel entitled to pictures of our body parts? Do you need me to share my stories? You want the stories of pain to munch on? If I prove to you my pain, would it calm down the rabies? How many stories though? Would my stories of the border police make me less of an adventurer? Arrests? Jail time? Cars gunned down at the camp gate? Sexual assault in exchange of no deportation? Hunger? Loss? You are not worthy. Last thing I read about white people collecting exotic body parts was the Belgians collecting hands in the Congo. You won’t consume my soul — or my history. I know it’s just a history, I am here now after all. I hold that history deep inside because I need to answer for it. You on the other hand want me to beat you into submission with the shame of not having a similar life, it’s a kink of the white allies. Not a tool for liberation. However, I want to answer for my actions, I want to tell you what I think, I want to make mistakes, to be brave, to learn from when I chicken out. I want a comradeship that challenges me, not a flock of dogs that I need to cut parts of myself to feed so they are companions on my path. I detest you.
III
I try to write every now and then, and always end up with an angry rant, inherently I do not think I have the talent for it. The suffocating repetition of this scene though makes it hard to interact, discuss, or even give or receive critique. Last October I had a major depression. I caught myself spiraling in a discussion where some people repeatedly asserted that as anarchists we should remember our positions of privilege and approach racialized and migrant communities with different, simpler projects rather than a clear political agenda. I am without status. I have no legal pathways to gaining one. So I angrily responded that I hope we stop defining anarchy as an upper-middle-class thing for white people. The white woman who I was responding to just snapped her fingers and nodded her head as in “preach sister”. I wanted to slap her soul out of her cheeks, instead I just turned red and stared at my feet. We are incapable of engaging with each other, because we actually don’t listen to each other. My spiral was due to the realization that I have become a caricature of myself, my anger is expected and awaited, to be consumed in meetings. We keep mentioning that these are white spaces, yet “they are just confused”, “it was a linguistic problem I don’t think they understand”, or better yet claiming that any mention of the Middle East even as an example is inherently a use of identity politics, when I get this feedback I am delusional if I think it is about race. Meanwhile France, Germany or even Italy is just another neighborhood in Canada. Dare I say that’s a practice of identity politics or centering whiteness or western experiences? No.
In an angry exchange with another organizer I asked him why as an anarchist he thinks it’s okay to protect his islamophobic zionist friend? He responded with: I can work with anyone, I work with the Islamists too! It’s true, he spent months centering an Islamist, campist and feminist voice and shoving her down our throat as the community representative. I wish I could go tell her his hot take that she was platformed so he can feel better about not challenging his zionist friend. No point in doing that, it will be exactly the same look an aunty gave when Arab anarchists showed up to the anti-trans demo and told her that she is marching with the fascists who want her killed and Gaza leveled, it was a look of shame, but a knowing shame that she only had to face because someone said it out loud.
Some think identity politics is helping start conversations about race or class or whatever. It is not, it is just starting an oppression marathon, just so white people feel legitimate participating. I was recently attacked by the metro tracks by an old white man who was enraged that I couldn’t speak French — it was not the first time in the city, but 3 out of the 3 francophones to whom I told this story asked me if the person was homeless. Wouldn’t you think that religiously repeating that fascism is on the rise amid ongoing obsession over language policies makes it strange for the first question to be whether the person was homeless? Of course they were not. I did not find the attack weird, but I did find the response out of place, specifically after all those conversations about “race” and how it’s not white people’s place to act. I mean if the conclusion is that we are so aware of race dynamics thanks to identity politics how come it only ever gets centered in conversations about our resistance? Quite suspicious no? Some think that the way forward is to ignore that identities exist. Just like that! As if I can wake up, decide that I am a citizen, that I do have papers, that I can go to the hospital or an airport. Others think we should just hide our identities, avoid being clearly anarchists, blend in, be whoever you want to be. Others maintain a distance between what they say and their actions. I will give you a tip, try asking them if maybe we don’t push hard enough because we don’t want to take risks. Or maybe we chickened out of escalation precisely because we don’t get bombed and we mostly don’t go hungry? You will see that people will be livid. They will reject such accusations, and you will be lucky to be merely the idiotic anarchist leading people into danger. It’s always: the time was not right because we do not have the public support, or the plan was stupid because it will bring repression, or we need to build communities to be able to act from them. How come it’s a given that the space is white and privileged, but it is not a given that maybe that’s the reason we do not act the politics we front?
Some people will not bat an eye starting every meeting with recognizing decolonized land. Our white privilege bla bla. Is this what people mean by shame is not a motivator? You think your anarchist project is to stop being ashamed of being white settlers with privileges? Do you start meeting with this is a white privileged space to disarm your biases or to just affirm your identity? Is this what they call manifestation? Were you ever ashamed though? Can you recognize what shame is? Let me help you. This is what shame looks like. At a vigil recently that SLAM held in honor of a woman who killed herself on the day of her eviction, some white comrades felt that it’s not our place to take a stand. SLAM should not have made a statement or planned an action because the woman was not part of the union, so it was “ambulance chasing” to step up. You would think shame about lack of racial diversity might have encouraged reflections on neighborhood outreach and the biases that led to a tenant union being primarily white in a city that does not struggle with diversity. That is not where the brains of these white comrades went, no, it went to do not make a statement. Do not plan an action.
A statement was written and a vigil was called. Unsurprisingly, the family was pissed, even the GoFundMe that the tenant made before her death mentioned having been cut off by her family and being in conflict with them. None of these dimwits will tolerate the voices of the family of a trans person if they knew the person had cut ties with their family, but again this person is brown, xenophobia kicks in, no analysis can withstand the exotic takes of community voices in the rigid minds of white allies.
The statement was taken down the day before the vigil, because the family said so. A statement which already did not mention her name and included an acknowledgment that SLAM didn’t know her. So here I am under the snow, tired, overworked and triggered by the trauma of a suffocating religious dogma. A white person in front of me starts the vigil with an apology to the family as they lock eyes with a media camera. If you are sorry why am I seeing your face? Why are you holding the mic? Why am I hearing your shaky tone of white fragility? Be sorry and go home! If you want to respect the family’s wishes you would have stayed home. If I am ambulance chasing, then why are you on the mic standing tall and being the white ally with the bleeding heart who is sorry to the family? Another ally joins in, “we are not here to speak of this person” (this person that no one spoke of to begin with, they were an afterthought in their own death, which was barely mentioned in news reports that led with Three police officers exposed to toxic gas), “we are here to commiserate”. The ally adds, “We have on-call mental health support!” How ironic, to deny the mental health of the dead because their family told you so, but offer mental health support to the white fucking crowd because they are a sensitive, empathetic species triggered by such a story. Another white person steps in to share their struggle against their landlord, their experiences vibrate with the anger and the frustration in the crowd, before the previous ally steps in again: “Let’s do a breathing exercise! Breathe in, breathe out. Feel your emotions”. Why are we taking deep breaths exactly? To calm down? Can you breathe your way out of an eviction?
The demo starts, about twenty stay behind, mostly the sorry allies because they need to hold the moment, don’t worry they will follow up – but they will not actively encourage participation in the march – they are just empathetic like that. They are not ambulance-chasing, they will join a march at a slow pace, conscious of every step, wallowing in their deep deep empathy. It is such a deep empathy they get lost in it, their head gets shoved up their ass and they’re stuck like a pretzel, unable to take action, and in need of community support for their hard organizing work. Incapable of being present for anything but themselves and their feelings, so fuck the person who just killed herself, fuck the family for not seeing their pure white hearts, and fuck the opportunistic angry anarchists. Later on in the demo, the police did the usual violence to comrades and then drove their car through the crowd that is now about 30. People dispersed in big buddy groups. On the way out the people of empathy had just made it, frolicking down, wondering why we dispersed and telling us how we should get back together in a community healing moment. Despicable people. Want to talk about the mental health crisis and the horrors of the conservative community? No. You just want to pick the easy way out, you are white you cannot struggle with the idea of being unliked.
You are not an ambulance chaser, because you do not want to put effort into anything but capitalizing on the image of the white savior. I hate you with all of my heart, you are the enemy, my advice to you is to chase an ambulance even once. Maybe you will make mistakes but the labor and the risk you endure will teach you to grow a spine, will force you to develop a principle to fight for and from. Maybe the ambulance will lead you to the xenophobia hospital that you so desperately need. Ambulance chasing is termed for those who gain benefits from crises like the NGOs that taught you this pacifist and idiotic theater of identity play. You want to play name calling? Let’s have fun with each other. Let’s claw at each other’s hearts until something gives.
When I die, you won’t find my family telling you anything passive, but I am sure your slimy souls will find a random aunty who once maybe knew of me who will tell you this is haram or that’s not what the community wants. When you find her, tell her that if I end up in heaven it’s only to kill God, so she better wish my death goes without the community’s blessing.
This text discusses identity politics in a limited capacity. In its essence it is a fuck-all rant. In the spirit of the insults making lines clear, it might seem like it is arguing for something, but do not be fooled. I am just trying to respect the Arab curse “I spit on you and your honor”. This disclaimer is not to protect white fragility, not at all, it’s precisely to limit the capacity to escape. I want to cut the road ahead before someone concludes with “oh well they could have been nicer about it, if they care to start a conversation”, or “the text is not really a political text so it’s hard to engage with”. I hope you don’t find it engaging, I hope it insults you, I hope it makes you angry, and defensive. In fact, if you do get insulted that might be your only redeeming quality. I am trying to insult you to find your humanity, I am trying to believe that you are not this super calculated villain. You insult me by dehumanizing me. We are not the same. Go build a fort at home and make it your safe space. Get the fuck out of my way.
#bringbackshame Breathe in Fuck you. Breathe out Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you. Pathetic excuse of a comrade.
A discourse attached to an affect in relation to demonstrations has percolated on the margins of the milieu of late. “I’m not really interested in demos right now”, “Demos are very limiting”, they say.
The leftist tendency to make calling a demo the default response to social problems has rightly attracted criticism. But these critiques are now being used to mask an entirely different position, according to which no demos are worth our time. I feel confident that a take-it-or-leave-it approach to such a wide class of tactics is rarely helpful in developing a coherent projectuality.
I find it easy to fall into a militaristic approach to combative demos. Will the cops be flanking us? Have I pre-scouted the terrain? Will we have a reinforced banner unit? Such questions can obscure that the primary level on which a demo gains force is social. Do we believe in what we’re doing together and why we’re doing it? Is this our fight? Are we invested in telling ourselves and others that it’s not? Who will I be able to make decisions with? Have we made space to acknowledge our fears? Do we genuinely believe we can win? The answers to these questions might have more bearing on whether a hundred people can overrun twenty riot cops.
The critics of demos are careful to draw a distinction with riots. Of course we like riots. But they hardly engage with the reality that most riots in our context arise from demos. Rather than exploring the conditions that make it possible for demos to turn into riots and how anarchists could create them more often, they simply oppose the two forms, one being reformist, the other radical. And they ignore that many of the skills that allow anarchists to act with intention in riots are developed in demos, especially in a context like ours where the latter frequently give rise to (brief) disruption and clashes with police. Communicating effectively within a crowd, accurately assessing threats and opportunities in a chaotic environment, street fighting, and dispersing safely are all much easier when it counts the most if you’ve already practiced these skills in somewhat lower-intensity contexts.
Don’t take this personally – I want more riots for all of us – but I suspect that many of the comrades fairly new to combative organizing who echo these generalizations about demos have never been in a genuine riot. I mean like one where you can stroll to the jewelry store in the middle of downtown to loot it, lighting fires along the way, no cop in sight, with the knowledge that three other groups of a hundred or a thousand people are wreaking havoc elsewhere. Am I holding out an exceptional outcome for the purpose of romanticizing an outdated form? A social revolution will see such exceptions leap into the lived experience of millions. What combination of combative offerings lies on the path from here to there? Only the mental rigidity of dogmatists answers in advance, in the singular, or to the exclusion of vast fields of autonomous activity. They say they want a social revolution.
I recently heard a comrade say they were able to enjoy demos again after they stopped taking them so seriously. Maybe that’s not possible for all of us, but I think there’s some wisdom here. Is there a source for the lighter affects of curiosity, exploration, and joy beyond the beliefs and practices we ourselves bring to the table? When comrades gather together to prepare for a demo, could it be in the style of planning an elaborate practical joke on the pigs?
The argument is made that demos are reformist. Indeed, even combative demos are often organized, if implicitly, around demands to the authorities. What can a group of resolute comrades do in such situations? Not much, unless they have already thought (for example) about how to give out a leaflet, paint a banner, leave the emcee and their sound truck behind at the meeting point. The banality of their immediate cause, as we know, is the calling card of revolts throughout history.
The real toll of physical injuries at the hands of police weighs on some comrades. But the conclusion that anarchists instead should only do covert attacks in small groups is mistaken, because the latter carry a different but just as consequential risk. You can execute your operational security perfectly time after time, until a series of small mistakes puts you in prison for years. Because many more people in our context participate combatively in demos than in impactful covert actions, we have less experience with this risk and it is less on our minds, but that makes it no less real. Does the psychic and physical toll of prison, of the State’s attempt to sever us from community, mean that people shouldn’t do clandestine attacks? No, the point is that repression in one form or another comes for everyone who chooses to fight domination in a meaningful way, regardless of tactics, which is why anarchists have a long history of preparing for and responding to it with practices of care and combative solidarity.
When the attitude that casts handing out a lawyer’s number in a demo as support for the legal system goes on to treat the skill of feeding people at a blockade (blockades are also bad) with the same dismissiveness, it’s hard not to see a thinly veiled machismo at play. This dynamic weakens our stance against repression, in one case rejecting the act of giving people a tool that could be of immediate help in an interaction with the State, and generally by devaluing the types of contributions that disproportionately make up the work of supporting prisoners and defendants.
Radical in-groups are known for a habit of looking down on others. Despite making some more nuanced points than the wider discourse it partakes in, the recent offline text “Obsessing over demos” literally opens with the image of the intrepid author(s) looking down from a mountain trail. Most of the time, I find a scornful and condescending attitude toward others doesn’t emerge from a confident relationship to one’s own ideas, which is an important starting point for affinity.
Is it awkward to be defending (some) demos when the loudest subculture around them within the militant sphere seems to have lost the plot? A March 15th that won’t call itself a demonstration. A May Day that won’t call itself anti-capitalist. If someone dares post on the groupchat about a different event on the holy day of the demo, we’ll have a good laugh about it.
As the extremists taking the side of a contagious disorder sweeping away the certainties and rituals of authority, we place ourselves at a disadvantage if we forget our wins faster than the enemy forgets its losses. It was only a bit over a year ago, on Nov. 22, 2024, that just a few dozen militants forced multiple units of the SPVM riot squad to retreat down an alley, before attacking the site of an international summit. Despite the milieu’s over-reaction to the SPVM’s predictable revenge tour over the following months, demonstrations and anarchists’ relationship to them are not some unsolvable problem.
Some paths forward ought to be debated. How can we give different forms to the element of surprise? Where and when does it make sense to go hard? Is it possible to bridge some of the larger meanings we give to these moments?
Our concept of autonomous self-organization should not revolve around demos. If no demo is where you personally want to put energy, that’s okay. But if your implicit claim that no one should ever engage with combative demos can’t even stand up to the counter-arguments of the most casual insu book clubber, you might want to ask yourself some questions. We are beset by the tendency to develop politics and strategy around the limits of what we personally feel willing and able to do. In a decentralized movement that prizes autonomy, strategic missteps are normal. The blanket dismissal of demonstrations as a tactic is one.
Comments Off on Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars in Damage to Concordia in Response to Repression
Apr062026
Anonymous submission to MTL Counter-info
A week of student strikes having just ended, this is a claim for a series of direct actions that spanned the course of the past two years including three nocturnal attacks. Pieces of Concordia University infrastructure were destroyed at a variety of sites. Based on their own estimates these damages cost the school hundreds of thousands of dollars.
These attacks were not done because of Concordia’s investments or ties. This was all done because of their attempts to pound their students into submission. These nocturnal attacks are being announced to erase any doubt in the simple minds of the university administrators who will do anything and waste all their money and resources just to chase after some authoritarian fantasy of an obedient consumer-student, administrators who have minds that are obsessed with their own ideologies, who live in echo chambers where their rich friends cheer them on and leave them out to dry when they see no results, and who throw tantrums when their perfect vision of order is disturbed time and time again despite the money they have wasted on their peanut-brained private security apparatus. We laugh at you because you waste your time on the hopeless dream of all tyrants while barely deserving such a title in your sandcastle empire. You do not understand that love for the world and the refusal to accept the abuse, brutalization, and slaughter of other humans is an eternal human tendency that will endlessly replenish the pool of people struggling for freedom. This human nature has never been stopped by such pitiable punishments and will renew itself endlessly and pour out of any and all cracks which we will make ourselves if we have to.
This was very easy to do. The nights were so quiet and peaceful. The air was fresh and cold. Whenever I fell upon a police cruiser leaving the site of an attack they didn’t even pay any attention to me. During the next period of student protests and before if need be, I hope more people will join me in responding to any repression blow for blow. Every person must take up these small and easy attacks when the time comes. Remember that no one will ask you to do this or get it started for you. You will need to find the power in yourself to step into the revolutionary wilderness and to never turn back.
If they insist on their authority, lost in their delusions of grandeur, let them face that grand destiny of all rulers who stubbornly held tight on their grip and refused to loosen their fists. To desire to be king forever leaves each to their own kingdom of ashes. They can govern that if they’d like.