Keep American Culture Wars Out of Canadian Classrooms!
This is not an abstract concern.
This is not a hypothetical.
This involves my sister—a Grade 6 student—who recently came to me asking for help with a school assignment.
The prompt asked students to write about a “historic event from last year.” That framing alone sets a reasonable expectation: a civic milestone, a democratic change, a major political development relevant to the society these children actually live in.
Instead, my sister, from Ontario, was assigned a topic centred on Charlie Kirk, an American political commentator whose public profile exists almost entirely within U.S. culture-war politics.
That choice is not merely questionable. It is unbelievably inappropriate.
My sister is eleven.
She is at an age where students are still learning:
- What Parliament is
- How elections work
- The difference between institutions and personalities
- How civic disagreement is supposed to function
Charlie Kirk is not an “event.” He is not a policy outcome. He is not a democratic turning point. He is a living, partisan media figure whose influence is built on provocation, framing, and ideological conflict.
Expecting a Grade 6 student to meaningfully analyze that—without fully formed media-literacy skills—is unbelievably inappropriate.
Even if one were inclined to stretch the definition of what “historic event” is, there is still no justification for assigning an American commentator to a Canadian child in a Canadian classroom.
Canada has its own political system.
Its own institutions.
Its own civic responsibilities.
If the goal was to explore a significant political moment from last year, there were numerous appropriate Canadian options, including:
- The first year of Mark Carney's government
- Jagmeet Singh's resignation and its impact on federal politics
- Pierre Poilievre's by-election
- Parliamentary roles held by figures like Michael Ma or Chris d’Entremont
Those are real civic developments. They help students understand their country.
Charlie Kirk does not.
“It Was Just an Option” Is Not a Defence
My sister did not choose this topic.
She was assigned it.
When an educator assigns a topic to a child, they are signaling that it is:
- Educationally valid
- Appropriate for the student's age
- Aligned with curriculum goals
That is not neutrality. That is a professional endorsement, whether intended or not.
This Is a Failure of Judgment
This is not about shielding kids from politics.
It is not about partisanship.
It is about the basic expectation that elementary education should be grounded in age-appropriate, nationally relevant civic learning — not imported American culture-war figures with no relevance to a Canadian Grade 6 classroom.
My sister deserved better than this assignment.
So do her classmates.
And saying that plainly should not be controversial — it should be the bare minimum.
— Will Adams
Editor, The Provincial Times
