Canadians woke up on Sunday to grim news from the other side of the world. A Hanukkah celebration on Sydney, Australia’s Bondi Beach—meant to mark light, survival, and faith—was shattered by a brutal antisemitic terrorist attack. At least 16 people are dead. More than 40 are injured, many critically. Early reports suggest two gunmen armed with long bolt-action rifles deliberately targeted Jewish civilians, killing them for no reason other than for who they are.
This was not an accident. It was not random violence. It was targeted, ideological hatred carried out in an advanced, pluralist Anglosphere democracy that looks, in many ways, uncomfortably like Canada’s.
Australia is not a failed state. It is a liberal society with strong institutions, the rule of law, and a long tradition of both immigration and multiculturalism. And yet, on a Sunday meant for prayer and celebration, Jewish families were massacred in public. The parallels with October 7 are impossible to ignore, not in scale, thank God, but in intent. Innocents were murdered simply because they were Jews.
That alone should stop us in our tracks.
For Canadians, this attack cannot be treated as a distant tragedy. Over the past two years, we have seen synagogues firebombed, Jewish schools shot at, and Jewish Canadians subjected to intimidation, threats, and dehumanizing rhetoric in cities across this country. Police cruisers stand guard outside places of worship not as a precaution against the unthinkable, but as a response to threats that are very real.
We should now be honest with ourselves: The conditions that made Sunday’s attack possible in Australia exist here.
Since October 7, something corrosive has taken hold across much of the Western world. Instead of a clear moral line being drawn against both terrorism and antisemitism, we have witnessed a growing tolerance, sometimes even justification, for intimidation, harassment, and violence aimed at our Jewish communities. What once would have been unspeakable is now shouted in the streets and typed brazenly online, often without consequences or shame.
That erosion of moral clarity is dangerous.
The article warns of a 'corrosive' element in the West. What does this mean for Canada's pluralism?
Beyond condemnation, what concrete actions does the article suggest to combat radicalization?
The article states liberalism and pluralism are 'not a suicide pact.' What does this imply for free speech in Canada?
Comments (14)
The last couple years traveling in Europe if you want to see heavily armed police just go visit Jewish parts of cities
This is a disease and we have imported it here. We cannot control it because the liberal party needs these votes