Étienne-Alexandre Beauregard: Nationalists in Québec City, woke in Ottawa?

On Don Cherry and the Order of Canada.

(Don Cherry in 2022, photo taken from X.)

The Conservative Party’s proposal last week to appoint Don Cherry to the Order of Canada sparked a lot of controversy, particularly in Quebec. Following the familiar refrain of “Quebec-bashing,” politicians and pundits compiled unflattering quotes, and made outraged comments, as if honouring the controversial sports commentator were a grave insult to the entire nation.

A Bloc Québécois MP even went so far as to accuse him of making “contemptuous remarks […] towards all those who are not white, English-Canadian men.” To anyone with a little perspective, this over-the-top reaction, the desire to “cancel” him, and this tirade against “English-Canadian white men” bear a striking resemblance to the modus operandi of wokeism—a movement against which Quebec nationalists are, after all, the fiercest opponents on the other side of the Ottawa River.

When Quebec nationalists defended Sir John A. Macdonald

As recently as 2020, when protests rocked the world following the George Floyd incident, progressive activists vilified the Premier of Quebec with the same rhetoric for his refusal to subscribe to the theory of “systemic racism.” Recall the statements of Professor Amir Attaran, who called Quebec the “Alabama of the North” for its refusal to bow to woke rhetoric. He drew unanimous opposition in Quebec, and rightly so.

Similarly, when vandals attacked the statue of John A. Macdonald in Montreal, he found an unlikely ally in François Legault. Although Macdonald isn’t popular among Quebecers, we recall that “Riel will be hanged even if all the dogs in Quebec bark in his favour”—it was a matter of principle. It is unacceptable to let a mob of radicals tear down a statue simply because they dislike what it represents. Mathieu Bock-Côté, writing in the Journal de Montréal, pointed out that it is a mistake to reduce “the most important of the Fathers of Confederation” to the status of “father of the residential schools,” because “we must consider men within their historical context to understand them, and even the greatest leaders are not saints.” The late historian Frédéric Bastien, a former candidate for the leadership of the Parti Québécois, also authored a notable op-ed in the National Post in support of keeping the statue of Canada’s founder:

In Quebec as elsewhere, people understand that the historical memory of anyone who is white and of European descent has become a target of hate. […] In Quebec, a few weeks before John A.’s statue was toppled, a monument commemorating Adam Dollard des Ormeaux, a long-celebrated figure who died defending New France against the Iroquois, was also damaged. In a communiqué released to the media, the perpetrators said that Dollard represented “Christian fascism.” This event showed Quebecers that their cultural heritage is now also under attack. […] This is why the majority of Quebecers refuse to remove Macdonald’s statue.

Consistent nationalism respects the memory of others

Looking back in 2026, it does seem quite hypocritical—especially when one opposes “decolonial” attempts to deconstruct Quebec’s history—to react in the same way when English Canada wishes to honour its own heroes. When one is a nationalist and even slightly consistent, logic dictates recognising the right of other nationalisms to express themselves in their own lands, and the right of other peoples to celebrate their national memory.

Don Cherry is one of English Canada’s best-known icons: his Coach’s Corner segment entertained hockey fans for 38 seasons, and his colourful jackets were known to all, as was his oft-repeated support for the Canadian Armed Forces. Let us not forget that, despite occasional chauvinistic remarks towards Quebecers, he always expressed deep respect for heroes like Maurice Richard, Jean Béliveau, and the Francophones who fell in battle during their military service. Moreover, in English Canada, he represented a sometimes clumsy opposition to federal multiculturalism, which has “symbolically erased its English Canadian component.” Quebecers who criticise institutional multiculturalism but lack the ability to understand why Anglo-Canadian conservatives appreciate him should be careful what they wish for.

Preston Manning or Marc Miller?

Nationalists who attack Don Cherry should ask themselves who their allies are in English Canada. Quebec has rejected sovereignty twice, remains in Canada until further notice, and votes in federal elections. It cannot therefore afford to ignore this consideration, at least from a strategic perspective.

For some strange reason, it has become part of the Quebec media discourse, since the birth of the Reform Party, that Western Conservatives somehow represent the Nemesis of “progressive” Quebec within the federation. Thus, a figure like Preston Manning—who has always criticised multiculturalism, who wanted to cut immigration in half as early as the 1990s, and who seeks to reform federalism to give more power to the provinces—is not popular in Quebec public opinion. He is apparently the antithesis of “Quebec values,” even though today’s Quebec nationalists have almost the same demands as he does.

Marc Miller embodies the other end of the spectrum in federal politics: an Anglo-Quebecer from Montreal, he speaks perfect French, embraces Canadian multiculturalism, and could never be suspected of idolising Don Cherry. On the other hand, he sharply criticises Quebec politicians who are concerned about the decline of French, finds it “unfair and cruel” that Quebec does not provide subsidised daycare spots for asylum seekers, and is part of the government that wants to prevent Quebec from using the notwithstanding clause as it sees fit. Meanwhile, Danielle Smith’s Alberta will argue alongside Quebec in favour of the preventive use of the notwithstanding clause before the Supreme Court, and is planning a referendum to restrict services available to asylum seekers in its own province.

As Quebecers and as nationalists, this story should give us pause. By fearing an Anglo-Canadian patriotic assertion more than the unbridled multiculturalism of Canadian progressives, we paradoxically choose the politicians most hostile to Quebec national sentiment, precisely because they do not share that sentiment for their own people. Those who are throwing tomatoes at Don Cherry today may regret it tomorrow, when it is Lionel Groulx or Pierre Falardeau who gets attacked.

Étienne-Alexandre Beauregard is a contributing editor at Without Diminishment, an author, and a researcher at Cardus. His latest book, Anti-Civilization: Why Our Societies Are Collapsing from Within, was published in September 2025 by Presses de la Cité. He was formerly a speechwriter and strategic planning advisor in the office of the Premier of Québec.