Antisemitism in Canada

In colonial Lower Canada, Ezekiel Hart could win an election yet be barred from the assembly because he was Jewish. The extension of rights in 1832 changed the law, but later social exclusion and nativism persisted.

Explore Canada

Published by WTJPublication updated

A religious barrier becomes a border barrier

In colonial Lower Canada, Ezekiel Hart could win an election yet be barred from the assembly because he was Jewish. The extension of rights in 1832 changed the law, but later social exclusion and nativism persisted. During the Depression and Nazi rise, Jewish Canadians faced hostility while Jewish refugees encountered restrictive immigration policy. The Christie Pits riot and the refusal of the St. Louis passengers reveal two different channels: public mobilization and state decisions about entry.

1807–1832

A religious test · The voters choose Hart; the assembly refuses him

A Jewish representative’s election exposed the gap between local support and legal admission.

Ezekiel Hart wins election

Ezekiel Hart was elected to Lower Canada’s assembly in 1807 but prevented from taking his seat because he was Jewish. Neighbours had chosen their representative; officials applied a religious barrier. The story concerns colonial Lower Canada, before the formation of the modern Canadian federation.

Faith overrides the voters’ decision

The exclusion made religious identity a condition of political participation. Hart’s election could not by itself overcome the institution’s rules and interpretation of the oath. Antisemitism here worked through the authority to decide whose representation was legitimate, rather than through a street attack.

The law changes in 1832

In 1832, Lower Canada recognized people professing Judaism as entitled to the rights and privileges of other British subjects in the province. The change dismantled a religious disability. It did not create universal modern suffrage or guarantee that social prejudice had disappeared.

1933

Public hostility · A swastika arrives at a baseball game

Nazi-inspired agitation found a local stage in Depression-era Toronto.

16 August 1933

At a Toronto baseball game in Christie Pits, youths displayed a swastika to provoke Jewish Canadians. A major riot followed. Nazi symbolism was not confined to Germany: it could be adopted locally and directed at neighbours whose lives had no connection to the accusations behind it.

The symbol names an enemy

Displaying the swastika in this setting communicated anti-Jewish hostility. It turned a recreational space into a test of who could occupy public life without intimidation. Imported ideology became locally meaningful because an audience and agitators gave it a target in their own city.

People resist the intimidation

Jewish youths and others, including Italian Canadians, fought against the provocateurs. The confrontation revealed both organized hostility and a refusal to accept it. The riot should not be romanticized as an easy victory; it exposed a community forced to defend its place in an ordinary public setting.

1939

The closed border · A ship of refugees finds no Canadian welcome

Immigration policy turned prejudice into a refusal with life-changing consequences.

The St. Louis passengers

In 1939, the St. Louis carried more than 900 Jewish refugees seeking escape from Nazi persecution. After rejection elsewhere, appeals for admission to Canada also failed. The passengers returned to Europe, where countries accepted them, but the later war placed many under Nazi control.

Exclusion is an official decision

Antisemitism influenced Canadian immigration leadership and wider attitudes toward admitting Jews. Restrictions were not merely an unfortunate absence of sympathy. Officials possessed the authority to open or close routes, and their decisions narrowed the options of people facing persecution.

The consequences extend beyond the border

More than a quarter of the St. Louis passengers later died in the Holocaust. Canada did not operate the Nazi killing system, but its refusal contributed to the failure of refuge. Keeping those responsibilities distinct makes it possible to explain both the perpetrators’ crimes and the effects of other governments’ choices.

1945 / apology in 2018

Rebuilding & responsibility · An apology names the choice the country once made

Survivors built lives in Canada, while the refugee refusal remained part of its history.

Survivors arrive after the war

In the postwar years, Holocaust survivors eventually made homes in Canada and contributed to Jewish and wider public life. Their arrival changed a country that had earlier restricted refuge. The later welcome does not remove the earlier consequences, but it shows that policy and possibility could change.

The apology of 2018

In November 2018, Canada’s prime minister formally apologized for refusing the St. Louis passengers. The apology acknowledged antisemitism and the government’s decision. Naming responsibility matters because a national story of refuge can otherwise omit the people whom the border excluded.

Two gates, one question of power

Hart’s barred seat and the refugees’ closed border concerned different rights and different centuries. Both depended on institutions deciding whom to admit. The comparison exposes a concrete mechanism: prejudice becomes more consequential when officials translate it into rules governing participation or safety.

2023–present

October 7 & today · October 7 & today

Nativist and neo-Nazi suspicion met anti-colonial collective blame and transnational militant networks in Canada’s renewed crisis.

A school becomes a police scene

In November 2023, Montreal police investigated a shooting at a Jewish school. Toronto’s Bais Chaya Mushka school was shot at twice in 2024. Police reported no injuries in those Toronto attacks and were still investigating the motive.

A school is where a community expects children to learn and grow. The shootings made security part of that expectation. Their place in the aftermath was concrete even while investigations continued: institutions visibly connected to Jewish life had become targets, and the people who used them had to live with the uncertainty.

Old outsiders become presumed Zionists

Canada once excluded Jewish refugees and treated Jewish neighbours as religious or national outsiders. Neo-Nazi movements preserved the hidden-controller story. After October 7, B’nai Brith researchers also found self-described anti-Zionists reviving dehumanization and Jewish-influence conspiracies. On both sides, changing the label could leave the Jewish target intact.

Anti-colonial activism became exclusion when Canadian Jewish institutions or students were treated as agents of Israel. Canada also listed Samidoun as a terrorist entity; US Treasury identified it as a fundraising front for the Marxist-Leninist PFLP. A separate prosecution alleged an ISIS-inspired plot against a Brooklyn Jewish centre by a Canada-resident suspect. These were distinct routes by which overseas militancy entered Canada’s aftermath, alongside the return of older prejudice in everyday political language.

What it means to feel at home

Canadian police data showed a sharp increase in anti-Jewish hate crimes after October 7. The later decline did not return the figures to the earlier baseline. Jewish community reporting also described people withdrawing from public life or feeling less safe.

Some considered a move to Israel, and applications increased. Others remained and faced the question of how openly to live as Jews. These were different decisions, not one collective response. Together they show how hostility can narrow a sense of home even before a person decides whether to leave it.