In the aftermath of Canada’s recent federal election, the political landscape has entered familiar territory—a Liberal minority government has once again taken shape, narrowly missing a majority by just three seats. While the Conservatives gained ground and the NDP lost enough support to dip below official party status, the public reaction has been a microcosm of a growing issue: misinformation and political tribalism. Amid the noise, one thing remains clear—Canada must reframe how it discusses and digests politics.

The election results themselves are straightforward: the Liberals retained power, the Conservatives made gains, the Bloc Québecois lost seats but remained relevant, the NDP dropped to seven seats, and the Green Party’s Elizabeth May kept her seat. But what followed was far more complex—and troubling. On social media and even in casual conversation, the rhetoric of distrust surged. Cries of “fix,” accusations against news outlets like CBC and CTV, and vague theories of election tampering proliferated. The troubling part? These claims weren’t rooted in verified facts, but in frustration and political disappointment.

The Rise of Misinformation: “It Must Be Fixed”

The reality is, networks like CBC and others projected the Liberal win based on models and data patterns used in modern elections. It’s not a conspiracy; it’s analytics. Yet, the refusal to accept a result without evidence of wrongdoing has taken deep root. And here’s the irony: if a fix had occurred, would any party orchestrating it settle for a minority? If the Liberals had control of the process, surely a majority would be the logical goal. The theory collapses under the weight of its own logic.

This trend—of rejecting results not because they’re illegitimate but because they’re undesirable—presents a growing challenge to democratic stability. Social media exacerbates it. Posts that claim fraud, share doctored images, or reference debunked conspiracies spread like wildfire, not because they’re true, but because they align with people’s frustrations. One example was a false narrative targeting Mark Carney, linking him to pedophilia—a claim rooted in doctored video content. It’s not just incorrect; it’s lazy, dangerous, and corrosive.

That laziness—failing to fact-check, reposting without reading, blindly accepting claims because they match our emotional state—is perhaps the most dangerous political trend of all. Sharing misinformation isn’t passive anymore; it’s an act that undermines trust in institutions, damages reputations, and fuels division.

But there’s hope. Fact-checking sites exist. Tools exist. And more importantly, a constructive culture of calling out misinformation—kindly but firmly—can reverse course. When friends or connections post falsehoods, providing factual corrections without hostility makes a difference. In fact, some people, when confronted with verifiable truth, take down their misleading posts. That’s a win. It’s slow, it’s unglamorous—but it’s progress.

There is also a deeper philosophical divide: the desire for change without understanding its consequences. One voter wanted “something different,” even though they couldn’t articulate why. That kind of change-for-change’s-sake can be dangerous. It undermines stability and invites risk.

That isn’t a call to resist progress or reject criticism. Canada has issues—every country does. But labeling the entire nation as “broken” because of disagreement with current policies or election results is hyperbole. It’s not only inaccurate; it’s defeatist. Canada isn’t broken. But Canada can be broken—by us—when we refuse to participate constructively, when we sling accusations without evidence, or when we divide ourselves based on who we voted for rather than the values we share.

There is however hope that this minority government era can be one of collaboration rather than conflict. The best democratic outcomes occur when parties challenge each other respectfully, push each other to be better, and operate with decency. This doesn’t mean avoiding criticism or debate. It means choosing civility over chaos, facts over fury.

Even in our relationship with other nations—such as the United States—the tone we adopt matters. Whether at the border or online, Canadians have a chance to model kindness and decency in every interaction. The negative behaviours creeping across borders—hostility, suspicion, prejudice—don’t have to be mirrored. They can be met with grace instead.

Ultimately, the message is simple but powerful: Canadians must reject disinformation, engage in critical thought, and prioritize decency. Whether liberal, conservative, or otherwise, the thread that should bind us is not colour-coded loyalty—but shared values of integrity, tolerance, and truth. That’s how we move forward—not as factions, but as a united people in a free and open democracy.