Part of the reason is the failure of our school systems to teach the history of Canadian resistance to U.S. threats, incursions and trade sanctions.

No way.

They are susceptible because they use "products" (i.e. social media) that's been specifically engineered to manipulate your opinions and worldview. That's by design, and young minds are more easily corrupted by it.

There is also a growing number of extreme right-wing, "alpha male" influencers who are specifically targeting young males through social grooming and manipulation strategies.

When you've got elementary school teachers overhearing their 11-year-old students talk about people like the rapist and misogynist Andrew Tate, you can hardly blame a lack of history education on it.

Wait until they have to find a job to pay for their health insurance

Those who fail to (or refuse to) learn history are doomed to repeat it.

Young people are dumb and easily impressionable.

Most of us look back at our 20 year old selves with varying degrees of embarrassment.

That being said, 20 year old me was dumb, but not dumb enough to be a Trump supporter. I knew better. Who knows what would have happened to my brain if I grew up on social media though.

They've never really looked closely into just how fucked up the US is in a lot.of ways.

The article's definitely giving "old man yells at clouds." The (alleged) hyper-credulousness of an entire generation is quite a lot to put on students not being required to memorize names and dates in history class. Much like the other various subtle anti-woke undertones throughout, strip away the biased framing he puts on modern education and the only functional differences (to my knowledge) are ditching the memorization, and making space to pursue more individualized selections from a wider, more inclusive sampling of historical knowledge.

I guess we just can't possibly contextualize or interpret current events without the specific curated (sanitized) historical narratives and nationally approved biases that shaped his world view. "Post-national" really means learning to work with a wider, more diverse community because that's a key skill in modern society. You know, like having peers with different knowledge than you. It also means maybe just a bit of time spent honestly looking at ourselves.

Sorry Gen-Z didn't all get inoculated with a standardized America-wary but Canada-special curriculum. I guess without the author's specific brand of unifying indoctrination, we're all just cooked. Somebody learned about residential schools instead of the war of 1812, and now they'll never know America bad. Meanwhile, I was homeschooled for religiously motivated reasons, using American-sourced curriculum that was mainly focused on two top priorities -- that I read good and reject evolution. I got zero training in critical thinking, and American exceptionalism came preloaded.

What I didn't have was a broadband brain-rot feed, with direct access to deliberate disinformation campaigns and intellectual groomers.

Historical knowledge is not why our newest voters are lacking patriotism and buying into American exceptionalism. Elsewise, the things we've learned about ourselves nationally over the past decade or two would be curing all ages of national pride. But acknowledging the bad doesn't diminish the good -- it explores the better. Speaking of better, an education that instills wariness toward the U.S. is good, but I bet it won't help solve the housing crisis. And you know what might give Gen-Z a stronger connection to Canada? Yeah, it's housing.

So I'm still going to put my money on social media and especially right-wing influencers sinking their claws in young impressionable minds, before their critical thinking/analysis skills are anywhere near adequately developed for an ecosystem that's rotting plenty of adult brains too -- including those with a similar age and education to the author's. I think most middle and high-school teachers will indicate they've already figured this out, as half the commenters in here are also doing. I'm not sure why the author can't.

I would count it as certain fact that every single society that's ever hit any sort of national identity crisis point has spawned commentary from people insisting that the "problem" is that young people are no longer being indoctrinated with some set of ideas with which they used to be indoctrinated (and with which the commenter personally agrees), and that that has made it so that they can be and are instead indoctrinated with some other set of ideas (which the commenter personally opposes) instead.

I would say that the rather obvious problem is indoctrination in and of itself, though unfortunately the solution to that problem is almost certainly more evolutionary than societal, and it's going to take at least one and likely a few more mass die-off events before humanity will have any hope of beating it.

For whatever any of that's worth, to those of us on the wrong side of that event.

I'm not buying that older Canadians are any more informed about history, but putting that aside, maybe it's young Canadians self-interest. The article doesn't actually examine why they would want to join the US, but guesses at it being the consequence of "woke" policy. The pieces just aren't connected.

They may feel they have less to lose and more to potentially gain than older Canadians, who built up wealth and pensions in an economy that no longer exists. If they expect the country to offer worse pay, lifestyle, and services, disloyalty is not unreasonable. If a life in Canada means no home ownership, no healthcare or pensions in a few years, and that they won't be able to retire, that sounds a lot like the offer from the US. They're reasonably not sold on dying for Canadian oligarchs over American ones.

The average yank doesn't even know what a tariff is but Canada's problem is that our teenagers don't have a nuanced enough understanding of North American history?

The obvious answer is brainrot. But don't expect a thinktank writer who wrote history textbooks to give you a non-self serving answer.

Probably also the lack of education on US'es history of occupation over the last century and how occupied territories don't get to vote for US representatives.

Kids are dumb and that makes them more likely to adopt the kinds of views educated people should know better than to adopt. For example in high school I very much supported right-wing libertarianism which lasted just until I got an actual job

ITT: young people

I think a lot of it is simply counterculture. I think there's just an inherent urge to resist and go against the stream for a lot of young people. This is how it's manifesting this time. Which is one hell of a bummer.