Under Scrutiny Part 1: Second Sons Canada — Beyond the Masks

Under Scrutiny | Investigation 001 | Part 1.

What happens when an organization presents itself as a brotherhood built around fitness, friendship and Canadian identity, while independent researchers identify it as part of a broader white-supremacist movement?

That question is at the centre of this investigation. But it is only the beginning.

Second Sons Canada describes itself as a Canadian men’s nationalist club established in 2024. Its website emphasizes physical fitness, camaraderie, personal responsibility and mutual support among men who share its values.

Those activities, considered individually, are neither unusual nor inherently objectionable. Canadians join fitness clubs, community organizations and political movements every day.

However, understanding an organization requires looking beyond how it describes itself.

Second Sons also publishes messaging about ancestry, national identity and a perceived loss of Canadians’ birthright. Its public activities have included masked demonstrations, coordinated appearances and recruitment efforts across several provinces.

Independent researchers have documented connections between its leadership, earlier nationalist networks and the broader white-supremacist Active Club movement.

This investigation will examine those findings. But it will also explore something larger: the social conditions that contribute to the development of extremist movements, the appeal of their messaging and the potential consequences for the communities in which they operate.

Because the questions surrounding organizations like Second Sons are not exclusively about immigration. They concern national identity, social belonging, political participation and the kind of society Canadians want to understand and debate.

What Second Sons Says It Is

According to its own website, Second Sons combines fitness, fraternity and political activism. The organization describes a formal membership structure, fitness requirements, background checks and regional divisions.

It explains its name through the historical concept of second-born sons who, rather than inheriting family property, had to establish their own fortunes and legacies.

Its recruitment messaging connects that metaphor to contemporary concerns about identity, ancestry, immigration and the future of Canada.

The organization also says that members conceal their identities during public appearances to protect themselves from harassment and prevent opponents from obtaining personal information.

These explanations are important primary-source evidence. They establish how Second Sons presents itself, but they do not independently establish the accuracy of every claim the organization makes.

Understanding that distinction is central to this investigation.

What Independent Research Has Documented

The Institute for Strategic Dialogue identifies Second Sons as an organization operating within Canada’s white-supremacist Active Club movement.

Its research describes an organizational model that combines male camaraderie, physical training, recruitment and public activism. It also examines how these activities can provide opportunities for extremist networking and the wider circulation of exclusionary political ideas.

Second Sons is associated with Jeremy MacKenzie, who was previously involved in the online network known as Diagolon.

Reporting by the Canadian Anti-Hate Network documents the group’s March 2025 public appearance in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. Additional reporting and research have examined its subsequent activities, leadership and organizational development.

These findings provide a starting point, but they also raise questions.

How did Second Sons develop? What are its stated objectives? How does its recruitment process work? What organizational relationships can be established through public statements, official records and documented activities?

And how do its public explanations compare with the findings of independent researchers?

Understanding the People and the Sociology Behind the Movement

One of the central components of this investigation will be understanding why people become involved in movements that organize around nationalism, ancestry and perceived cultural displacement.

What attracts someone to an organization offering brotherhood, shared identity, discipline and a sense of purpose? How do personal experiences, economic uncertainty, social isolation and perceptions of unfairness influence political attitudes?

These are questions that sociologists, psychologists and researchers studying radicalization have examined for decades.

Research indicates that perceived injustice, group identity and feelings of exclusion can contribute to radicalization under certain circumstances. However, there is no single psychological profile that explains participation in extremist movements, and the presence of these experiences does not mean someone will adopt extremist beliefs.

This series will examine the relevant research and consider how organizations use messaging about belonging, identity, perceived threats and collective purpose.

We will also examine the distinction between an organization’s leaders, its active members and the broader audience attracted to its messaging. Those groups should not automatically be assumed to share identical beliefs or motivations.

The purpose is not to speculate about individuals’ psychological conditions. It is to understand the broader social processes involved in recruitment, group identity and ideological development.

We will also explore what happens when organizations develop strong distinctions between those they consider members of the national community and those they portray as outsiders.

These questions form part of the wider sociological investigation.

Immigration, National Identity and the Canadian Reality

Immigration is a legitimate subject of democratic political debate. Canadians hold differing views about immigration levels, economic effects, integration and government policy. Those disagreements do not, by themselves, establish extremism.

However, there is an important distinction between debating immigration policy and defining national belonging according to race or ancestry.

Second Sons’ published messaging about Canadians losing their birthright and being replaced by foreigners makes that distinction particularly relevant to this investigation.

We will examine those claims against demographic research, historical evidence and the realities of Canada’s economy.

For example, Statistics Canada found that immigrant workers accounted for 84% of the growth in Canada’s total labour force during the 2010s. Its research also identifies immigration as an important contributor to addressing labour shortages and the economic consequences of an aging population.

Immigration nevertheless involves genuine policy challenges.

Population growth can place pressure on housing, infrastructure and public services when investment and planning fail to keep pace. Research from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development recognizes both immigration’s contribution to labour supply and the pressures that rapid population growth can create.

These realities deserve examination together.

What does the evidence tell us about immigration and Canada’s economy? What are the consequences of an aging workforce? How do immigration levels interact with housing supply, infrastructure, productivity and the availability of public services?

And how does evidence-based discussion of these issues differ from claims that Canadian identity or national belonging depends on racial ancestry?

Future articles will examine these questions using demographic and economic research rather than relying on political slogans.

The Wider Consequences for Canadian Society

The implications of exclusionary concepts of national identity extend beyond recent immigrants.

They also concern Canadians whose families have lived here for generations, racialized communities, religious minorities and Indigenous peoples.

Organizations that define national belonging through ancestry raise broader questions about how people understand citizenship, community and their relationships with one another.

This investigation will explore the potential effects of exclusionary political rhetoric on social cohesion, public discourse and democratic participation.

We will examine research into polarization, prejudice, group identity and the circumstances under which extremist ideas can become normalized.

Public demonstrations will also receive attention. What messages are being communicated? How do communities and public institutions respond? What can be established about the organizers’ objectives, and what consequences have actually been documented?

Freedom of expression and freedom of association are fundamental democratic rights. They must also be understood alongside other legal protections and the rights of people affected by public demonstrations.

The aim will be to examine these issues through documented evidence, relevant law and credible research.

From Online Networks to a Public Organization

Second Sons did not emerge without a preceding history.

Independent reporting traces its leadership to Diagolon, an online community associated with Jeremy MacKenzie. Researchers describe Second Sons as a more formally organized group involving some of the same personalities.

Second Sons itself identifies 2024 as its founding year.

Its subsequent public activities, membership requirements and regional structure provide opportunities to investigate how the organization operates beyond social media.

We will examine the development of its leadership, recruitment practices, membership structure, website, public communications and organizational relationships.

The timelines accompanying this investigation document activities preceding the establishment of Second Sons and significant developments following its formation.

They will continue to be updated as additional information is verified.

What Under Scrutiny Will Investigate

This series will examine Second Sons Canada from two interconnected perspectives.

The first is an investigation of the organization itself: its origins, leadership, organizational structure, recruitment messaging, public demonstrations, publicly available corporate and financial records, and documented relationships with other organizations.

The second is an examination of the broader social issues surrounding movements of this kind.

That includes research into political radicalization, group identity, the appeal of belonging, demographic change, immigration, national identity, polarization and social cohesion.

Where appropriate, we will draw upon sociology, psychology, history, economics and legal research to provide context.

We will distinguish between the organization’s own statements, independently established facts, researchers’ interpretations and questions that remain unanswered.

Not every association establishes an organizational relationship. Not every allegation is a proven fact. And an organization’s public statements cannot automatically be treated as a complete account of its activities.

Nor should research about extremist movements be used to assign psychological characteristics or motivations to individuals without supporting evidence.

These distinctions will guide the reporting.

An Investigation That Will Continue

This introductory article marks the beginning of an ongoing investigation into Second Sons Canada and the wider issues associated with its activities and messaging.

Future installments will examine specific events, public statements, organizational relationships and records. Other articles will take a broader approach, exploring relevant research into immigration, demographics, social identity, political polarization and the development of extremist movements.

The dedicated investigation page will maintain a chronology of events and provide links to the complete series.

Readers will be able to consult the underlying sources, examine the documented findings and follow developments as the investigation progresses.

The objective is to make the evidence accessible, explore the broader questions, identify the limits of what can be established and provide readers with the information they need to reach their own conclusions.

Stay curious. Look closer. Keep the conversation going.

— Laurie