Mentally Messed Up
Blog Archives
Majority of Canadians continue to oppose new immigration: poll
Ari David Blaff
Tue, September 30, 2025 at 6:00 a.m. EDT
4 min read
Majority of Canadians continue to oppose new immigration: poll
A majority of Canadians feel that the country does not need new immigrants and people are divided over whether newcomers should have to give up their customs, according to a new national poll.
The survey, conducted by Leger for the Association for Canadian Studies found that 60 per cent of respondents disagreed that “Canada needs new immigrants,” with the highest levels of opposition found in Alberta (65 per cent), Ontario (63 per cent) and Quebec (61 per cent), followed by Manitoba and Saskatchewan (60 per cent), the Atlantic provinces (56 per cent) and British Columbia (48 per cent).
The poll found Canadian immigrants were slightly more supportive than non-immigrants of opening the country to future waves of newcomers. Just over half (52 per cent) of immigrants agreed that “Canada needs new immigrants,” while 37 per cent of non-immigrants felt the same. Still, 48 per cent of Canadian immigrants disagreed that the country needs more immigration.
Jack Jedwab, the chief executive Association for Canadian Studies, told National Post in an email that he was “surprised” by the findings, which came “in the midst of one of the biggest debates over immigration in Canada in the past 25 years.” Jedwab pointed to a Statistics Canada report released last week that shows the country’s population growth has virtually plateaued and that new arrivals are needed, despite the public’s growing weariness.
“Canada needs immigration despite many feeling otherwise,” he wrote. Jedwab placed some of the blame for anti-immigration sentiment on the government for failing to communicate effectively with the public on this issue. “Our politicians need to offer a reminder about the importance of immigration and redirect the debate to how many are needed in line with the country’s capacity.”
The youngest (aged 18 to 24) and oldest (65 years and older) respondents were the most supportive of welcoming new immigrants, at 46 per cent. Anti-immigration sentiment was highest among “working age” cohorts, Jedwab said, which “may be attributable to the perception of competition in the workplace, something that requires more validation than is the case currently.” He also explained that besides economic factors, “concern around security issues … can’t be neglected” when seeking to understand the growing skepticism toward immigration.
Respondents were also closely split on the question of whether Canadian newcomers should culturally assimilate, with 51 per cent agreeing immigrants “should give up their customs and traditions and adopt those of the majority.”
Respondents in Quebec were most likely (60 per cent) to support the statement, followed by Alberta (55 per cent), the Atlantic provinces (49 per cent), Ontario (48 per cent), British Columbia (47 per cent), and Manitoba and Saskatchewan (46 per cent).
Jedwab pointed out that, on the other hand, the overwhelming majority of Canadians (85 per cent) believe “it is important to pass on customs and traditions to future generations.”
“There is a lot of confusion around this issue as half of Canadians are saying on the one hand that immigrants should give up their customs and traditions and become more like the majority, while the vast majority of Canadians are saying that it is important to transmit our customs and traditions to future generations,” Jedwab wrote.
“In other words, it’s okay for ‘us’ to preserve customs and traditions but not for newcomers to do so. The conversation around newcomer integration needs to be better defined than is currently the case,” he wrote. “Clearly, the discourse around integration and assimilation in Canada appears to reflect less the pride in our mosaic that we used to hear more frequently.”
Despite Canada’s reputation as a multicultural mosaic, the poll found that Americans — historically known more for their reputation as a cultural melting pot — were actually less supportive of cultural assimilation than Canadians. Nearly three-quarters (71 per cent) of Americans disagreed that immigrants “should give up their customs and traditions” compared with just under half of Canadians (49 per cent).
https://rumble.com/v6zn5no-elder-roundtable-building-in-group-preference.html
Round Table: “Building In-Group Preference for Whites”
For instance, they saved the ostriches yesterday in the demented Dominion, but it took the Supreme Court to do it and that only temporarily. A more craven cowering Supreme Court it would be hard to find, but the public outcry was, for once, convincing. One can only hope that people who saved the birds stay standing upright. Our government agencies are all jack-booted genocidal maniacs and it’s not just birds they want to kill. The Journal of Death and Dying this week reported that Health Canada plans to save $1.73 trillion from 2027-2047 by persuading 14.7 million (nearly half the country) Canadians to accept medically assisted dying. How? They plan to withdraw hospice and palliative care. Nine million elderly, four million mentally ill and 300,000 indigenous are on the kill list. The balance will be the homeless.
Our replacements will be the 100 million Muslims they plan to import from the Middle East and Africa. Think I’m kidding? Not even a little bit. That is the stated policy of the Liberal Party of Canada. And apparently of every other left-of-center political party in the supposedly democratic west. Including the U.S., if the Democrats win any election from here to 2050.
Will that wake up this wretched country? Will it? I skidded out of Canada for the States at top speed at the age of 28, because of the passivity, the craven comfort seeking, the lack of courage and nothing has changed.
Of the ten thousand people I know in Canada, no one gives a damn. And I grew up among the well-heeled, well-educated middle class. Privileged. Privileged because like my family, theirs built the damned country and were coasting on the achievements of generations past. Today, to a man or woman, they roll around in comfort, “travelling” and joining “book clubs”, playing pickle ball and golfing and sailing and boasting at parties. Their only time thinking about someone other than themselves is a reluctant nod to socialism, thinking it is right and fair and luckily they’ll be dead. Besides, what can they do, they’re just one person? (Plus, look what happened to Lizzie, no one will talk to her. Conrad Black, the only other individual who grew up in my early world, went to prison.)
These are the people with the skills and money to do the necessary work. In one year, if they woke the hell up, all this mayhem would be over. But no, it’s left to the scrappy people at the Rebel, and a handful of others on Substack, and the tremulous grinding scared-to-death Conservative party, doing Trojan work, underfunded, with the entire force of a vicious closeted Marxist government against them.
Across the west, in Europe and the Anglosphere, western civilization and your very lives, and the lives of your children, are at severe risk. For all of us, if we don’t engage, Islamization will be our fate. Our culture gone and once we have had everything we own extracted, offered death-by-government-injection. At some juncture, three decades ago, as I count it, the malignant left joined with the malignants among Muslims in the Middle East, and planned to destroy Christianity once. and. for. all.
This week Lara Logan interviewed Katy Hopkins, a more braw soldier it would be hard to find. To the question of what the hell is happening in Britain:
“Very powerful forces who knew what would be necessary to overthrow a country were operating 20 or 30 years ago, putting the scaffolding in place to overthrow a nation and way before it hit road level, tarmac level where people start to see things, way before that in the bedrock of the thing, the scaffold of the thing, the takeover is in place and then you have Muslim mayors in every city, every city. In the most northerly islands where three or four live in the remote Hebrides there is a mosque built, and in the furtherest south there is a built mosque with not a Muslim in sight. All of the structure and infrastructure is built around an Islamic takeover. In the U.K., the Mayor of London is a Pakistani Muslim, the Head of the Justice system is a Pakistani Muslim, and the Home Secretary is a woman named Shabana Mahmood.
What Is a Canadian?
The Question That Defines Us
| Michael BatorSep 27 |
What does it mean to be Canadian?
To me, it isn’t about the paperwork in your pocket or what Ottawa tells you to be. It’s about living the values, the culture, and the freedoms that built this country. Canada belongs to its people—not to bureaucrats, not to lobbyists, not to global institutions.
My father once told me: “A title doesn’t make the man—the man makes the title.” In the same way, Canada was not made by politicians, but by ordinary people living out the timeless principles of Christianity, Roman law, and Greek philosophy. That foundation gave us a high-trust society rooted in moral values and personal responsibility.
Our Proud Canadian Moments
When I think of what it means to be Canadian, I think of our proudest moments:
- The Trucker Convoy — when ordinary men and women stood shoulder to shoulder for freedom and reminded the world that Canadians do not bow to tyranny.
- Terry Fox — who showed us courage, sacrifice, and hope by running a Marathon of Hope across this great land.
- Vimy Ridge — where young Canadians fought and won together, giving birth to a nation’s pride on the world stage.
- The 1972 Canada–Russia hockey series — when Paul Henderson’s goal wasn’t just a victory on the ice but a declaration of who we are: resilient, united, and unwilling to back down.
These stories define us. They prove that being Canadian means rising when the odds are stacked against us, daring to stand for what is right, and never letting fear dictate our future.
What We Risk Losing
And yet, today, we see those very foundations being chipped away. Through the spread of DEI bureaucracy and ideology, and through policies that erase our history and silence our voices, it feels as though the essence of being Canadian is being rewritten—our culture diluted, our identity blurred.
If we allow that to continue, we risk losing not only our freedoms but the very spirit that makes us Canadian.
The Canadian Spirit
A Canadian is someone who cherishes freedom—freedom of speech, freedom over your own body, and the right to live without coercion. We stand firm against top-down controls like lockdowns, digital IDs, and international dictates that strip away our sovereignty.
A Canadian is resilient. We don’t fold under fear. We step up, we speak out, and we discover that we are far more capable than we ever imagined. That spirit—that courage—is what makes us who we are.
I Am Canadian
So when I say, “I am Canadian,” I mean I am free. I am sovereign. I am part of a community that takes care of one another. And I will defend those things with everything I have.
Unlike most social-democratic parties, Denmark’s has been winning elections since 2019.
That’s because the Nordic country’s centre-left party has stayed true to its working-class roots. Rather than allowing itself to be run by what French economist Thomas Piketty calls “the Brahmin left” — by which he means educated city elites — Denmark’s Social Democrats have been taking blue-collar workers seriously.
The country has had a long tradition of valuing work done by the hands, including with sophisticated trade apprentice programs that ensure wages are often similar to university-trained professionals.
Denmark’s Social Democratic Party Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen also recognizes blue-collar workers have reason to worry about high migration levels. Countries that bring in many workers from offshore tend to experience a reduction in wages, studies show. Pressure also rises on health care, housing costs and schools.
Denmark’s PM, who herself has working-class origins, decided a decade ago that a progressive party has to restrict migration to retain an egalitarian, cohesive welfare state. To that end, Denmark’s left-wing government has been lowering immigration levels and deporting people who enter illegally.
t
The New York Times recently ran a sympathetic seven-page feature article about Denmark, asking: “Around the world, progressive parties have come to see tight immigration restrictions as unnecessary, even cruel. What if they’re actually the only way for progressive governance to flourish?”
Given the political culture of North America, once the The Times poses such a question, it becomes OK to discuss it in centre-left circles.
In Canada, people like Simon Fraser University’s Sanjay Jeram, the University of B.C.’s David Green and others have for years called for just such a “healthy debate” of migration policy, but with limited success.
Meanwhile, only a few North American centre-left politicians — like Sen. Bernie Sanders or B.C. Premier David Eby — have gone out on a progressive limb to raise some migration policy downsides.
Not so the PM of Denmark: “There is a price to pay when too many people enter your society,” Frederiksen told The Times. “Those who pay the highest price of this, it’s the working or lower class in the society. It is not — let me be totally direct — it’s not the elite people. It’s not those of us with good salaries, good jobs.”
Tightening borders is just one way Denmark’s centre-left retains the loyalty of the rank-and-file. Others include new legislation to enable blue-collar workers to retire earlier than professionals.
Denmark also stops landlords from raising rents for five years after purchasing residential apartments. And it provides free education through university, including a monthly stipend of about Cdn$1,200.
Such generous benefits, says Frederiksen, can’t be offered if borders are too open — if the population balloons without a sufficient tax and business base.
Despite Denmark’s rigour on migration, it’s worth countering impressions that it isn’t cosmopolitan. Thirteen per cent of residents are foreign-born. In Copenhagen, that rises to 16 per cent. The nation continues to welcome newcomers, including refugees.
While Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has talked about how Canada should have “negative growth” in population, the Liberals’ Mark Carney became PM in April in part because he vowed to fight Trump on tariffs, but also because he pledged to moderately lower migration rates.
In contrast, the social-democratic NDP, under Jagmeet Singh, was more enthusiastic than Trudeau about mass migration. Singh was ready to go further to open borders than Trudeau had been, particularly by advocating bringing in more parents and grandparents.
A rare glimmer in Canada of left-wing concern about migration came this month, when Eby called for a national “serious and adult conversation” on migration levels.
t
Eby connected “very high” youth unemployment, chronically low wages and overburdened social services, including food banks, to record numbers of temporary foreign workers.
Denmark’s Social Democratic Party, which has just won elections against the populist right, has brought in policies that have made obtaining citizenship more difficult, including requiring applicants to speak conversational Danish, and has changed asylum rules so a temporary crisis in another country is no longer grounds for a permanent stay in Denmark.
Canadian thinkers like Queen’s University’s Will Kymlika and Keith Banting said more than seven years ago that it’s not possible to have both a welfare society and wide-open borders. They called it the “progressive’s dilemma.”
Princeton economist Angus Deaton, a Nobel laureate, says the trouble with North America’s current centre-left is it’s dominated by academics, urban lawyers and public-sector managers, rather than, as it was decades ago, by labour.
That means the leadership, Deaton says, often doesn’t recognize how high migration policy can exacerbate economic inequality: It has a way of benefiting the affluent, while poor and working-class people, including recent immigrants, bear the burden.
While some accuse Denmark’s Social Democratic Party of getting tough on migration in a cynical effort to draw votes from the right, even the party’s critics acknowledge the shift is authentic.
‘‘For them, it’s not just a strategy,’’ a member of a rival left-wing Danish party told The Times. ‘‘They mean it.’’
Trump Skewers UN for “Globalist Migration Agenda” & Climate “Con Job”
by Paul Dragu September 23, 2025
Article audio sponsored by The John Birch Society
https://trinitymedia.ai/player/trinity-player.php?pageURL=https%3A%2F%2Fthenewamerican.com%2Fworld-news%2Fun%2Ftrump-skewers-un-delegation-over-globalist-migration-agenda-climate-con-
President Donald Trump skewered the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday for its refusal to support peace negotiations, its financing of disastrous open-border policies, and the litany of erroneous climate doomsday predictions the organization has made over the decades.
“What is the purpose of the United Nations?” Trump asked after lambasting the globalist organization for not helping him negotiate peace between nations. This was one of many digs he took at the UN in his nearly one-hour scold fest.
The UN is meeting for its 80th annual conference in New York City. The organization’s influence has been dropping precipitously, and so have its resources. Dwindling American support has played a major role in that decline. And on Tuesday, Trump showed no remorse.
Peace President
In typical Trumpian fashion, the president bragged about his peace negotiations. He mentioned his mediation role in a series of conflicts: the ones between Cambodia and Thailand, Kosovo and Serbia, the Congo and Rwanda, Pakistan and India, Israel and Iran, Egypt and Ethiopia, and Armenia and Azerbaijan.
However, he said on Tuesday, it’s “too bad I had to do these things instead of the United Nations doing them.” He piled on:
And, sadly, in all cases, the United Nations did not even try to help — in any of them.… I never even received a phone call from the United Nations. I realized the United Nations wasn’t there for us.
The president then mistakenly said the UN was not living up to its “great potential.” That suggests he may not understand the real reason a cohort of certified communists created the UN, i.e., to serve as the foundation of a world government. A world at peace is not fertile ground for global government. A chaotic world, however, is. It’s in a world at war, a world ravaged by a pandemic, that global governance comes about. Many people within the UN’s agencies have openly admitted the reason for the organization is to bring about world government. You can read more about that in our previous report here.
https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?
Migration Mayhem
Trump got back on the right track when he said the only thing the UN is good for is “creating new problems for us to solve.” He then segued into one of the largest crises the organization created. “The United Nations is funding an assault on Western countries and their borders,” Trump said, adding, “The UN is supposed to stop invasions, not create them — and not finance them.” The UN, he pointed out, gave food, shelter, transportation, and debit cards to illegal aliens. “Can you believe that?” he said. He was referring to the organizations’ role in the open-borders policies of the Joe Biden years. Trump took swing after swing in this vein:
You’re destroying your countries. They’re being destroyed. Europe is in serious trouble. They’ve been invaded by a force of illegal aliens like nobody has ever seen before.… And nobody is doing anything to change it, to get them out. It’s not sustainable.… Your countries are going to hell.
Trump also detailed the carnage the “globalist migration agenda” brought not only to host nations, but to the migrants making dangerous journey to Europe or America. Open borders has facilitated human trafficking, which he dubbed “inherently evil.” Over 300,000 people were kidnapped and taken into slavery or ended up dead. “They’re lost or they’re dead because of the animals that did this,” Trump said.
Control Your Borders
Every sovereign nation must have the right to control their own borders. He said migrants should immediately be sent home, especially those who’ve broken the law and claimed asylum under false pretenses. Citing the Council of Europe, he said almost 50 percent of people in German prisons were foreign nationals. In Austria, that number is 53 percent. In Greece it’s 54 percent. And in “beautiful Switzerland,” a whopping 72 percent of prisoners are foreign nationals.
Common sense policies are the answer. Trump:
Proud nations must be allowed to protect their communities and prevent their societies from being overwhelmed by people they have never seen before with different customs, religions, with different everything.
What makes the world beautiful is that each country is unique, he said, a sentiment that flies in the face of the anti-West, pro immigration narrative that’s forced down the throats of Western nations.
Populist Uprising
The immigration crisis has created momentum among nationalistic political coalitions in England, France, Germany, and other nations. Just last week, Tommy Robinson’s Unite the Kingdom rally drew at least 100,000 people to London to protest, first and foremost, the open border policies ruining the once-mighty United Kingdom. In France, Marine Le Penn’s party has gained significant influence because of its anti-immigration stance. And same goes for Germany’s AfD party.
https://platform.
Climate Con Job
Immigration and suicidal energy policies will be the death of Western Europe if something is not done, Trump reiterated, before transitioning into another destructive policy pushed by the UN, what he referred to as the “the greatest con job” — the “green scam.” He rightly pointed out that the alarmists have for more than a half century screeched about incoming climate catastrophes:
It used to be global cooling. If you look back years ago … they said, “global cooling will kill the world, we have to do something.” Then they said global warming will kill the world. But then it started getting cooler, so now they just call it climate change. Because that way they can’t miss.… It’s the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion.
In 1982, the executive director of the UN environmental program predicted that by 2000 “climate change will cause a global catastrophe,” Trump said. It would be as irreversible as any nuclear holocaust. “This is what they said at the United Nations. What happened? Here we are.” He brought up another failed climate prediction. Trump:
Another UN official stated in 1989 that within a decade entire nations could be wiped off the map by global warming. Not happening.
He pointed out how absurd it is for some nations to deindustrialize their economies in the name of reducing their carbon footprint while their efforts are offset by countries that don’t implement the same policies. Trump mentioned how countries such as China have more than made up for the carbon emissions Europe has reduced. He pointed out that green policies have spiked energy prices for the Europeans, mentioning Germany by name.
Western Greatness
In his speech, Trump also reminded his audience about the greatness of Western Civilization and the blood and sweat it took to build such a mighty society. It was a stark contrast from years of self-hate from Western leaders. He made many comments praising European culture and the beauty of cultural distinctiveness.
It’s good that the United States has a president who recognizes that Western Civilization ought to be preserved and that the United Nations has been a threat to that. For too long, Democratic and Republican administrations have ignored the malign impact of this malevolent organization. But the most important step is action.
Stop the UN
Here in the United States, The John Birch Society, the parent company of this magazine, began warning about the UN all the way back in 1962. Knowing that the UN was a root of many problems, JBS founder Robert Welch launched the Get US Out! Of the United Nations action project. Birchers embarked on a comprehensive, nationwide campaign with the goal of severing ties between the United States and the UN. Many people still remember the billboards and the pamphlets. The JBS has persistently chipped away at UN support in this country from the 1960s until today. And now it appears that mainstream sentiment has finally caught up with the Birchers.
Every country in the world needs to get out of the UN. It’s not enough for the Trump White House to point out how much disaster the UN has caused. Congress needs to push through already-existing legislation withdrawing the United States from this globalist organization, and Trump needs to sign it. That is the only remedy to curtailing the disastrous impact of the UN. Check out this page for more on what you can do.
Trump Blasts UN Over Immigration, Climate in Combative Speech
Catherine Lucey, Josh Wingrove and Jennifer A. Dlouhy
Tue, September 23, 2025 at 2:00 p.m. EDT6 min read
(Bloomberg) — President Donald Trump assailed the United Nations and other countries in a grievance-laden speech that saw him accuse the world body of offering nothing but “empty words,” label climate change a “con job” and warn that open borders are destroying them.
His closing message swept aside some of the UN’s most cherished files: climate change, which Trump repeatedly called a hoax, and uncontrolled migration, which he declared the top political issue of the era.
“Countries that cherish freedom are fading fast because of their policies on these two subjects. You need strong borders and traditional energy sources if you are going to be great again,” Trump said Tuesday, after warning bluntly: “Your countries are going to hell.”
He faulted the UK and Germany over green-energy policies, and Greece and Switzerland for allowing in immigrants. He blasted Brazil for what he said was censorship and repression.Trump reserved his sharpest attacks for other countries’ immigration policies and for UN support for asylum seekers. Trump accused the UN of “funding an assault on western countries and their borders,” citing efforts to provide aid to migrants.
“The UN is supposed to stop invasions, not create them, and not finance them,” he said. And he cited longstanding complaints from Democrats and Republicans alike, who have often lamented — though rarely in such blunt terms — that the UN has become little more than a talking shop.