Tag Archives: multiculturalism

Summary of Canada in Decay by Prof. Ricardo Duchene by Eric Brazau

Posted on by


“A nation created by diverse immigrants”

1971 96% of Canadians were of European origin

Today 2017 less than 80% of European origin Toronto and Vancouver 50% are non-white.


Not long ago everyone in Canada, the media schools, political parties took it for granted that “Canada was a British Nation”, or an “English – French Nation” or simply “a White Nation”. No one challenged Prime Minister Mackenzie King when he said in Parliament in 1947 that Canada should remain a white man’s country.

Nation created by diverse immigration

P. 17 

1) 1871 first census after Confederation 3.2 million – 32% French ancestry, 24%    Irish,    20% English, 16% Scottish, 6% German. 21,500 Blacks, 23,000 Natives

2) 1867 97% had been born in Canada. 400 years before Confederation there were only “to limited period” of substantial arrivals of immigration 1783 to 1812 – 1830 to 1850 – majority British – 1871, to 1891 high birth rate 3.7 million to 4.8 million”

3) 1608 to 1760 New France 10,000 settlers. By 1770 and 90,000 surviving. Birth rate 5.65 lower Canada 330, 000 in 1850 to 890,000 1851. By 1950 Quebec population 4 million and 1970 Montreal saw non-European immigration

4) 1896 to 1914 3 million immigrants 84% British and French 9% European. 1914, 400,000 Germans in Canada.

5) 1946 to 1962 immigration 2,151,505. During 1946 to 1962 population grew from 11.5 million to 18.5 million. 90% of immigrants to Canada before 1961 are from Britain

6) 1971 to 1981 33% from Asia 16% Caribbean and  South America 5.5% from Africa. 1991 to 2001 European immigration fell to 20% Asian immigration increased to 58%. Visible minority population was growing at 22% from 1996 to 2001 versus 4% general population. 25% of Canadians are visible minorities.


Prime Minister Trudeau said openly “an experiment of major proportions“ an effort to undermine the historic European character of Canada by transforming the nation into a multi-ethnic place in which old ethnic nationalisms would be discredited in 

this context came the meme Canada is a nation of immigrants.”

Multicultural revisionism equals fake history


During rain of Stalin history was rewritten according to the correct Marxist theory. State officials commonly went about erasing major historical figures from documents, books and photographs when they were deemed “enemies of the people”


New historicists question the notion that historians are driven by a sincere disposition to tell it as it really was. Historical narratives they insist are best viewed as social constructs, enforced by dominant White heterosexual males who control the production of knowledge.


Like Winston Smith in George Orwell’s 1984 historians today work in the ministry of truth. Universities are where they are paid to alter historical facts to fit the needs of the multicultural party.

People created through the fecundity of women


1666, Jean Talon conducted a census in New France. There were 3,215 people in New France 2,034 men – 1,181 women. He devised a population strategy. Encouraged early marriage gave baby bonuses. France sent young healthy females. In 1672 the population grew to 6,700.

“Fille du ROI” (the Kings daughters) by the 1700 settlers along St Lawrence and the Acadian peninsula was around 15,500. By 1730 it increased to 42,700 by 1754 increased to 55,000 and by 1763 it was 70,000.

Demographic rise of the new white people


In the words of Canadian high school textbooks published in 1970 “Population of New France was almost holy native – born and distinctly Canadian”.

1784 population of 113,021 grew to become 335,000 by 1814 to 890,000. 1660s to 1800s in New France 5.6 surviving children

By 1950 Quebec population 4 million


Domestic pro nationalist policy was made possible by the Simultaneous promotion of seigneurialism, the intention was to transport to New France the feudal system of the mother country, this system developed in the colony along very different lines. In contrast to France tenants enjoyed considerable rights and privileges, manageable rents. Seigniors could not live off the rents in idleness “Many of them literally laboring beside their tenants.” Economic differences were not that significant. This agrarian order was the foundation from which the Canadians emerge as a new people right from the soil, through large families, traditional family values, hard work and self-reliance.

On Canada’s “Diverse History”


Current portrayal of Canada as a nation populated from beginning by people from a diverse culture and racial background is an act of deception orchestrated by academics in willful disregard of the historical evidence.


At time of Confederation the English 60%, French 30% remaining non-British or French 7%

The Acadians


The beginning of the Acadians closely resembles that of the Quebecois. Small colony of men and women buildings constructed in Port Royal in 1605 by Samuel Champlain


Arcadian population 1750 – 10,000.

British gained control in 1713. Acadians refused to give British formal pledge of loyalty to the British so 75% were deported… However, in 1764 the British allowed 3,000 Acadians to resettle. In 1740, 700 Acadians went to PEI then known as Saint John.


In New Brunswick 1784, 4000 Acadians.

The claim that Acadians were just immigrants no less different to the making of Canada then Shri Lankan Tamils, corrupt Chinese real estate millionaires, and Somalis is absurd. Whites were responsible for the founding of the nation of Canada. Loyalists were not immigrants but Settlers – Founders. 

Canada Anglicized and Whitened


Protestant immigrants, largely merchants had arrived in 1774. The number of English was estimated at 2000, 1780. No precise number of how many loyalists settled in Quebec in what would become Upper Canada or Ontario carved out of the western side of New France in 1791


Before Confederation most immigrants from the British Isles were Irish (850,000), not English (300,000). It can be argued, accordingly, that the loyalists, an indigenous people of British ethnicity born in the soil of British North America and Canada played a most important role in giving Canada its National Anglo identity.

Diverse immigration from British Isles


The demographic growth that upper Canada experienced from 1760s, when it was barely populated by Europeans, to 1815, was quite substantial, from 14,000 inhabitants in 1791, to 70,70818 in 1806, 295,000 in 18 14, the loyalists undoubtedly played a key role in this demographic expansion American inhabitants, or Canadians with American ancestry, made up about 80% of the population of 136,000 in upper Canada for example it’s no exaggeration to say that the loyalists were the original founders of Ontario

1815 to 1867 first large scale immigration 1 million from Britain

P.46 Irish 50% Scottish 15%

Canada’s Britishness genetic and cultural


2006 census Nova Scotia 93% White the 2011 census reported 92% English mother tongue 4% French.  

Then English 66 percent French 32 percent

Newfoundland was 94% white in 2011. And the Maritimes are not ethnically diverse and never were. But was built by white people

1749 detailed census Nova Scotia – German 1500 and 2500 British American and 7,000 New England “planters” English Irish Scottish


J.M Bumstead uses these statistics to argue Maritimes were racially and ethnically diverse.

Thousands of loyalists came to Nova Scotia 1780 settled in New Brunswick. 1784 Acadians returned from exile back to settle in New Brunswick. 1815 to 1838 40,000 Scotts arrived. 1,500 black loyalists

Nova Scotia population 68,000 in 1806 – 120, 000 in 1825 – 168, 000 1831 – 277, in 1851 – 331,000 in 1861 growth was from birth rates. 1871 Maritimes population was Indians 0.4% Blacks 1.6%, 98% Whites yet Canadian museum of immigration announces to millions of visitors in its website that Nova Scotia has been the province of people of African descent for 300 years.

Immigration 1867 to 1889


The population of Canada grew from 2 million 414,519 in 1851 to 3,174,442 in 1861 to 4 million in 1876 and to 4.8 million in 1891 the population of Quebec group from 890,000 to 1.5 million through this period however, most of the Quebec growth was due to the continuing high fertility rate of the French population. And it is also a fact that immigration played a relatively small role in the overall growth of the Canadian population during this period

Cultural Impact of immigration

P.58 – 9

1904 to 14, 3 million immigrants came to Canada all white Europeans.


1896 to 1914 3 million immigrants arrived 1.25 million from British Isles 1 million from America and 500,000 from Continental Europe.

Multicultural or racist?


Having examined the history of immigration in Canada from 1600s to 1921 only after 1914 is there non-English immigration.

These “other Europeans” came to participate as farmers and workers in a Canada that was politically economically and culturally English-speaking.


1901 96% of Canada was white European descent – 1911 97% – 1921-97.5%

Pioneers, Settlers & Discoverers – Newspeak


Vladimir Lenin (1870 -1924)

Cunning schemes… evade concealed the truth… Evoke hatred not to convince but to break their ranks… Wipe his organization off the face of the earth.

Dictionary definition

Page 64 

Replacement of words Pioneer and settler with immigrant

Prior to 1914 people arriving were pioneers

Immigrants started to arrive after World War II.

Book by Samuel Huntington: “Settlers before immigrant” “who we are”? Challenges to Americans national identity 2004.


America and Canada were built on: Christian religion, Protestant values and morals, or work ethic, English language British traditions of law, justice and limited government power and the legacy of European art, literature, philosophy and the music.

Distinction between pioneer and immigrants has been explicitly obfuscated by current historians.

Canada’s pioneers book


Donald Creighton’s “Dominion of the North:” history of Canada 1957.


Edwin Gillette “Pioneer days in upper Canada” published 1933-66-68, 70,73,75 but since this discarded.


Don’t believe mainstream press “we are all descendant from immigrants and refugees”. Globalists left and corporate right wants to destroy National identities and heritage of European people.

Europeans discovered Canada


White students are made to feel their ancestors stole this country from the first Nations and there is no reason for them to feel pride in their past.


… one thing is certain, no one claims that there were Nations before certain characteristics we identify with a civilized state of living were in place, such as a written language, a legal code, network of communications and reasonable centralized army, bureaucracy capable of enforcing State authority over a territory. This is what the French and English did. They created a nation state. They discovered Canada a land inhabited by Indian tribes.


Francis Parkman’s France multi-volume history of the European colonization of the North America, titled “France and England in North America written between 1865- 1992 (multi-volume) the “Indians of Canada” by Diamond Jenness published 1932 – 1977 – 1980 – 1996

First Nations


True that Parkman called Indians savages this term meant that Indians were at a lower level of historical development, not living in society, large cities, written language. People living in tribal units were in constant fuse with other tribal units. Quite violent and Savage like. Hobbesian existence – uncivilized.

Parkman was European with his own standards, to be sure, but he at least wrote without treating the Indians as ideological pawns to serve contemporaneous political agendas.


Parkman’s book was replaced by Olivia Dickinson’s “Canada’s first Nations: history of founding people” in 1992. Dixon’s a text is seen as a corrective to Eurocentric bias. The fact is that every single book these white historians rely on to tell us how we are finally hearing the authentic voices more accurately. We hear the voices of leftist academics projecting Eurocentric leftist notions.

Academics with no Ethnographic Grasp


Ethnography is a discipline taught in our universities. It is an invention of Europeans. But recently has turned the field against their own culture. Europeans have always shown a Faustian ambition to learn about the unknown. Why different societies have different morals. Europeans deployed the discipline of archeology and anthropology write the history of Asia Africa, aboriginals –

Why did Canadians decide to stop it being a white Nation?


RB Bennett prime minister 1930-35 told a British Columbia audience in 1907 

“We must not allow our shores to be overrun by Asiatic and to be dominated by an alien race we must remain a white man’s country.”

Henri Bourassa major politician for four decades in the 1900s

“It was never of Confederation… We should change French and English country to make it a land of refugees for the scum of all nations.”


Mackenzie King

Races of the orient… would change the fundamental composition of the Canadian population

Canadians were in agreement into the 1960s

So, why did Canadians suddenly agree to open Canada’s borders to mass immigration from the third world, within a single generation?


Freda Hawkins

It is that the 1967 immigration regulations emphasizing skill and education, rather than racial origins, were not brought on by popular demand or even parliamentary debate and initiative, but by senior ministers and cabinet officials. “Reference Queens university press critical years and immigration”


“Since Confederation” authored by a prominent list of historians, published in 1983 indicates that every public poll over the past 50 years … Canadians do not want any substantial increase in the number of people admitted into the country. Yet, in complete disregard to Canadians wishes, Canada’s borders were sent wide open. Under the directives of all major parties, the media, tenured academic radicals, and business elites. Why? Parts 2 and 3 examine the theoretical justification, from both of the left and the right

Part 2 

Refuting the theory of multicultural citizenship

Oh, what they tangled web we weave when we first we practice to deceive.

Theoretical deceptions of will kymlicka


Karl Mannheim’s concept of free – floating intellectuals engaged in the production of knowledge unconcerned with personal motives and interests has long attracted liberal academics uncomfortable with Karl Marx argument that knowledge is ultimately a reflection of one’s class interest, because it offered an image of themselves as self -sacrificing men pursuing truth objectively for the sake of humanity. This self-image grew in spades when the post WW2 age of universal human rights afforded liberals with an airy sense of standing above the prejudice of particular cultures.

Will kymlicka most influential advocate of “immigrant multiculturalism” his research is relied on by all Main stream parties, universities, NGOs and white papers commissioned by government agencies.

Kymlicka recognizes the “deep bond” that minorities have to their culture and ethnicity, at the same time as he categorizes any form of ethno-culture identity by Euro Canadians as racist.


Kymlicka hold the chair in political philosophy at Queens… Has received every year without interruption big grants… Although he fashions himself an outsider fighting the dominant Eurocentric discourse, he is Canada’s Premier government – sanctioned ideologue of multicultural citizenship.


Immigrant minorities with group identities do best, both in terms of psychological social cultural well-being when they are able to combine their ethnic identity with a new national identity.

Fundamental flaws


English are nothing more than modern conveniences economic, education, social institutions – intended “in principle” to serve anyone regardless of cultural background. The English are mere possessors of individual rights, whereas every other ethnic group enjoys both individual and group rights.


Kymlicka identifies the English / Europeans by history and culture; it is scornfully as colonizers racists and conquerors. The only thing European Canadians are allowed to celebrate is multiculturalism.

Civic versus ethnic nationalism


Second flaw kymlicka  – European ethnic nationalism contradicts the liberal principles of the west. Western Nations, he wants us to believe we were meant to have only civic identity


… These authors exerted enormous influence in academia, erroneously arguing that the nation state that emerged in 19th century Europe were not created by a people sharing a common history, sense of territorial belonging and habitation, similar dialects, folkways, physical appearance. Rather, the nation – states of Europe were “usually constructed” entities “invented traditions” imagined by people perceiving themselves as part of a “mythological” group in an unknown past.


All of them discredited ethnic nationalism as an artificial construct and as a source in the words of Hobsbawm, of “demonic xenophobia and chauvinism with no basis in reality.”


Smith’s main contention is that modern we are not created ex nihilo on the basis of civic values alone, or; rather, nation states were created at the basis of ancestral ties and a sense of historical continuity… these nation states were primordially based on a population with a collective sense of kinship.

State that nations “are rooted in primordial human sentiments of kin-culture rule affinity, solidarity and mutual cooperation, evolutionarily engraved in human nature” agreeing with much of what Smith says, Gat still finds wanting his lack of emphasis on human nature, evolutionary theory, and unwillingness to break away from a culture – oriented perspective. He got right that “ethnicity is by far the most important factor” in national identity “people tend to prefer closer kin, who share more genes with them, to more remote kin or strangers.” 


Why is ethnic identity among European Canadians viewed as illiberal, whereas ethnic identity among non-European immigrants, minorities is celebrated as the culmination of liberalism?

The great deception

… When in truth it is an effort to justify the growth of foreign minorities in which Euro – Canadians will be reduced to minorities without group rights.

Civil Rights movement USA talked about policies that were inconsistent with such key liberal principles as freedom of association and property rights.


Kymlicka surreptitiously introduces a program that has nothing to do with liberal minority rights for “previously excluded groups” and everything to do with imposing a multicultural identity “across Western democracies” by bringing in millions of foreigners.


Kymlicka completed his PhD under the supervision of the renowned Canadian Marxist Gerald Cohen. 


… is a deeply in internationally transformative project both for minorities and majorities


It is no accident that Kymlicka uses the term “immigrant multiculturalism” other than just multiculturalism

He is condemning and by implication European nations that disagree with mass immigration as having “disease of racial superiority”


Millions of students have been made to believe that the liberal constitutions of Western Nations make it mandatory to grant citizenship and group rights to endless masses of foreigners.  


Kymlicka has become rich, promoting his Marxist liberal theories.

Empirical refutation of William Kymlicka


… idealized accounts of why diversity should be good with very few empirical studies backing his claim about its success.



On the surface immigrants are integrating into Canada insofar is only a small number have engaged in terrorist activities.


Studies do show that Chinese immigrants tend to settle in Chinese areas. Richmond BC 6 out of 10 residents are now new immigrants, and were half do not speak English in their homes. Chinese language signs with no English can be seen everywhere, with multiple incidents of Canadians protesting the lack of visible English signs 2012 National Post “As immigration booms ethnic enclaves swell and segregate with following in 1981, Canada had only six neighborhoods with ethnic enclaves.. now, that number has mushroomed to 260”


Teppermam appeals to other Western Nations to imitate the Canadian model as the right way to relieve labor shortages… We hear this everyday in Canada. Before I challenge his claim, important to remember the evidence produced in favor of immigration is part of an establishment that does not allow for dissenting views. Almost 100% of academics are committed to research that facilitates immigration as Herbert Grubel, professor economics Simon Fraser university “atmosphere of PC in Canada suppresses any negative comments in the fear that they could be interpreted as evidence that the person expressing them is racist… By contrast the idea that immigration is beneficial gets much accolades and media attention.”


Grubel produces solid facts against the claim that mass immigration is economically beneficial

  1. cost in services and benefits, in the year 2002 alone, incurred by 2.5 million immigrants who arrived between 1990 – 2002 exceeded the tax they paid by 18.3 billion 
  2.  recent immigrants paid half the tax of the average Canadian… total $25 billion annually for all immigrants
  3. the total fiscal burden resulting from immigration is 20 billion and 2005 24 billion in 2010 and 32 billion 2014.


Significant part of this burden originates with the parents and grandparents who joined their families in Canada pay no taxes and consume large amounts of services especially Healthcare.


Grubel argues, there is no such thing as a labor shortage. There is an unwillingness to work for undercut wages due to cheap immigrant labor.

Page 119

… even supporters of immigrant multiculturalism admit it has preceded in secret by executive directives, and administrative discretion rather than legislation 1970s Canadians agreed with Minister Mackenzie King 1947

“The people of Canada do not wish as a result of mass immigration to make a fundamental alteration in the character of our population.”


1971 multiculturalism has become official government policy – the elites know better. 

Kymlicka refers to the imposition of multiculturalism as “a Long March through the institutions of Canada” … leftists in 1960s instead of calling for the Communist takeover of State as in Russia or China, called for gradual infiltration of all the pivotal opinion forming institutions of Western society.

Page 121

Canadians are brainwashed to think of multiculturalism is Canada’s identity. They are compelled to think that their nation was created by immigrants and that Euro – Canadians with ancestries going back generations are no more Canadian than foreigners seeking citizenship.

Multiculturalism is an industry that fuels lucrative salaries and perks for countless academics that are thus incentivized to portray the model in the best possible light. No graduate student or professor can get a grant if the proposal insinuates opposition to the very notion of immigrant multiculturalism.

Cultural enrichment


The implicit logic is that, since Europeans believe in freedom of choice, it follows that they prefer more cultures inside their Nations to improve the “quality and richness” of their choices. I say implicit because Kymlicka does not debate whether choices will continuously improve as the culture is continuously diversified… 1971 Canada was diverse, British 44%, French 28%, German 6%, Italian 3% Ukrainian 3%, Dutch 2%, other Europeans 4% Asians 1%, aboriginals 1%. What was it that was lacking in quality and choice? Kymlicka never asks this simple question in all of his writings.

Destruction of Canadian historic identity

Page 124

Biggest problem is projections are pointing to a future Canada in which Caucasians will be an absolute minority. This fact is never seen as an issue by the mainstream political parties and the media. Instead Euro-Canadians who lament their dwindling numbers are denounced as “White supremacists”, while those who call for a majority Asian Canadian are celebrated as vibrant and liberal-minded.

Recognizing minorities suppressing majorities

Charles Taylor

Page 128

Critics of Taylor have said his notion of “diversity entails cultural demands by minorities inconsistent with the liberal principles that all citizens should enjoy the same rights as individuals…” Taylor “non-European groups may want to retain some key defining aspects of their cultural identity rather than integrate totally into a world of individual rights.

His communitarianism recognizes the group rights of minorities with the exception that different cultural groups may redefine the meaning of individual rights in ways that reflect their collective cultural norms… this communitarianism recognizes only the individual rights of Euro-Canadians without recognizing their collective cultural rights. 


Taylor recognizes that humans have a strong need to have their ethno-cultural collective identities acknowledged by the state.


Not only contemporary feminism but also race relations and discussions of multiculturalism are undergirded by the premise that the withholding of recognition can be a form of oppression.

Taylor is aware of the tension between a liberalism based on individual rights and a liberalism that grants minorities certain cultural rights and Powers not enjoyed by other Canadians.


Taylor pushes for a stronger communitarian liberalism that recognizes the wishes of immigrant groups to retain their traditions, survive as different communities, and enhance themselves as members of a particular culture, even if this entails collect demands by minorities that are inconsistent, with the principles of individual rights.

No cultural rights for Euro – Canadians


Europeans have their own collective customs, religious ways and historical memories including a strong belief in individual rights, which they may want to protect in the face of immigrants from illiberal cultures claiming that immigrants endanger European cultural only intensifies discrimination against them. Western culture belongs to everyone and so it should be shared with all other cultures. It is racist for Euro – Canadians to insist that they have a western identity that is uniquely theirs.


Charles Murray’s book “Human Accomplishments” Pursuit of excellence, art, and science, 800 BC to 1950 informs us that 97% of accomplishments in the sciences occurred in Europe… Efforts to acknowledge the viewpoints of others or understand different cultural ways in their own terms, are an uniquely European attribute.

Herder was a German ethnic nationalist


This misuse of the ideas of past European thinkers, two German conservatives, is typical among leftist academics; they like to create the impression that what we were witnessing in the last few decades to transform European nations into diverse societies are somehow supported by the great minds of the past. But immigrant multiculturalism is only decades old policy without precedent in human history.


Herder cherished the variety of races and cultures he saw in different regions of the Earth in time and space. He rejected the universal history for humanity in which the unique National and ethnic character of peoples would disappear.


Taylor is saying that Euro – Canadians? Anglo’s in particular, should overcome their own to Canada’s Britishness by recognizing and respecting the cultures of others while suppressing their own heritage of affirming only their individual rights and state imposed ideology of multiculturalism.


How could someone with Taylor’s intellectual stature misinterpret Gardeners text in this manner? Short answer is that he wants philosophically sophisticated concepts to justify mass immigration. But since the idea of mass immigration is unprecedented in history devoid of any intellectual justification… wider movement critical of excessive individualism of classical liberalism, which sounds very appealing with its concern for the erosion of communal life in an increasingly fragmented society, but is really about Western academics dedicated to the destruction of organic community of Western European Canadians.


For decades cultural Marxists have been assiduously trying to break down patriarchal families and kinship ties, designating them as racist.


Best way to illustrate the rapidly anti-European mindset is by examining the sayings of its major exponents starting with Professor Sunera Thobani. According to her, multiculturalism allowed whites to reconstitute themselves “as tolerant and respectful of difference and diversity” expected to assimilate to this tolerant culture


Thobani is typical among immigrant intellectuals in European countries who exploit ideas of leftist Whites to advance their own ethnic interests.


Alan Simmons book “immigrant and Canada global and transnational perspective”. ” the transformation of Canada into an immigrant place should be seen as part of a global – transformation”. That is bringing multiple ethnicities and cultures from all over the world together within Canada, making this nation no longer a state unto itself but a component part of a interdependent network of global relations.  

We are also witnessing the emergence of hybrid and transnational identities distinct from the more fixed National ethnicities of the past which were deeply grounded in culture, kinship and custom.


… Yet the glorification of diversity is taking place only in the west.

Robert Lock “Nation busting globalization and globalism”

Are fundamentally different. Globalism is the ideology that advocates the liquidation of Nations. Its opposite is nationalism. Globalization, on the other hand, is an ideology. It is the growth of communications and trade. Globalism is a political choice, no more inevitable than socialism 

Part 3

Refuting Assimilationists Argument


Assimilation is equivalent to cultural genocide, for the assimilator and the assimilated


Only by speaking up front about the ethnic interests of Euro – Canadians can we mount a proper challenge to the otherwise impending reduction of Euro – Canadians to a minority status in Canada.


What makes them conservatives part of the mainstream, in Canada were Trump’s political views have yet to make it national, is that they criticize multiculturalism but not mass immigration and they reject to speak about the ethnic interests of white or Euro – Canadians.


By the year 2036 as high as 40% of the working population in Canada will be visible minorities. 30% will have a mother tongue other than English or French


Since the ’80s, no conservative government has challenged the institutional framework of multiculturalism in Canada, or sought to carry major reforms.

Humans are naturally ethnocentric


I prefer the term ethnicity rather than race because “ethnicity” refers to culture and race combined.

Preference for individuals of the same ethnicity or same race is part of our human nature. Ethnocentrism is simply a propensity to favor kin; this is actualized in politics, in a form of nepotism. Ethnic groups are extended families sharing distinct genes.


There are a number of important studies on the genetic interest of humans, the best strategy for the preservation and advancement of the genetic interest of ethnic is a well–defined territorial state. The greater the genetic distance between the native Europeans and immigrants, the greater the genetic loss to the nation.


Culturalism is an asymmetrical system in which only Europeans are expected to celebrate other cultures. At the same time ethnic groups are encouraged to practice in group ethnic interests inside the homeland of Europeans.

Multiculturalism is not the problem Bissondath’s Selling Illusions


Refers to a survey in 1993-72% of stated Canadians multiculturalism was not working


Multiculturalism is not the problem the problem is the policy of mass migration from non-European cultures. Kymlicka and Taylor: “individual fulfillment can only be as a member of a community; a constituent component of a community is the cultural and ethnic identity of the members belonging to it. Hundreds of thousands of immigrants arriving from non-Euro lands cannot be expected to brush aside their customs and ethnic identities.”


Bissondath would like all individuals to stop thinking in terms of collective identities and view their identities as social constructs shaped by the free play of their own choices in a changing environment. But why does he presume that preferring one’s race and historical culture is wrong and somehow not an individual choice?


Multiculturalism in Canada that was still 6% Euro in 1971 would have reinforced Canada’s existing identity


Professor Bissoondath implies that before diversity arrived, Canada had no identity other than being racist in excluding minorities. 


There are no known cases of racially mixed liberal democracies in the world. We are currently in a state of experimentation.

Salim Mansur


I classify Mansur, as a right-wing cultural Marxist. To me any position not critical of the current policy of mass immigration in Canada and European countries generally, must be so designated since it amounts to a denial to European people’s of the right to a Homeland where they can freely Express and protect their ethnic identities.


All of these intellectuals I write about agree that liberal Democratic societies should not accommodate illiberal values, and by illiberal they mean not only Islamic fundamentalism but ethno-nationalist European ideas.

Some years ago I was satisfied with Mansur’s line of reasoning. But have come to realize that European ethnicity is an intrinsic foundational component of Western civilization.

All modern liberal states were created by ethnically unified Europeans.

Dialogue with Mansur


.. .no individual has ever existed outside a community, and that Western individualism is Western because it was produced only by Western communities.

The opening of European boarders was imposed from above without the Democratic consent, and today no free criticism of the supposed merits of diversification is allowed. The traditional community of Canada before 1970 was open to critical reflection.


In what ways are the values of the West universally true for humanity if these values were not nurtured by most of humanity?


Westerners were the first two liberate themselves from culture and see what is universally best for all humans. Multiculturalism brings back the blind lens of cultural particularism rather than allowing immigrants to free themselves from their cultural background.


Western people are different only in being less ethnocentric due to their individualistic temperament which is a product of their unique historical origins.


… multiculturalism weakens our resolve to fight a radical Islam, while defending a thoroughly multiracial Western universalism against… Bruckner is another trickster pretending to be for the West while celebrating the destruction of White Gaelic France.

Straussian assault on the west


Major weakness in the critiques of multiculturalism is lack of philosophical depth. There are, however lesser known Canadian critiques of Muslims who have provided substantive philosophical arguments by drawing on American Leo Strauss’s arguments against relativism of multiculturalism in favor of Western civilization


Western civilization is the only nation in which the idea of citizenship has been erratically separated from the ethnic and religious background


Conservatives, just like the leftists, have been pushing for a purely civic interpretation of Western nationhood trying to root out Christianity and ethnicity from the historical experience of founding principles of European nations.

Haver’s conservative critique of Strauss consists essentially in emphasizing the uniquely Western and Christian origins of the founding principles of Anglo-American democracy.


Strauss wanted a liberalism that would work to undermine any ancestral or traditional conservative norms that gave preference to a particular people in the heritage of America’s founding


Strauss was mindful of the particular identities of Jewish people, criticizing the call for Jewish identities based on values alone

Australian Frank Salter


“The US begin as an implicit ethnic state, whose Protestant European identity was taken for granted”

Janet Ajzensat – Political Nationalities


I just thought the fathers of Confederation were deliberate in their rejection of the idea that Canada was founded by a common cultural


At Confederation 70% spoke English 30% French the father’s took it for granted that language came from culture


She is projecting onto the writings of the Fathers of Confederation our current obsession with inclusiveness.

Ajzenstat is imposing this reading onto the Fathers as a way of framing Canada’s identity in the way that suits the politically correct expectations of mass immigration.

Riendeau and Granatstein


The entire history of Canada prior to 1970 was British and all we’re aware of this Britishness and for this reason preferred Anglo – Saxon immigrants. Riendeau’s own demographic stats prior to the late 1960s “almost 90% were from European Origins”

… All cultures and all religions, feel as much a part of Canada’s history as the British and the Quebecers. We can all feel it is our history Protestant or Muslim, ethnic or Anglo. This argument tells you how silly the Canadian mind has become.


Enlightenment ideas include the birth of modern nationalism, democratic privilege of majority ethnicity, empirical science, biology, which culminated in man’s Fuller understanding of himself as part of nature.

These papers are continuously coming out to support the view that humans are ethnocentric and that altruistic dispositions – even motherly love, are exhibited primarily and intensively within – groups rather than towards a universal “We”.

Oxytocin is a molecule associated within group favoritism and out group derogation.


… despite their realization that ethnocentrism is not an irrational fear but a natural reaction.

Leftists recoil from the possibility that an ethnocentric chemical is likewise a source of motherly affection.


…all recognized the powerful drive within all living beings, including bacteria, to organize themselves into in – groups and out – groups. This however was viewed as a challenge for Western societies to overcome.

Majority rights for Europeans not enough


Since World War II the only booming business in academia has been the rights of minorities and the legitimate cultural claims of immigrants

P. 212

… so do majorities have a right to be concerned about the impact of constant high levels of immigration on their cultural national identity?


The West is currently facing a whole new reality never anticipated by the initial proponents of multiculturalism.

Orgad’s theory has to be seen as yet another position carved inside a liberal establishment that seeks to make Europeans believe that mass immigration and diversification are fundamentally connected to a liberal way of life.

Liav Ograd’s book

.. p 214 the goal is to persuade establishment liberals that majorities are right to be concerned about their liberal heritage.

… page 215 rather than traditions that identify Europeans as particular people.

Kymlicka’s expectation that immigrants would behave in the same way as Europeans, happily endorsing multiculturalism and human rights, has not yet transpired as expected but has instead resulted in a situation in which immigrants are reproducing their own cultures at the expense of the majority liberal culture of Europeans.


Ograd has a limited view of European majority culture, reducing it essentially to its political liberalism, interpretation of Western culture being about values that hold true for all humans, in which Euro nations are no more than civic nations without ethnic Origins and custom. Where in the foundational principles of liberalism does it say that a nation must grant citizenship rights to foreigners?


The weakness of Ograd’s cultural defense… Why should cultural rights of Muslims in Sweden be equivalent to the cultural rights of native Swedish people?


He is simply calling for restrictions – old diversification of Europeans to a majority culture that is fundamentally defined not by its particularities but by its supposed universal principles.

Because language, ethnic appearance and customs do have a reality with  generations behind them. 

Refuting left and right liberals


There are some 3,300 higher education establishments in the European Union all dominated by pro-immigration liberals. Almost all academics in Western Europe believe that liberalism demands diversification of all white-created nations.


It is revealing how persuasive the notion that liberalism necessitates Mass immigration.

Liberalism can’t exist with a strong form of ethnic nationalism.

There is nothing a liberal about discriminating among immigrants on ethno-cultural grounds since immigrants are not citizens


Do the majority in Europe have a right to decide what the cultural characteristic of their Nation should be?

Look at the population projections in Africa … The rush to Europe will be so massive and relentless that it will not be possible to stop it without direct military force.

David Abraham


… a tolerance sense of “we” can be nurtured more effectively through social “equity” measures. He is in favor of keeping borders open to mass African migration into Europe.


…and cities numbers to the effect that by the end of this century non-Europeans are expected to be the majority in many European nations.


…does not ask why diversification became the central ideology of the west, and why liberals have been pushing this ideology for decades.

Since I academia is where PC reigns supreme, Kaufman says that liberals have directed all their time and effort at developing theories of minority rights.

But what if it can be shown that ethnic minorities came to European lands through the undemocratic actions of elites employing deceptive arguments about cultural enrichment and economic benefits


He says the cultural majority has the right to show preference for immigration closer to their cultural tradition, all ethnic groups should be presumed to be capable of assimilation unless social scientific evidence shows otherwise… but science shows that humans have a preference for their own ethnic group


He believes a culture should be relegated to the private sphere, should become another choice among others, rather than a collective responsibility of the state.

… Hanson brings out a survey showing that high percentages of Muslims hold highly illiberal views. But does not think immigration should be restricted. Only that immigration merely “poses uncomfortable challenges”

George Fletcher


He takes it as self-evidently true a French speaking immigrant from Haiti is the same as a Quebecer with deep ancestral roots. We have thus the situation which Haitians in Quebec have started acting as the true representatives of the French heritage in Canada.

Page 239

1. Westerners came to believe that racism was the worst evil because of its association with Nazism.

2. Immediate intensification of human rights which were extended to all humans resulting in the extension of Western citizenship rights to foreigners.


According to Carl Schmidt, liberals have an underdeveloped sense of the political, and inability to think of themselves as members of a political entity that was created with a clear sense of who can and who cannot belong in a community.

Liberals tend to deny that man is by nature a social animal a member of a collective.


They do not want to admit openly that all liberal states were created violently by a people with a sense of people hood laying sovereign rights over a territory against others competing for the same territory.

If a liberal state is to remain liberal it must act collectively against the inclusion of non-Europeans with their own in group ambitions


Eventually, liberals came to believe that commerce would wear off those prejudices which maintain distinction and animosity between nations.

They believed there would be no conflicts that could not be resolved through peaceful deliberations and political compromise

Schmidt: what makes a community viable as a political association with control over a territory is its ability to distinguish between friend and enemy


Possibility that enemy out groups can emerge within our liberal nation state. Not all humans are equally individualistic, but far more ethnocentric then Europeans.


Enemy groupings may also emerge as a major force to share demographic growth in a seemingly peaceful atmosphere.

Ethnic liberalism versus Post World War II norms


Canada multicultural Nation 1971. Canadian human Rights act 1977. Employment act 1986. Multiculturalism act 1988.


A new set of norms came to take a firm hold of western states after World War II calling for the dissolution of ethno-nationalism in western states and the complete discrediting of racial identities among Europeans.

I will argue that once these norms were accepted and actions were taken to implement them institutionally they came to entrap westerners within a spiral of radicalization because those norms have a tendency for never satisfied solution.

The arrival of endless masses of immigrant minorities in need of continuous equalization programs promoting ethnic interests.

P. 251

Hostile ethnic elites inside the West have exploited racial equality and human rights for their own particular ends.

It was created by people with a strong ethno cultural role, collective identity, claiming sovereign rights over a territory to the exclusion of other people with different and always potentially threatening ethno-political interests.

World War II normative situation in the West


Each Norm reinforced the other, leading Western people’s into a funnel with a seemingly irreversible logic of pro–diversity hysteria and a pathological death wish..

1. Westerners came to believe that racism was the cause of the Holocaust and Nazism. It came that acknowledging race was akin to racism and fascism.

2. Until World War II it was held by a minority of scholars that the very idea of a science of race was unscientific.

3 Intensification of the noble savage notion that third world people embodied the innate goodness of humanity when freed from corrupting influences of Western imperialism.

P. 257

In 1948 UN declaration: article 2: everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms regardless of… Western states must extend citizenship rights to foreigners, there should be no line between citizen and non-citizen.

A White Man’s Country


Canada had strong collective ethnic markers before world war II – 1960s, with immigration policies that excluded ethno groupings deemed to be an existential threat to the National character.


As long as agents and blocks were excluded, and Anglo-conformity was emphasized, ensuring that non-British Europeans were transformed into English speakers with manners and habits in line with Canada’s Britishness

P. 263

Only non Euros were identified as inassimilable races that would pose a threat, in large numbers, to the unity and cohesion of Canada’s national character and economic viability

P. 265

In 1947, minister; of external affairs suggested that the Chinese immigration act of 1923 could not be justified under the UN Charter which Canada has signed.

It is worth noting that Canada at this time was caving into pressure from foreign countries and the UN generally, which was made up of non-western countries without any individual rights but a concept of collective political identity.

Following the granting of Independence to India, Pakistan and Burma in 1947 Canada, felt morally obligated to the new anti-racist and pro third world norms.


Senate committee on immigration and labor 1946 to 1953… They concluded that racial wording should be avoided in a new immigration act, Voice approval of Canada’s traditional patterns of immigration and her strong European orientation.


The act of 1952 simply held the principal that Canada had a sovereign right to choose immigrants that were economically and culturally suitable for the British / European character of the nation.

Canadians were no longer comfortable with the term race as per the new norms of the post World War II era.


The government and the British elites were eager to paint Canada as a race mixed nation of Europeans rather than a nation of pure Anglos.

Limiting immigration from tropical commonwealth countries was not a matter of prejudice but of avoiding racial tensions in the future.

Ellen Fair claw 1960 “Canada has no racial problem and that is the way it is going to stay.”


By 1961, African, Asians and Latin Nations made up 2/3 of the UN general Assembly.

John Diefenbaker endorsed with conviction the principles of racial equality within the commonwealth.


But these gestures nearly signaled to other members of the Commonwealth that Canada’s sovereignty could be challenged by out

The discipline of anthropology played a very significant role in spreading the norm that third world peoples were innocent, well-meaning, nature loving, egalitarian humans greedy individualistic westerners should learn to emulate them

Fair employment and accommodation practices act 1951-54

Page 271

Beginning 1940s – 1950s a growing network of groups, academics, media, ethnic associations, trade unions operating within a liberal atmosphere, and endorsing a political pluralistic view of politics, in which the state was seen as just one among many others engaged in politics rather than as the actor in charge of ensuring the collective identity of the nation


Liberal groups managed to bring about Fair Employment Act 1951-54 which declared Ontario’s allegiance to the principles of the UN Charter and UN Declaration of Human Rights.

The End of British Liberties

No man is above the law. Argued by James walker, such British liberties in Canada as freedom of speech and association were interpreted to mean the right to declare prejudices openly. Freedom of association was understood to include the right to discriminate on grounds of ethnic, religion and sex


Millions of immigrants are encouraged to claim Canada this nation as their own, and therefore, encouraged to impose their own sense of the political, their own collective identity.

Before WW2 individual rights were rights which emerged from the British people, not from individuals as members of the humanity.

A new liberalism was being advocated in direct challenge to the ethnocentric liberalism. It was a civic – oriented conception of the Canadian Nation, based on universal values wherein membership was defined by values of equal rights rather than a shared heritage.


There was a strong pressure from business elites on politicians to find new sources of immigrants.


Obligations to live up to the protocols of the UN… any form of ethnic nationalism was fascistic.


No one envisioned these regulations as a way of transforming Canada away from its Anglo-European heritage.

Accepting this pressure in November 1965, Lester Pearson promised to remove all remaining barriers in the acceptance of immigrants of color. Canada’s government wanted to avoid strong resentments in international relations.


Green paper 1975-83%, wanted less immigration from third world countries.

A special joint committee received 2000 letters of opinion – formal briefs, and oral testimonies demanding restrictions on the immigration from the Third World.


They don’t realize that non-Europeans, as McDonalds shows, involved in a ecological context that “supported large tribal groups based on extended kin ship relationships”.

Vancouver Chinese community defended the 1967 regulations, and went beyond in calling for the expansion of sponsorship rights, while insisting that Canada was no longer a nation of two founding peoples, the English and the French but a nation of multiple cultures and races.


Accelerating the spiral: the rise, and the promotion of Canada’s parties, of ethnic voting blocs against the ethnic interests of Euro Canadians.

Pierre Trudeau’s assault on bicultural nationalism


Between 1963 and 1969 the Royal Commission on Bilingual and Biculturalism organized hearings across the nation.

Despite the commission’s recommendations for a bicultural identity, globalized elites of the early ’70s decided to ignore this recommendation.

Cultural VS Ethnic Nationalism


With the 1962 – 67 regulations every remaining trace of ethnic nationalism was officially discarded in Canada.

This Anglo nationalism recognized that Canadians included other Euro ethnic groups rooted n Canada, and that in Canada there was another founding people , the Quebecois

American Globalism and the Defeat of Canadian Nationalism


John Diefenbaker was always confusingly weak, as testified by his passage of the Canadian Bill of Rights 1960, which further undercut Canada’s historical alliance to British liberties, the idea that Canadians had liberties as members of British Canada, not as members of the human race.

British capital served the making of Canada as a nation. American investment in the 20th century in contrast was directly controlled by American companies. British investment declined to 17% and American investment increased to 77%.

Royal commission on Bilingualism & Biculturalism


The transpiring message is that the term, “ethnic group” will be used in reference to groups that are not Anglophone or Francophone.

Trudeau Charter years


He argued that creating a Canada without a collective cultural identity, would make this a; National model for a solution of ethnic strife around the world.

“Canadian Federalism is an experiment of major proportions.. a brilliant prototype for the molding of tomorrow’s civilization.”


“We believe that cultural pluralism is the very essence of Canadian identity.”


The goal was to create a new Canadian identity based on the cultures of the world. A Canada separated from any founding culture.


The way to break cultural nationalism he concluded was to populate the nation with different cultures.

Hugh Forbes “Canadian immigration offices were opened in various third world countries”

The Trudeau administration increased third world immigration in 1971


1970 – 1981 55% of 1.5 million immigrants came from third world

1972 a “Directorate” was created to persuade Canadians that immigrant diversity was really a good thing for them. 1973 “Ministry of multiculturalism” was created. Soon another bureaucratic body “Canadian ethno cultural Council”


He (Trudeau) believed that Western Nations should be based on civic values alone.


Accordingly this act contained a “hate speech” provision criminalizing the expression of statements categorized as “hateful” towards identifiable groups.


Charter was precisely about creating a new Canada based on post WW II human rights principles … Every remnant of “Tory” Canada had to go, including the way we understood the history of Canada as a nation founded by two races.


Section 15 in particular, the equity provisions, represent one of the most important and dynamic forces on the road to social justice. By “dynamic” they mean that Canadians will be able to draw on equity provisions to eliminate every remaining inequality, as defined by current and future elites.


We have a situation in which the “dominant society” English culture, or Euro Canadian population, is under the obligation of reconstructing its culture according to the transnational values formulated by anonymous international human rights experts.


Julius gray thinks it is a great to have courts, judges, and legal scholars decide “major matters” for an entire people because they are the ones carrying the march of human improvements ahead.

Hugh Forbes “the charter took decisions concerning fundamental rights of Canadians out of the hands of elected officials (into the hands) of highly trained legal experts appointed by politicians” Forbes thinks it has been a great change to have highly trained experts decide the character of Canada rather than the majority of the population… a future home for all the peoples of the world.


These thinkers believe that the nature of humans was molded entirely by the social and moral environment. This nature could therefore be remolded through change in the moral institutional environment. New humans could be created, through a proper education.

After the experiment of WW 2, laying the groundwork for the Fabian and cultural Marxist strategy of marching gradually and steadily through the institutions.

The Charter is an expression of this radical transformation of Western civilization under the guidance of academics, administrative, legal, and business elites.

Multiculturalism in the Charter


“This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.”

The identification of Canada as “multicultural” is a panoply of conceptual tensions and factual deceptions and legal obfuscations.


Section 15 of the charter, subsection 15 (2) says that the government has the constitutional right says that the government has the constitutional right “to create special programs aimed at improving the situation of individuals who are members of groups that have historically experienced discrimination in Canada.”

Court cases since 1980 section 27

Human rights versus Taylor


Taking section 27 together with section 15, he argued that fighting racial and religious discrimination would be a sufficient objective for limiting free expression.

Ethnic demography is Destiny


This view for all its “contextual”  talk, is seriously flawed in offering a strictly realistic account of the meaning of multiculturalism and group rights, without the bus slightest awareness of the “dynamic force” of mass immigration”


This principal may nevertheless encourage creation of quasi-autonomous administrative structures under the control of the particular groups as a powerful means of ensuring that these groups have the capacity to maintain themselves and develop according to their particular perception of their own special requirements.


 It could alter the minimum standards of respect for personal liberty in favor of the special needs of the semi-autonomous groups to preserve their special characteristics.

He wants to determine the meaning of section 27 as if it were only about words rather than about how these words will be interpreted in the coming decades as immigrant – ethnic groups continue to grow exponentially.

Since World War II the elites of Western culture have been teaching white students that emotional attachments to in groups are backward, illiberal, but also a personality disorder and a public health pathogen.


We are witnessing in Europe a lack of integration by second and third generation Muslims in Europe. How long will immigrants require special group right? Is there, will there be any limit on the number and years that Canada should have open borders?

Given these realities it is necessary to go beyond near legalistic and static accounts of the nature of multiculturalism in Canada. We need a proper scientific grasp of ethnic group interests.

Sharia law in Ontario


Islamic Institute of Justice intended to establish faith-based tribunals for the 400,000 Muslims in Ontario in 2003.

Marion Boyd “Fair and consistent with the principles of enhancing multiculturalism to allow Muslim tribunals

However the Western centric feminists won. In September 2005 Dalton McGinty turned against religious arbitration, announcing there would be no Sharia law tribunals in Ontario and no religious arbitration.

2001 percentage of Muslims is 3.1 – 2011 percentage of Muslims 4.6


Ethno- demographic context will determine the meaning of multiculturalism,, the context is between 2001 to 2011 the Sikh population increased by 72% Hindu population by 69% the Muslim population by 65% Christian population by 3%.


Today are trying to incorporate Sharia law in ways consistent with ideals of “tolerance and pluralism”.

Westerners need to understand that, just as Sharia principles are being influenced by Western values so will Western values be influenced by Sharia and Islamic values.  

Muslims are 5% of the population in England and in certain areas it is 20 to 35%. In those areas there is no debate about Sharia law tribunals whether they should exist they are entrenched in Britain.

Rise of the multicultural globalism

George Grant’s lament for Canada


Grant lamented the defeat of Canadian nationalism in light of the inept failures of Diefenbaker.

Liberals such as Frank Underhill had it backwards thinking that Canada could only become a true nation by breaking off with the British heritage.


Diefenbaker’s nationalism came from his small town life in the prairies. The old wasp elites of Montreal Toronto were no longer interested in Canada’s heritage most of them made money representing American capitalism.

…but the onset of global multicultural capitalism against any form of cultural nationalism.

…the Liberal’s celebration of the communitarian identities of non-whites and immigrants in opposition to any form of cultural and ethnic expression by Anglo and Quebec Canadians.

Page 337 

The left and right have really converged in a state of amicable reinforcement, not withstanding they’re varying emphasis on different aspects of globalism.

The right

They, The Right, want humans without National identities endlessly seeking pleasure in a homogenized world market in which every person in the globe wants products that everyone else wants.

The left

Page 338 

Cultures should not be viewed in essentialist terms, but as constructs in a state of continuous change.

These new humans will learn to become global citizens, identifying themselves as members of an international community while celebrating transsexuality and pan sexuality in an orgasmic state of happiness. With the spread of transnational corporations, IGO’s and NGO’s, the EU and other Supra National organizations and trade blocks, power has become “deterritorialized” and so there is a need for global governance and the breakdown of nationalism. Europeans must think of their Cosmopolitan responsibility rather than their national interests.


Article announced forget left and right the new divide is nationalist and globalist.

Brian Mulroney’s globalist post 4th district regime of accumulation


Mulroney 1984-93, was the most ardent promoter of multiculturalism, mass immigration, and global identity for Canada.. Canada was sold to the world as a business place with a global, not a national, identity dedicated to the enhancement of racial diversity.

June 84, Mulroney told a cheering crowd, right upon his election, that his party now stood for multiculturalism and would not allow itself to be called the party of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant… Funds for the preservation and advancement for non-European cultures.


Post-Fordist regime involves globalized financial markets and free trade zones allowing businesses to move across national borders in search of lower wages.


Under Mulroney Canada was showcased to the world as a nation successfully integrating the norms of multiculturalism, mass immigration and human rights.

My critical observations concerned the way in which these right wing economic policies were framed within the ideologies of immigrant multiculturalism.

1 employment equity act of 1986

2 multiculturalism act of 1988

3 immigration plan 1990-95 minimum 250,000 immigrants per year.


Employment equity act 1986:

Rich non-white immigrants just off the plane were to be given preference over poor white males born in Canada.


The aim of the act was to effectively multiculturalize every aspect of Canadian life, starting with the administrative practices of the executive. In the words of Joseph Monette “sensitization the federal public workforce to multicultural principle.

The preamble to the act established the connection between the 1982 charters objective of enhancing the multicultural heritage of Canada.

The act specifies that the following objectives should be taken into account in the development of policies and programs: recognition of the historic contribution to Canadian society of different ethnic communities


Starting in the 1990s, Canadians were told that what made them distinctive as a people was their multicultural identity.

In 2002 publication, by citizenship and immigration Canada for new immigrants Canada is a land of many cultures and many people.


British Canadian identity was to be witnessed only in multicultural tolerance and pluralist values.

Multiculturalism was promoted as a state of mind in which the Canadian in favour of immigrants and minorities would be automatically viewed as progressive, whereas the Canadians who opposed this diversification would be seen as xenophobic and intolerant, and people investigated for hate speech.


The central component of this new schooling would be a curriculum focused on fighting racism.

Immigration during Harper years


Up until Mulroney’s time, there was a tap on tap off immigration policy, which Trudeau used during the recession of the 1970s.


It was from Mulroney’s time that Canada’s historical ethnic identity would start to undergo a dramatic alteration from 81 – 2001, the number of visible minorities increased threefold 1 million 5% to 4 million 13%

There was a position from the reform party… What brought them down eventually was his opposition to high levels of immigration.


As the reform movement was defeated ethnic and refugee groups, and academics grew in power always ready to pounce on any government or organization whispering about limiting immigration.


Under Harper, the admission of immigrants into Canada reached its highest level with immigration ranging from 240 to 260,000 between 2003 and 2012

In 2011, Canada had a foreign-born population of 6 million 775,000 which is 20% of the population the highest of the G8.

Canada’s conservative Kennedy who spent many days donning ethnic attire said: Canadians have much to learn from our newest arrivals.


The left and right are two sides of the same coin promoting globalism and identifying nationalists as the enemy.


Carl Schmidt both sides believe that the friend – enemy distinction can be abolished in a world where everyone worships human rights and economic interdependency.

What globalists fail to realize is that only Europeans are relinquishing their political, their tribal identities.

The us versus them distinction cannot be abolished, for it is part of human nature, human creativity.


The entire left establishment is committed to this policy; all the funding goes to research prepackaged and demonstrating that immigration is good.


The arguments made for diversification in Canada are part of a wider package of arguments for diversification of all White Nations and part of a program to destroy White identity.


Sweden: Tino Sanandagi Kurdistan emigrant researcher at institute of economics at Stockholm these are his findings

  1. Between 20 – 64 years, 82% of native Swedes are employed that Gap has been consistent since 1990.
  1. 30% of immigrants do not qualify for high school after the 9th grade, compared to 10% for Swedes.
  1. Immigrants do not fill skilled jobs.
  1. 70% of migrants are male in 2015 surge of migrants in 92%.

5) Immigrant population in 2014% in 2010 20% in Malmo it’s near 50%.

Page 358

This is less true for Canada, but in Europe, for over a decade, it has been apparent that there is a horrendous mismatch between the quality of immigrant labor and the needs of Europe

Turks in Germany 30% do not have a school certificate 80% live on social welfare 


Bertelsmann foundation: since 2014 immigrants were a net loss of $20 billion per year

Canada: first post national state in history


Justin Trudeau is a man without ideas. He had a mediocre education, average grade and an easy – to get teaching degree.

Many Canadians believe Canada has no core identity because they believe that being Canadian today is to being multicultural.


Post National: by which nation states and National identities lose their importance to the supranational and global entities.

It is a consistent with the emphasis we have placed on human rights, that post nationalism is linked to the expansion of international human rights laws and norms reflected in a growing stress on the rights of individuals in terms of their personhood, not just their citizenship.


The liberal universal values that underpin Western nation states are being challenged “by claims for special group rights”

“Migrant communities increasingly take on the character of a transnationally linked diasporas”


But what this article is missing all together is the incredible weakening of the political that is transpiring in the Western world, only, in varying degrees since WW2 , and the evolution of new forms of citizenship based on universal human Rights.

… This is evidence that they are integrating to a state committed to multiculturalism and diversity and which immigrants are using for the own interest in a post National direction.


As Foran stated:”Post nationalism is a frame to understand our ongoing experiment in filling a vast yet unified geographic space with the diversity of the worlds. Toronto is the most diverse city in the world with half its residents born outside in the country.”


 A Post National Canada requires making a final step in eradicating not only the remaining vestiges of cultural nationalism but the presumption that Canada is a nation with civic values that are specifically “Western”.


Deepak Obhrai: in criticizing of Kelly leach acting “unCanadian” even multicultural Canada is no better than mono culture Saudi Arabia.


Justin Trudeau tolerance compassion inclusiveness and diversity is a strength and a force that can vanquish intolerance and hate. Justin Trudeau has the mind of a 12-year-old child, and this is the basis of his political success, his ability to be sincerely in favour of an ideology that is fundamentally infantile.

Across Canada, and every town, city, school, university, government office, media social, and print the same phrase – diversity is our strength.

Multicultural, party is watching you. The ministry of Truth is dedicated to altering Canada’s historical record to fit the needs of a post-national state.

The only force that can destroy this totalitarian spiral is the affirmation by Euro – Canadians of the historical heritage, without apology.

Canada in Decay by Ricardo Duchene

Isn’t It Racist To Restrict Hiring Of White Canadians On Campu

Posted on by

Isn’t It Racist To Restrict Hiring Of White Canadians On Campus?

Is there a reason why media refuse to mention that contemporary white Canadians are not responsible for historical policies of prejudice against “racialized” communities?

Brad SalzbergFeb 13


“The Faculty Association of the University of Waterloo says its Equity Committee must be at least 50% non-male and 50% non-white in order to have gender and racial parity.” [While the general population is slightly more than 50% female, the non-White proportion of Canada’s population, at this point in our planned replacement is 22%, not 50%1}

In contemporary Canada, what goes around really does come around. Thinking back to civil rights leaders for the Advancement of Coloured People in the United States, we turn to a lady named Rosa Parks:

The United States Congress honoured her as “the first lady of civil rights” and “the mother of the freedom movement.”

“On December 1, 1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, Parks rejected bus driver James F. Blake’s order to vacate a row of four seats in the ‘coloured’ section in favour of a white passenger.”

Parks went on to become an international icon of resistance to racial segregation.

Today, in PM Justin Trudeau’s “post-modern” society, racial segregation has returned. Only this time, the tables have been turned toward ostracization of White Canadians based on the colour of their skin.

“The faculty association also says it gives preferential treatment to Black and Indigenous peoples in the selection process whenever possible.” 

Unabashed, egregious racism it is. None of it a problem for University of Waterloo’s woke crew of inverted bigots.

“In the late 1870s, Southern state legislatures passed laws requiring the separation of whites from ‘persons of colour’ in public transportation and schools.”

Several thoughts bubble to the surface. Firstly, an anachronistic move by Canadian academia to re-institute a reversal of civil rights that people like Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King worked for, and in the latter case, died for.

Secondly, the idea that as with all elements of DEI(Diversity, Equity & Inclusion), an unspoken goal of racial revenge lies at the core of the agenda. Indeed, University of Waterloo’s decree exists as a microcosm for the “social equity” movement in its entirety.

With woke political correctness as its support-system, an entire school-of-thought is cast aside. Mainstream media won’t breathe a word about it, even though at this stage of the game, 80-90% of leading journalists in Canada derive from an Anglophone or Francophone background.

Multiculturalism as conceived and institutionalized by ex-Liberal PM Pierre Trudeau contains no legal limit, or “ceiling” as to when social equity is achieved. No barometer of “success” exists to verify that its original purpose– racial equality within a pluralist society– has been accomplished.

The result? It can, and will, “go on forever.” Meaning that the steamrolling of Whites out of employment potential could transition from 50% to 100%, while no legal mechanism exists to prevent such a thing.

Paying for the sins of our forefathers? Upon which we turn to a critical, yet unspoken, observation. Government, media, academia– notice how none of them point to the fact that those who initiated “racist” policies in Canadian society are all dead?

CBC, Globe & Mail, CTV, Toronto Star— which one has ever referenced the fact that contemporary white Canadians are in no respect responsible for historical policies of prejudice against “racialized” communities.

In the case of racism perpetrated by University of Waterloo’sEquity Committee,this equates with the idea that these people are punishing the innocent. As in, an act of revenge. Bitter, angry woke warriors taking out their collective frustration on Canada’s Anglo-European communities.

In truth, that’s not the worst of it. The worst is that this travesty goes on without being challenged by any controlling institution in the country. PM Justin Trudeau is all for it, as is under-the-radar Anglophone-basher, New Democratic party leader Jagmeet Singh, who says:“The reality is, this is our Canada. We can’t deny it. We can’t reject that, because it does no one any help. The reality is: our Canada is a place of racism, of violence, of genocide. [Yet, no one calls this defamation of Whites for what it is — BULLSHIT! ‘Genocide’, Jagmeet? Are you and your turbanned confreres being genocided? No, you and they are thriving. Indeed, Sikhs, less than one per cent  of Canada’s population, comprised 16% of Justin Trudeau’s first cabinet. The only people being genocided on the instalment plan are Canada’s European founding/settler people being replaced by immigration policy!]

Love you to, Jagmeet. Establishment media has not a problem with racism against White Canadians. Ditto for our Marxist-infused university system, which over the decades silently converted to bastions of anti-Canadian hatred.

An injection of irony springs forth as we reference a recent article published by True North News:

“Diversity, Equity And Inclusion Programmes Lead To More Bigotry, New Research Shows”

“Drawing from a wide array of research published in leading social scientific journals, including contributions from prestigious institutions like Harvard  and Princeton,  findings challenge the prevailing narrative that DEI instruction leads to lasting positive behavioural changes.”

Well, what do you know? It could well be that academic social equity programs are exacerbating the level of racism in society.

A couple thoughts here: for one thing, it will make not a shred of difference to Canada’s woke academic warriors. Secondly, the idea that, on a deeper level, forces exist in our society who want social chaos to ramp up ad infinitum.

As mentioned, Canada’s academic world contains an unspoken-of-foundation of Marxist-oriented political orientation.

“Marx wrote extensively on race and class in the American Civil War. These writings argue that capitalism was grounded in slavery and that racism attenuated class-consciousness among workers from dominant racial groups.”

“These Marxist writings, which have been discussed only sporadically over the past century, are especially timely today.”

You’re+ darn right they are, because academia is utilizing race to divide citizen from citizen, and community from community. In other words, beneath all the “equity” talk, exists a tacit form of socialist-oriented “revolution.”

We begin to see why the haters are the way they are. What is really in the works is a social inversion of profound proportions:

Whitey to the back of the bus, the “racialized” in the driver’s seat. Can this be the silent, overarching agenda as perpetrated by the Canadian government, media and academia?

Extinction is Forever

Posted on by

Radical Multiculturalism Is a Destructive Absurdity

Posted on by
Category: Uncategorized | Tags:

Multiculturalism or Civic Nationalism — The Results are the Same

Posted on by

From ABBA to Allah: The Invasion & Destruction of Sweden http://canadafirst.nfshost.com/?p=2457

Posted on by


The day Sweden will be Islamic

Now Sweden fears being replaced by immigration. Li ke a drunkard in the morning, Sweden wakes up to the sad reality. Op-ed.

Giulio Meotti, Italy Aug 20, 2022, 9:37 PM (GMT+3)

Sweden Islamic State Giulio Meotti

Giulio Meotti

Giulio Meotti צילום: עצמי

Swedish Prime Minister (1946-69) Tage Erlander in 1967 declared in response to the racial riots in the slums of Los Angeles that “we Swedes live in such an infinitely happier situation. The population in our country is homogeneous, not only in terms of race, but also in many other aspects ”.

In 1975 the country introduced multiculturalism with Social Democratic Prime Minister Olof Palme rejecting assimilation in favor of policies that encouraged minorities to maintain separate identities. It was part of the famous “freedom” of the Swedes, free to do and undo everything, from the family to the nation.https://c09e4318fe1dcc6997518fc438949904.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html

Now, like a drunkard in the morning, Sweden wakes up to the sad reality, but doesn’t know how to get rid of the hangover. Ghettos, crime, segregation and ethnic-religious conflicts are now the hallmarks of the “quiet laboratory of the world”. The inevitable happened. The system is collapsing and reality can no longer be ignored. Large areas of the country are more similar to the Middle East and North Africa than to Sweden.

And the main ruling party and the largest political party, the Social Democrats, also made a breakthrough in just a year. As champions of open borders, international solidarity, multiculturalism and free immigration, the Social Democrats are now the party of restrictive immigration.

Sweden is only the portal to Europe’s future.

In an interview with the newspaper Dagens Nyheter, the Swedish Minister for Immigration Anders Ygeman announces that Sweden has a big problem: too many areas where most of the inhabitants come from outside the Nordic countries (Denmark, Sweden , Iceland, Finland and Norway). “I think it’s bad to have areas where the majority have a non-Nordic origin,” Ygeman said.

Ygeman suggested a “50 percent” limit when pressed by reporters if he believed Sweden should have a similar target to that of Denmark, where the Social Democrats have set a ceiling of 30 percent of the population of non-Western origin by 2030.https://c09e4318fe1dcc6997518fc438949904.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html

Denmark had announced that it will try to limit the number of “non-Western” residents in neighborhoods with a high migration density. The Minister of the Interior, Kaare Dybvad Bek, indicates the share of 30 percent, because too many non-Western foreigners in an area “increase the risk of the birth of parallel religious and cultural societies”. According to Statistics Denmark, 11 percent of Denmark’s 5.8 million inhabitants are of foreign origin, of which 58 percent come from a country considered “non-Western”. 30 suburbs mostly inhabited by Muslim foreigners. Neighborhoods like Mjolnerparken, nicknamed “little Damascus”.

Swedish Green Party spokesperson Märta Stenevi is shocked by the proposal of her old government mate Ygeman: “I think it’s incredible that a Social Democrat minister suggests that we should conduct an ethnic-based policy.” It wasn’t just any Viktor Orbán, right? “Swedish immigrant integration policy has failed, leading to parallel societies and gang violence,”

Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said in May after dozens of police were injured and cities were thrown into chaos over Islamic riots. “Segregation has been allowed to go so far that we have parallel companies in Sweden.”

In Sweden there are hundreds of suburbs and neighborhoods where Swedes are a minority. Alby, in Stockholm, is known as the “little Baghdad” (title contended with Sodertalje) for the percentage of Iraqis. There are suburbs where only one in ten inhabitants is Swedish. Or Rinkeby, the district with the highest immigration rate in Stockholm, known as “little Mogadishu” (Somalis are the majority). In Rinkeby 95 percent of the people come from abroad. It is a kaleidoscope of 60 ethnic groups and 40 languages: Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Ethiopia, Turkey, Bosnia …

To read the international press, these looked like golden Ikea ghettos: public libraries, green gardens with playgrounds, clean streets, good schools and public transport. Areas where the word “multicultural” meant “exchange”, “workshops of coexistence” and “global villages”. The Swedish police have a list of 60 “vulnerable areas”, which translated means abandoned by the state.

Uppdrag Granskning, a television investigative journalism program, has just visited the Tjärna Ängar district in the town of Borlänge, also known as the “little Mogadiscio “, where more than half of the residents come from Somalia. Attacks and violence against journalists, SVT Nyheter reported. Ukrainian women at the Galaxen refugee center in Olofström have just been told not to dress to “provoke men from other cultures “, reports the daily Nyheter Idag.

From Abba to Allah – and one day we will read about cities in Sweden known as “little Sweden”.

Ukrainian Female Refugees Who Sought Safety in “Multicultural” Sweden, Are Now So Terrified in That Country, They Are Asking to be Sent Back to Ukraine March 25, 2022

Posted on by

Ukrainian Female Refugees Who Sought Safety in “Multicultural” Sweden, Are Now So Terrified in That Country, They Are Asking to be Sent Back to Ukraine March 25, 2022


As previously reported here, African and Arab Muslim migrant men have been getting into the Ukrainian refugees’ residence in Sweden, where they are banging on doors and trying to enter the bedrooms of sleeping women and children.  Not surprisingly, many of intruders are Somali Muslims. Apparently, the threat of Russian missile attacks in Ukraine is a lot less scary than staying in “multicultural” Sweden.

EU Times The Swedish news outlet Samnytt spoke with female Ukrainian refugees residing in the town of Örebro following an incident last week where foreign men entered their hostels and tried to attack them.
“When there are bombs, I know at least that I can go down to the basement and hide there,” one victim told the news outlet. Another woman who gave her name as Oksana spoke to Swedish public radio, saying, “They said that Sweden was a safe country, but I have not seen that.”
The women had arrived in Örebro in recent weeks with their children and were accommodated in a hostel. On Monday evening, several unknown males of foreign origin attempted to break in where Ukrainian women were staying with their children.
The first incident occurred at 3 a.m. when two Somali men started knocking on the front door of the hostel. Without opening the door, one of the Ukrainian women tried to talk to the men outside, explaining that only Ukrainian women and children live in the hostel, but the Somalis claimed that they have a friend who lives there, which was a lie.
They did not give up and soon a third Somali man appeared outside the premises and one or more of them managed to enter the hostel, knocking on bedroom doors. At 5 a.m., a group reportedly of Arab origin arrived at the premises and attempted to enter the hostel.
According to the volunteer, the women are scared of gang rape, which one of them says she has already experienced in Germany. Despite the safety measures put in place, there has not been a report filed at the Örebro police department. According to the volunteer, the Ukrainian women were too afraid to report the case. An interpreter allegedly told the women that they may not call the police because they are not yet registered with the Swedish Migration Agency.
The incident in Sweden follows after two migrants raped an 18-year-old Ukrainian refugee girl in Germany just last week.
VIDEO says the same as text: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxEMZq8BUbc&feature=emb_imp_woyt  3 Minutes

The Kingston Manifesto — Multiculturalism, globalism, “open borders,” and the dissolution of nations

Posted on by

The American Mercury

Founded by H.L. Mencken in 1924

The Kingston Manifesto — Multiculturalism, globalism, “open borders,” and the dissolution of nations

S Posted on by E.C. AshendenCanada: The Kingston Manifesto thumbnail

Multiculturalism, globalism, “open borders,” and the dissolution of nations

by Peter Goodchild

THE CORROSION of Western civilization can be seen in a group of interrelated political events, as exemplified in Canada, my own country: multiculturalism, globalism, “open borders,” the dissolution of nations, my concerns especially since the period of 2008 to 2011, when I was in the Middle East and saw these things from a perspective not possible for the average Canadian.

Most Westerners live in a world of illusion. They might spend their time “catching the news” on a TV set or a computer, but they are unaware that the main news-media are owned by gigantic corporations, which have a hidden globalist agenda. Yet most people nowadays do not often read serious books, and so they have little access to genuine in-depth information. If you push them far enough, they will only say, “Well, I believe. . . .”

What do Canadians think they are learning by having their eyes glued to a TV set? They believe that since Canada has 10 million km2 of land, it can keep bringing in more immigrants for eternity, even though most of the land is uninhabitable, and that with sufficient goodwill one can have infinite growth on a finite planet.

They believe that people of European descent, who composed more than 80 percent of Canada until recent times, are guilty of centuries of rather uncertain crimes, perhaps including the alphabet, education, democracy, modern medicine, and science. They believe the world should be controlled by a benevolent dictatorship, with all history, nationality, parenthood, and even gender scrubbed out of people’s brains.

The most important question, though, is not some vague issue of “ethnicity” but rather that of the political motive for these developments. “Multiculturalism” really means no culture at all, no values, no past, no goals, no hopes, no future. The ultimate message is that Earth should become a terribly crowded but profitable slave planet, and that resistance is useless.

Globalism and Western Decline

Around 4000 B.C. there arose a people, probably living north of the Black Sea, to whom we now refer as the early Indo-Europeans. They were the first people to use iron (versus bronze) weapons, and also the first to use horse-drawn chariots – perhaps indeed the first to domesticate horses for any purpose. After about 1000 B.C. there arose a division between the eastern (Persian) and western Indo-Europeans (Greeks), or, in other words, between the Asians and the Europeans. The Indo-Europeans in Persia were a minority in a sea of Asians and as a result ended up assimilating Asian customs. But the Indo-Europeans in Greece were a majority and thus managed to impose their aristocratic libertarian culture, the idea that the leader cannot be a despot but is first among aristocratic equals. This the world of the Iliad. Herodotus indicates the split in his frequent distinctions between the Persians and the Greeks. He claims that the Persian world was characterized by despotism, while the Westerners, the Greeks, were a people of relative freedom, aristocratic equality, and eventually democracy for all free men, including property-owning farmers.

The people who have that Western legacy, however, are now disappearing from much of Europe and North America. Instead, we have “multiculturalism,” which really means the dismantling of “culture,” the decline of the West. In our schools, young people are now taught to be ashamed of their legacy, and any courses in the social sciences are perverted to show the “guilt” of those who spent thousands of years developing Western civilization. How did these regrettable changes come about?

To answer this question, one must first note that in most Western countries there is no longer a real democracy, but rather a barely disguised one-party system. The elite of the supposed left and right spend their time together – the same restaurants, the same marriages, the same golf courses. For a change of pace they switch to journalism – and so much for freedom of the press. During an election, it would be possible to make a list of all the slogans, mix up those items, and then ask someone to match the slogans with the parties. But it would turn out that the matching could not be done.

Actually there is only one slogan: “Bodies are good for business.” So the population must be kept expanding forever. The price we pay for overpopulation and over-immigration, however, is high unemployment, environmental degradation, inadequate housing, traffic congestion, overloaded social services, high crime-rates, losses of water and farmland, and declining natural resources of all kinds. Overcrowding also leads to mental illness: in an urban environment, our nerves are often like wires that have been tightened to a point where their molecules will no longer hold.

The stage for decline was set by the lowering of intellectual capacity. Most people, unfortunately, don’t react to much of anything anymore. One of the main reasons for this decline is that people don’t really become adults. We have created a world of cultural neoteny – prolonged childish behavior, a milieu of “dumbing down” that stretches from birth to death. “Neoteny” is a biological term referring to remaining juvenile for a long period after birth. Obviously humans do this anyway – it takes years for an infant to turn into an adult. But a great deal of modern political sloganeering has the effect, consciously or otherwise, of keeping people silly and childish for life. Ibsen’s play A Doll’s House was an early look into that, at least in terms of women. Predictions of cultural neoteny can also be seen in Huxley’s Brave New World and in a somewhat grimmer form in Orwell’s 1984. This neoteny is pervasive, but it can be seen in such forms as the decline in literacy and the decline in education.

It’s curious to note, however, that there is a definite substratum of the public that disagrees with official policies. On-line news articles that allow comments from viewers get deluged with people expressing heretical views. Then the comments are shut off, and it’s back to Business as Usual – literally. These dissident members of the general public have rarely been brought together, and each person is largely unaware that there are many others holding the same views. The politically orthodox may be enforcing the rules for most daily conversation, but the disquiet never entirely disappears.

If civilization is defined by the presence of writing, then the decline of Western civilization might be defined by the disappearance of interest in serious texts – from the Iliad onward. People don’t read books as much as they used to. No one seems to feel guilty for the fact that instead of reading a book called X they have merely watched a movie called X, based on the book. Yes, it’s true that a movie sometimes has advantages over print, but in general to make a movie out of a book one has to reduce it to action and dialogue, and all the exposition and analysis has to be removed. The time frame of a movie also means that a great deal of detail will be cut out. Not much meaningful discussion can take place when the person to whom one is speaking is convinced that books and movies are simply different “media” providing the same educational service.

A similar decline can be found in formal education. There was a time when the purpose of a university education was to allow young people to explore the outer regions of space and time. Now it’s just training in how to use a cash register. The lowest clerk in the huge building labeled “administration” has a more pleasant job, and much greater job security, than the average instructor. It’s money that keeps the university churning, apparently, not some vague and pretentious search for wisdom. Teachers are day-laborers, easily replaced, and it takes no great skill to deal with the reading materials supplied by the corporations for their future slaves.

“Education” of the new sort is more form than substance: teachers are so afraid of being accused of heresy that the students are given little real information. The average young person in the modern world spends about twenty thousand hours doing school work, yet nearly all of that is a waste of time, because a job at the end of that road does not require the ability to think in any Platonic or Aristotelian sense. Modern education involves little real learning, and far more time is spent on mere indoctrination.

Any form of “nationalism,” any statement of pride in one’s country, was discredited. Furthermore, any specific form of ethnicity or religion was downplayed. Western culture in general was denigrated, and Westerners were largely associated with colonialism. Reversing colonialism meant celebrating non-Western cultures. The new attitude was that “all cultures are equal.”

By propagating an “underdog” mentality among Westerners, globalists have encouraged the nanny state, with people living in perpetual imbecility and irresponsibility. There is now a strong sense of “wrong,” but especially when these victims look at themselves. They hate their own culture and their own heritage. They live with a sense of guilt and shame, they suffer from self-loathing. They feel a need for self-abasement. They have low self-confidence, low self-assurance, low self-esteem.

Confirmed underdogs have self-destructive attitudes about sexuality, marriage, and the family. To them, a stable marriage, heterosexual and monogamous, is anathema. What better way to prevent the growth of what used to be called a “real man” than to suggest to a young boy that, deep down, he might not be a boy but a girl? (The same in reverse would apply to girls.) And so we create (or imagine) multiple “genders,” “bi-” this and “poly-” that, psychologically disturbed mutations who have no chance of standing up against the totalitarian state. (How odd that no other species of mammal has more than two genders!)

But above all, to be accepted in modern society one must now proclaim that Western culture is guilty of some nameless crime, making it necessary to give preferential treatment to any and all other cultures. Of course, that is a belief with which those “other cultures” are always happy to agree. And once that “guilt” has become established as “fact,” every piece of writing that appears in public must emphasize “multiculturalism” at all costs.

All “respectable” political or religious groups shuffling for power now try to portray themselves as holier, more pious, than the others, but really they all have the same goal: to establish a world government, and to turn the masses into obedient slaves.

The Growth of Cultural Marxism

The moral and intellectual fabric of Western society has been disintegrating for some time. To a large extent the destruction can be blamed on a form of Marxism, socialism, left-wing thinking, “underdog” mentality, which has encouraged the nanny state, with people living in perpetual imbecility and irresponsibility. In the middle of the last century, Marxism never had much luck in intellectual contests among Westerners, so it had to burrow underground, eroding the foundations of modern society and leaving people in a state of perpetual self-doubt and abnegation. This is what is called “cultural Marxism.” Not much of the reality of cultural Marxism is clearly evident: most of it is experienced as a mere premonition, like that of a coming change in the weather.

Cultural Marxism began in the early twentieth century, when Marxism in the usual sense (i.e. economic Marxism) was a failure in Western Europe; in the First World War, for example, most people were far more interested in defending their country than in overthrowing their government. Cultural Marxism arose because, in order to win in the West, Marxists realized they would have to go underground, working on the “culture” rather than openly advocating revolution. The movement began roughly with Georg Lukács and Antonio Gramsci, who claimed that in order for Marxism to succeed in the West, it was vital to destroy the existing culture by sowing the seeds of doubt regarding all traditional Western moral values.

Hence the formation of the Institute for Social Research at the Goethe University Frankfurt, and its offspring, some of whom (at various times) were Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Leo Lowenthal, Max Horkheimer, Walter Benjamin, and Erich Fromm. Following Hitler’s rise to power in 1933, the Institute left Germany, finally moving to New York City, where it was affiliated with Columbia University.

In “The Origins of Political Correctness” (version of 2000), William S. Lind breaks cultural Marxism down into five parts:

“Where does all this stuff that you’ve heard about . . . the victim feminism, the gay rights movement, the invented statistics, the rewritten history, the lies, the demands, all the rest of it – where does it come from? For the first time in our history, Americans have to be fearful of what they say. . . . .

“We call it “Political Correctness”. . . .

“Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. . . . If we compare the basic tenets of Political Correctness with classical Marxism the parallels are very obvious. . . .

“First of all, both are totalitarian ideologies. The totalitarian nature of Political Correctness is revealed nowhere more clearly than on college campuses. . . .

“Indeed, all ideologies are totalitarian because the essence of an ideology . . . is to take some philosophy and say . . . certain things must be true. . . . That is why ideology invariably creates a totalitarian state.

“Second, the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness, like economic Marxism, has a single factor explanation of history. Cultural Marxism . . . says that all history is determined by . . . which groups . . . have power over which other groups. . . .

“Third, certain groups . . . are a priori good, and other groups . . . are evil . . . regardless of what any of them do. . . .

“Fourth, both economic and cultural Marxism rely on expropriation. . . . When the cultural Marxists take over a university campus, they expropriate through things like quotas for admissions. . . .

“And finally, both have a method of analysis that automatically gives the answers they want. . . . . For the cultural Marxist, it’s deconstruction. Deconstruction essentially takes any text, removes all meaning from it and re-inserts any meaning desired. So we find, for example, that all of Shakespeare is about the suppression of women, or the Bible is really about race and gender. . . .

“The members of the Frankfurt School are Marxist, they are also, to a man, Jewish.”

It is commonly assumed that the term “cultural Marxism” is a right-wing invention. As such, it could be described as a form of “paranoid global conspiracy theory,” along with so many other right-wing concepts that are casually dismissed in similar ways. But the term isn’t a right-wing invention at all. The use of the term “cultural Marxism” by leftist academics themselves (with the same definitions as are used by the right wing) is indicated by such authors and book titles as Dennis Dworkin, Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain; Lawrence Grossberg and Cary Nelson, Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture; Frederic Miller and Agnes F. Vandome, Cultural Marxism; and Richard R. Weiner, Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology.

So “cultural Marxism” isn’t a form of “paranoid global conspiracy theory,” since it isn’t paranoid and it isn’t just a theory. But the daily news is so heavy with anti-right-wing judgments that a viewer could could easily give up on trying to find the truth. It’s not surprising that people just accept the claim that cultural Marxism is a figment of the deranged right-wing imagination.

Cultural Marxism is in fact the engine that keeps the whole “multicultural” ship moving along. But even fairly knowledgeable people don’t really think much about that engine, except maybe when they’re lying in their bunks at night and they hear a distant chugging sound.

The attack – by Westerners – on Western beliefs and values never slows down. The “Hippie Revolution,” damaging the lives of so many Baby Boomers, was largely due to the machinations of Benjamin Spock, Noam Chomsky, and Timothy Leary. The Church has reduced itself to infantilism. Ph.D.’s are handed out to students who can only be described as illiterate. Electronic devices destroy our attention span, reduce direct contact among humans, and turn everything into “virtual reality.” Illicit drugs and inadequate diets further reduce our mental capacities.

Sorry – maybe some of this can’t be laid at the feet of poor Karl Marx. Perhaps some of this is just a matter of “lifestyle choice,” to use modern jargon. But is there really a difference?

A related problem that makes cultural Marxism so hard to analyze is that to some extent it’s a group of overlapping activities, not just one, and that’s especially true nowadays. Multiculturalism, sexual deviancy, mass immigration, “sanctuary cities,” aggressive religions, dumbing down, “liberalism” that is not at all liberal, and so on – the modern world has become somewhat shapeless and formless. The trail of Marxism is so long, and goes cold so often.

At times the trail becomes quite ludicrous, with “multiculturalism” itself as an example of that absurdity. The early cultural Marxists hoped to destroy traditional Western culture by flooding it with other cultures. Yet nowadays the photographs in advertising largely portray non-White (non-European, non-Western) people, in spite of the fact that the West is demographically still mostly White. Yet every major bank advertises its services very largely with photographs of happy non-White or multi-racial couples.

But the inclusion of non-Whites is good for business, since such people compose a new and possibly lucrative customer base – “diversity is our strength” is the new chant. So what began in the 1930s as a Marxist tactic has become, many decades later, a marketing ploy by capitalist bankers who would rather die than be regarded as Marxists!

What does the term “left wing” itself really mean? In France long ago, the terms “left” and “right” had precise meanings, based on where one was actually sitting in the Estates General, indicating one’s attitude toward the Revolution. Now perhaps “left wing” means big government, and big spending by that government, but above all it means supporting the “poor” rather than the “rich.” By the “poor” I mean the voters, of course, not the people leading such flocks.

As soon as “guilt” has become established as “fact,” every relevant piece of paper that appears in public must emphasize “multiculturalism” at all costs. Although the terms are used misleadingly, everything must also stress “fairness,” “democracy,” and “equal rights.” The punishment for breaches of “multiculturalism” is swift and merciless, unless one is attacking Christians; Easter seems always ready to disappear from the free calendars handed out by politicians.

There are corollaries to all the above. Leftists must believe in prohibiting the ownership of guns, for example. If people believe they are underdogs, they must also believe they have no right to defend themselves. Only grown-ups should have guns, and leftists know they are not grown-ups.

Most leftists believe all cultures are, in some inexplicable way, equal. In their naiveté, they cannot believe that many cultures are cruel and intolerant, locked in the pre-literate mentality of a thousand years ago. Westerners today cannot understand that there can be such vast differences between the mentality of one culture and another. The mainstream news-media foster this misunderstanding by failing to report the shocking statistics of rape, mutilation, murder, and other barbarisms that go on in this world.

Most people have little sense of history, yet cruelty has long been a part of that history. Beginning about 5,000 years ago in the Near East, various civilizations arose in Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, Persia, and so on. After a war between city-states, it was customary for all the male inhabitants of the losing city to be put to death, and impalement was one of the most common forms of killing. That ancient mentality has not entirely passed away. Yet Westerners like to fool themselves into believing that the entire world consists of people who read glossy magazines and keep up with all the intellectual trends. The reality is that, even in modern times, the counterpart to an act of “tolerance” in one country would just as surely result in a death sentence in another.

Above all, cultural Marxism is an effective means of rationalizing the quest for “the ethnic vote.” The cultural-Marxist dogma plays into an alleged economic need: to increase immigration and thereby sustain a “growing economy.” Yet massive immigration really has little or no benefit to the country, and in fact leads to overcrowding, unemployment, and other social ills. For the rich, on the other hand, massive immigration means more buyers, more workers, and more investors. For politicians, more people means more votes. For religious groups, larger numbers of the “faithful” means a greater chance of pushing out competitors. Yet none of these groups has the good of the country in mind.

In a world of otherwise horrendous overpopulation, we are told that the West itself is headed for demographic collapse, and that we must find out why this is happening. Yet no answer is offered, other than the circular response that the problem is caused by low fertility. At the same time, one gets the feeling that the Westerners in these shrinking countries are being punished for some unnamed sin. Left-wingers are always trying to find ways to justify mass migration and multiculturalism, in the hope that they can dominate a planet of rootless wanderers, people with no culture at all.

But if we choose to have a serious look at the real issues of demographic decline, we can see some important variations. In Europe, it is the eastern countries that are facing the worst decline in population. And it is eastern Europe that is the poorest. In McMafia, Misha Glenny tells us that international “human trafficking” is supplied mostly by women from eastern Europe. This fact is surely connected to another, that women in these countries are choosing not to have children — or rather, they are faced with the near-impossibility of doing so. As I was once told by a white woman, “This isn’t a good world in which to be bringing up children.”

It was eastern Europe that was dominated by Communism. It was eastern Europe that was destroyed by Communism. All of this is the legacy of Karl Marx. Demographic collapse is not a punishment of Westerners for some unnamed sin. The dots are obvious, the connections among them less so. But the more one looks at the picture, the more it comes together.

One Ring to Bind Them All

Muslims repeatedly kill and wound large numbers of people. Basically quite simple. But then I find a large number of questions floating around. For one thing, the politicians and the mainstream news-media are all saying that such attacks are perpetrated by “terrorists,” not specifically by “Muslims.” So this raises the large issue of disinformation (versus misinformation). The KGB, during the Cold War, were quite instrumental in developing this. One of the main tricks is not to tell a lie exactly, because it’s possible to get caught, but simply to tweak the facts a tiny bit, even if the final effect is not so tiny. Now politicians do it all the time. By saying “terrorists” rather than “Muslims,” the average television-viewer can wipe the sweat from his forehead and say, “Oh, thank God. Terrorists. I was afraid it was Muslims.” Then he can go to bed, sleep like a baby, and snore all night long.

Somebody once asked me: Why would people deliberately blow themselves up? To a modern Westerner this seems incomprehensible. The answer is that these people think they’ll go straight to heaven if they perform these acts of martyrdom. And how could people believe such a thing? Because they have such faith in their God. Islam was created fourteen centuries ago, and it has hardly changed since then. In order to understand Islam one can study the history of Europe at that same time, the early Middle Ages. Consider the fact that even the Christian monks spent centuries burning other monks at the stake over minor issues of theological doctrine. And for Muslims nowadays, violence on that level is all part of the grand tradition.

In The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Samuel P. Huntington notes that “wherever one looks along the perimeter of Islam, Muslims have problems living peacefully with their neighbors.” A few decades ago, Charles de Gaulle had the bright idea of importing Muslims from his defunct North African empire, in order to form a union of Europeans and Muslims (called Eurabia by Bat Ye’or) that might even compete with the US as a world power. And now France, among many other countries, is paying the price, but the politicians deny all responsibility.

For Westerners, part of the disturbing news these days is that Muslim attacks are often right in the heart of Europe. So the unspoken fear is that jihad (religious warfare) is moving even further west. What will happen next in Germany, for example?

Then there’s the great stumbling block of Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel. After all that we know of the Muslim assault on the West, why would she have allowed a vast crowd of Muslim invaders from three different continents – sorry, “Syrian refugees” – to swarm into Germany and destroy whatever was left of German self-esteem?

The goal is always the same: to wipe out all the independence-loving particular countries that are now in place. That is why the news media always hammer out the message that one must never use the words “white,” “race,” “ethnic,” or “nationalist” in any positive sense. When those “rebels” (us) have been crushed, it will be possible for the One Worlders to set up their massive government that will have its fingers on all the buttons.

The European Union is not much different from the Soviet Union, and no better. The goal is to establish a world government, and to turn the masses into obedient slaves. All such ideologies have always been quite opposed to democracy. The biggest step, though, is to crush any sense of pride in one’s own country, and to do that the opposite to nationalism must be instituted: “multiculturalism.” And what better way to make a country “multicultural” than to bring in a few million families from places where people don’t even believe in birth control? If a few suicide bombers get a little out of hand, then – well, it’s a small price to pay. And, yes, it’s true that too many massacres could put a dent in the One Worlders’ plans. Never mind. As Tolkien said: “One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, / One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them. . . .”

Canada Is Not Vacant Land

It is a common misconception that Canada has vast amounts of land that could support large numbers of immigrants. Much of this belief is due to a failure to understand Canada’s unique but rather daunting geography. About half of the country is bare (or, at best, spruce-covered), uninhabitable rock, namely the famous Canadian Shield. But bare rock is never “underpopulated.”

It is the border strip, 150 km wide, which is demographically the most significant part of the country: 80 percent of the population lives in this area. In contrast, Canada’s largely uninhabited 5 million square kilometers of bare rock, the enormous area north of that border strip, has winters of unearthly cold stretching out over the better part of the year, with snow reaching to the rooftops, and the remainder of the year is characterized by dense clouds of mosquitoes and blackflies. The general impression is that Canada is an “empty” land, just waiting to get filled up. In reality, at 38 million the population is now nearly three times greater than in 1950.

Because only a certain amount of the country is livable, Canada is already well populated. There is simply no need to continue our mad rush to fill the country. Thanks to dishonest politicians over the years, Canada has roughly the highest immigration rate of all major industrialized countries. Canada also has many economic problems and is unable to provide adequate employment or other support for the people who already live here. A large increase in population is not a solution. In fact, in a world that now has a total population of about 8 billion, an increase in population is never a solution to anything. Yet, unlike many other countries, Canada has no political party that will take a firm stand against excessive immigration.

Canadian multiculturalism is a policy announced to Parliament by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau on October 8, 1971, leading in 1988 to the Canadian Multiculturalism Act. The policy is harmful, partly because it fails to include strategies for integration, such as a requirement of proficiency in an official language before citizenship is granted. Multiculturalism as we see it today – measured in terms of the quantity of bodies – simply results in enclaves, ghettos, gang warfare. Each culture fights every other one. About 85 percent of recent immigrants have neither English nor French as their first language.

Multiculturalism also leads to cultural relativism. Canadians of European extraction are now taught to believe that there is no such thing as barbarism, only “cultural differences.” We forget that there was actually a point to the long centuries of struggle in the West that fostered democracy, civil liberties, and human rights. Yet we bow to medieval mentality on the assumption that we are otherwise “racists.”

Immigrants displace Canadian citizens in the job market, even though unemployment these days is already very high. They also add greatly to the costs of “free” medicine, education, legal advice, and all the other perquisites of the welfare state. In part this is because the immigrants of modern times often lack both language and education.

Pierre Trudeau’s invention is destroying the country, and to speak against it is regarded as sheer heresy. The Chinese are by far the biggest immigrant group, and Vancouver is now an Asian city. But it is not only numbers of people that matter, because there are other ways of changing the country. Money from Saudi Arabia has insidious effects, and Muslim obsessions with sharia (Muslim law) corrode basic Canadian values. According to the highly respected journalist Robert Fisk (“The Crimewave That Shames the World”), about twenty thousand Muslim women every year are the victims of “honor killings” by their own families, but when Canadians hear such accounts they fail to believe them: if such a story did not appear on last night’s television it cannot be true. Yet I spent three years living in the Middle East, and I know that much of the world is far uglier than is imagined by most Westerners.

As an English teacher back in Canada, I would sometimes have to advise immigrant students against infractions of Canadian laws, including those regarding assault, but my students’ rationale for any moral or legal infractions was always the phrase “in my culture” (or “in my country”). Who, specifically, is teaching newcomers such expressions? Politicians are quite aware that “culture” is not a valid catch-all term, but they don’t seem to care. After all, a higher rate of immigration means more votes, and more customers, and more sweatshops.

Until the creation of multiculturalism, freedom of speech and the press was an age-old right. Now, however, it is a crime to say anything that offends any group of people, because one is said to be attacking “human rights.” A charge of this sort is a circular argument: what is offensive is defined in terms of the claim of the other party to feel offended. It’s like a charge of witchcraft: whatever you say, your statement can be turned around to “prove” you are guilty. The similarity between the twisted logic of Trudeauism and that of Stalinism (not to mention the Patriot Act and subsequent American legislation) is curious, but Orwell described such “thought crimes” long ago in 1984.

It’s easy to understand why the inhabitants of the less-pleasant parts of the world have their eyes on Canada. The most significant result of Communist policy in China was famine, and the worst famine in all of world history was that of Mao Zedong’s “Great Leap Forward,” 1958-61, when about 30 million people died. Now hunger is again looming in that country. China’s arable land is in decline, and about 600 km2 of land in China turns to desert each year. China has once more outgrown its food supply: the ratio of people to arable land in China is more than twice that of the world average, which is already too high to prevent hunger.

China is the world’s leader in the mining or processing of quite a number of natural resources: aluminum, coal, gold, iron, magnesium, phosphate, zinc, and rare-earth minerals, for example. Yet basic energy reserves are in short supply. Although China has about 20 percent of the world’s population, it produces only about 5 percent of the world’s oil, it uses up coal so quickly that its reserves will not last beyond 2030, and the country’s pollution problems are terrible. And China’s “booming economy” is based on devalued currency, counterfeiting, and what is virtually slave labor.

The “fossil” (deep) aquifer of the North China Plain is being depleted, although fossil aquifers cannot be renewed. Yet this aquifer maintains half of China’s wheat production and a third of its corn. As a result of the depletion of water, annual grain production has been in decline since 1998.

China now imports most of its soybeans, and conversely most of the world’s soybean exports go to China. But China may soon need to import most of its grain as well. How will that amount compare with their soybean imports? No one knows for sure, but if China were to import only 20 percent of its grain it would be about the same amount that the US now exports to all countries.

Immigrants from Muslim countries are another large group entering Canada, and according to the Pew Research Center the Muslim population of Canada is expected to rise much faster than the general population. Saudi Arabia pours money into the West for the purpose of “education,” and many Western academic institutions receive grants from Saudi Arabia, or programs are set up with Saudi funding. At the same time, the numerous mosques in the West serve as training grounds for young Muslims who live in those countries. Mosques are springing up everywhere in the West, yet in Saudi Arabia the building of a Christian church incurs an automatic death sentence. Contrary to popular opinion, there is no such thing as “moderate Islam” versus “radical Islam”: Islam comes in only one form, the one that was invented in the seventh century.

The misunderstanding of the vast difference between Muslims and Christians might be due to the fact that the debate is assumed merely to involve the respective merits of two religions. Yet this assumption is wrong on two counts. In the first place, Muslims regard it as self-evident that Allah spoke first to Moses, then to Jesus, and finally and most clearly to Mohammed: for Muslims, therefore, there is no possibility of a “dialog” among various religions. The second and more important reason why it may not be entirely logical to compare Islam and Christianity is that the former is, in some ways, more like a political movement than a religion. Every major religion has at times done some proselytizing “at the point of a sword,” but that has always been more true of Islam. The term jihad is not a metaphor.

The general public in Canada has become accustomed to submission and therefore remains mute. Unlike other people, most Canadians are never satisfied until they are feeling guilty about something. There is a constant undertone of “moral inferiority” being applied in Canada to people of a Western heritage. One must never mention Christmas, although one must portray a false joy toward the festivities of any other culture. One must constantly mumble and fumble in an attempt to find correct terms for various ethnic groups. Even the terms “B.C.” and “A.D.” must be rewritten as “BCE” and “CE.” All of this is absolute nonsense. To be convinced of one’s own inferiority is nothing more than to accept that some other person is superior – which is exactly what manipulative politicians are planning. It is time to wake up. Those who do not respect themselves will not be respected by others.
©2020 Jefferson-Mencken Group Scroll Up

Paul Fromm Discusses The Politics of Replacement

Posted on by
Paul Fromm Discusses The Politics of Replacement
Lecture delivered to the Japan First Party in Tokyo.
paul fromm japan firstpaul fromm japan first

Canada is a Country of the Descendants of Its French and English Founders

Posted on by
Canada is a Country of the Descendants of Its French and English Founders
By A Canadian Patriot
As STATS CAN immigration figures show, Canada has had a big change in its sources of immigrants. For example, according to the 1861 Census, most immigrants came from the British Isles. After 1861, a minor change occurred : there were waves from other European countries and the U.S. As Chart 5 on the STATS CANADA site shows, a much bigger change occurred from the 1960’s onward. At that time, there were two major shifts in the source countries of Canada’s immigration: (1) There was a significant decrease in the percentage of immigrants from key western nations – in particular, the British Isles and the USA. (2) There was a big increase in the percentage from Asia, North and Sub-Saharan Africa and Central and South American nations, etc. There was also an increase in the percentage of Middle Eastern immigrants.
The people from non-traditional source countries brought their ideologies, ethnic loyalties, values, cultures, norms, beliefs, and conflicts to Canada. The end result is that in 1871,the percentage of immigrants from the British Isles was 80%. By 1991, that percentage was down to under 20%. In a very biased statement, supposedly-neutral STATS CAN says that this was “an increase in diversity”. The truth is that the “diversity” rhetoric from liberals, leftists and “progressive conservatives” as well as their mainstream media friends has been focused on the belief that there are positive impacts from immigration from non-western nations. What STATS CAN, the Left, liberals and “progressive conservatives” and media ignore or downplay are the significant negative impacts of such a shift. For instance, what benefit to the average Canadian citizen came from this demographic transformation? What is the long term projection for our population composition? If research from Harvard (Putnam) as well as human history is true, when a country has groups of people with increased diversity in ideologies, religions, ethnicities and values, there is a much greater likelihood of conflict, power struggles, etc.
french canadians
I would add that that the often-repeated slogan,  “We are a nation of immigrants” is a deceitful justification for admitting more immigrants. In fact, we are not a nation of immigrants because for most of our history, we have been a nation of mostly European descendants born in Canada. And even by more recent standards such as the 2011 National Household Survey which estimated that the foreign born population was 20.6% of the total population, we were still not a nation of immigrants. We were and still are a nation of people mostly born in Canada with a smaller segment born elsewhere.
One other important point : We keep hearing that we are and have been a “multicultural nation”. That statement implies that Canadians approved of immigration changes. It is utter deceit. In fact, until the 1960’s, we were a nation of two cultures. French and English made up the majority of our country. There were other cultures (ethnic populations), but they were a vast minority. Multiculturalism and the change in the source countries of Canada’s immigrants has been forced on Canadians. None of us were given a chance to vote on it. Worse still, multiculturalism has become a virtual religion. And now the religion of multiculturalism has taken such a hold on Canada, that criticizing it is tantamount to blasphemy. Anyone who dares to question it is seen as the lowest form of life that must be tarred, feathered and locked in a public stockade. Canada was not broken. Why was it “fixed”?
One last point : Our population keeps increasing. And immigration is the key factor contributing to this increase. In the 1960’s, Canada’s population was in the 20 million range. Now, 5-6 decades later, it is over 36 million. Inevitably, breeding of recent immigrants will increase that number. Has this increase improved the relative quality of life for Canadian citizens? I don’t believe it has.
And so why on earth should we continue to support the key driver of this population increase, namely, high immigration numbers? It makes no sense to me. And as much as I keep hearing the rhetoric of the left, liberals and “progressive conservatives”, that we need more immigration to sustain our way of life and our economy, I don’t believe it.Three major federal studies contradict this nonsense and back me up. Moreover, all I see are the downsides. Even the Parliamentary Budget Office says it will cost Canadians $1 billion over 3 years just to cover the costs of the fake refugees at our Eastern border. Remember : Those people arrived because of Trudeau’s virtue-signalling blunder in 2015. That blunder has evolved into accepted inevitability. If Trudeau does nothing, about 50,000 more fake refugees will probably arrive this year.
Furthermore, I see a rise in Asian gang crime, Somalian gang crime, Islamic fundamentalism and the negative impacts of a major increase in populations in our major urban centres. For example, property values in Metro Vancouver and Toronto are out of reach for many of our children. Why are they so high? Because wealthy Asians have speculated with our property. And so, whatever the benefits of immigration, those benefits are vastly outweighed by the negatives, especially if you are a European- descended “Old Stock” Canadian.
It’s time to put the brakes on immigration.