Tag Archives: Ricardo Duchesne

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

Canadian Universities Have Extensive Research Partnerships With Chinese State To Develop A “Surveillance” Society Against “Far Right Canadians”

Posted on by

Canadian Universities Have Extensive Research Partnerships With Chinese State To Develop A “Surveillance” Society Against “Far Right Canadians”

by Dr. Ricardo Duchesne

UBC President Santa Ono (left) and a Huawei representative signed a 2017 deal to provide millions in funding to UBC researchers for the purpose of transferring Western knowhow to Chinese military and create surveillance technologies to “monitor” white Canadians. 

Can you believe this? Quietly behind our backs our universities have been reaching extremely lucrative agreements with the Communist Party of China to cooperate in the development of “surveillance and population control technologies and the use of facial recognition, and digital monitoring” against those who question mass immigration and the rise of China to global supremacy. Chinese financial power will be combined with Western scientific research to develop technologies that will allow the Canadian government to surveil “every health record, every banking record, every social media post” of Canadians to ensure the peaceful replacement of whites. 

These research partnerships are also intended to augment the military/global power of the Chinese. The Globe & Mail admitted on October 2018 that Canadian academics have been collaborating “on dozens of projects with Chinese military researchers…raising concerns that Canada is inadvertently helping China modernize its armed forces”. The research partnerships “include the enrolment of Chinese defence scientists as graduate students and visiting scholars at Canadian universities“. 
The Globe & Mail, however, does not grasp the full implications of what’s going on. We can’t understand these partnerships solely in terms of how they benefit the Chinese military. These research exchanges need to be conceptualized as part of a wider attempt to develop a surveillance society that will ensure the fulfillment of the program of racial diversification. We know that a fundamental mission of our universities, as openly stated in their official websites, is to brainwash students to accept the total diversification of Canada. Behind the scenes universities have taken another crucial function: the development of a Canada that is under “total surveillance” for the purpose of eradicating any form of dissent. 

Huawei and UBC

The most important research partnerships have been with Huawei Technologies, a Chinese multinational company that specializes in “AI-based surveillance, intrusive data collection and smartphone and general communications monitoring.” Huawei was founded in 1987 by a former Deputy Regimental Chief in the People’s Liberation Army. It has been estimated that Huawei spent about C$650 million on research and development projects in Canada in the past decade alone. 
Huawei has been singled out by security agencies around the world as a major military risk. It has been called a “Trojan horse” and a threat to Western nations because it has been regularly accused of spying and intellectual property theft. According to Stephanie Carvin, an Associate Professor of International Affairs, National Security Issues and Terrorism, at Carleton University, Huawei is a “state-championed company” engaged in theft of secrets and security information.
The University of British Columbia is one of many Canadian universities engaged in lucrative deals with Huawei and China. I will focus first on UBC and the “unprecedented number of partnerships” it has signed with leading Chinese universities that are expected to “deepen the ties that exist between UBC and China”. The goal is to “link UBC more closely with Asia and the Pacific” rather than with Canada, as the former President Arvind Gupta admitted. 
The Chinese government has long been bragging about the “Asianization of Canada’s economy, society and culture“. Under Arvind Gupta’s policy of “Asianization” of Canadian education, many lucrative agreements were established for joint degree programs between UBC and various Chinese universities, including Peking, Zhejiang, Fudan, and Southwest universities. In an agreement with Beijing University, UBC agreed to allow members of the Chinese Communist Party to have access to Canada’s Bioenergy Research. In another agreement with Chongqing University, UBC has given the Chinese state access to the latest research on “light and strong Alloys” and “materials engineering”.
As part of these agreements, Gupta met with key members of the Chinese Communist Party including Hao Ping, vice minister of education; Zhang Jianguo, minister of the State Administration of Foreign Experts Affairs; Wu Gang, vice-mayor of Chongqing; and Liu Jinghui, secretary general of the China Scholarship Council.

More recently, after Santa Ono became the president of UBC on June 2016, UBC finalized a $7.8 million deal on projects with Huawei to research “advanced communications and 5G projects.” 5G is a wireless technology that holds the promise of total connectivity and total surveillance.  The research to be financed includes cloud computing, the privacy and security of artificial intelligence, digital image forgery detection and silicon chip fabrication. All in all, 32 UBC projects have received Huawei funding since 2017. 

Arrest of Meng Wanzhou

This partnership was put under some pressure after the arrest of the chief financial officer of Huawei, Meng Wanzhou, in late 2018. Wanzhou enjoyed permanent residency in Canada. She was arrested by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on a provisional U.S. extradition request for conspiracy to commit fraud; and on February 13, 2020 Meng was indicted by the DOJ on charges of trade secrets theft. 
It should be noted that Meng was far more than a high level employee: Huawei was in fact founded by her father Ren Zhengfei. 
But even as legal proceedings were mounting against Meng, UBC started two new research projects on next-generation 5G wireless technology. In May 2019, the UBC research vice-president, Gail Murphy, said that the university “will continue with its partnership” with the Chinese company, which have been in place since 2011. 
Huawei has continued to pour money into UBC projects, even after the arrest of Meng Wanzhou“. While a few professors expressed fears about taking part in Huawei-financed projects, since the arrest of Meng, 18 new projects have been earmarked for Huawei funding at UBC, totaling C$2.6 million. To this day, in its official website, UBC proudly lists Huawei as a major partner.
Let it be said again that Huawei is into “surveillance and population control technologies and the use of facial recognition, and digital monitoring.” The Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) want this technology because they anticipate that “extreme right wing groups and individuals” will grow in influence as the diversification of Canada intensifies and white women are turned into sexual objects for interracial sex and the production of brown babies.
The Chinese know that Canada is the weakest link in the Western world, an enfeebled nation without an army yet in charge of huge tracks of land with abundant resources ready to be colonized by the most rapacious consumers in human history: 1400 million Chinese versus a pathetically weak Canadian population of 37 million rootless mongrels. The Chinese government eyes Canadian/Western scientific education very highly; and it has trillions to invest everywhere, and Canada is the most auspicious place to take over.

The Chinese know that our universities are pro-Asian and anti-Western. They know that the academics working in these universities are committed to the promotion of non-whites and the degradation of the white race. They know that Western science is still more advanced overall than Asian science, so “they’re looking for help from Canada in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, advanced materials, quantum computing, all areas that can help their military and help other aspects of their economy as well,” according to Robert O’Brien, US national security adviser. 

It is a two pronged attack: helping China to become the major world power while developing surveillance technology that will allow Western globalists to ensure mass immigration without any opposition from “far right” groups.
The arrest of Meng Wanzhou, and the increasingly strained relations with the US and Beijing after the Chinese virus was unleashed onto the West last Winter, have not damaged one bit the partnerships of Canadian universities with Huawei and China. UBC is just the tip of the iceberg.

University of Waterloo

Justin Trudeau tours Huawei research program at Waterloo. Former CSIS director says China views Canada as an ‘easier target’

Check the University of Waterloo. Following the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, Huawei released this statement: “We remain committed to our partnership with the University of Waterloo”. The “operations” of Huawei in Waterloo “are extensive”. All the agreements they reached with Waterloo are still in operation. The official website of this university still announces with pride: “Huawei and University of Waterloo partner for world-class research and innovation“. 
Back in 2016, Huawei announced that it had a research and development office in Waterloo with thirty employees, and that it planned to hire another 20.  When UW president Feridun Hamdullahpur visited Huawei’s headquarters in Shenzhen in 2016, he signed a partnership with the company that put $3 million into research “related to cloud computing, data management and data analytics.” In total, the university says that Huawei has provided $15.3 million in research funding over the past five years for 16 projects, which include research into wireless systems, autonomous driving and network virtualization.

The company funds a math scholarship at UW and an engineering-science entrance award. Huawei also is a sponsor of the Waterloo Artificial Intelligence Institute launched at UW last April. The University of Waterloo is packed with Chinese students. International Chinese students alone totaled more than 7,500 students in 2018. The Communist Party knows that most of its sponsorship will land in the hands of Chinese foreign students or Chinese-“Canadians”. 

Multiple Universities are Involved 

Huawei struck similar agreements with many other Canadian universities.

In the province of Ontario at large Huawei announced in 2016 that it was spending $303 million on research projects related to 5G networks. To this day the company employs more than 500 additional employees at research facilities in Markham and Ottawa. 
These partnerships by university presidents across Canada are being done despite the fact that “the company has come under scrutiny for developing advanced surveillance technologies that are being field tested in China’s Xinjiang region, home to the Uygur Muslim minority group, which has long complained of oppression. These surveillance and population control technologies use facial recognition, digital monitoring and artificial intelligence.”

Ted Sargent, U of T’s vice-president international, participates in a signing ceremony with DiDi Senior Vice-President Jun Yu (November 2018)

Here is a short list of the many agreements reached by multiple universities with Huawei and other Chinese companies.

  • The University of Toronto eulogizes about its partnership with the Beijing-based company “DiDi”, which boasts a half billion users, that will allow DiDi “to tap into the university’s expertise in artificial intelligence and transportation planning as it builds a global network.
  • The president of the University of Alberta brags about how his university has “developed extensive connections with China over the past 40 years“. Among the multiple partnerships there is one with Tsinghua University concerning the development of sustainable, low-carbon energy to improve China’s economic standing in the world.
  • The University of Ottawa and the Chinese Academy of Sciences Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica have co-founded “a state-of-the-art Joint Research Centre on Systems and Personalized Pharmacology.” Jacques Fremont, president of the University of Ottawa, gushed about  “an intense relationship, especially in medical studies, engineering and education.”  We always have dozens of Chinese people coming under specific programs.” Fremont added.
  • The University of Guelph told CBC News that Huawei has invested in two research projects, but declined to provide details on the nature of that research.
  • McGill University is another university actively working in partnerships with China in areas such as engineering, architecture, neuroscience, genomics and biomedical sciences. 
  • Polytechnique Montreal has seen much collaboration with China in the field of aerospace and transportation area for almost 30 years, from signing an agreement with Harbin Institute of Technology in 1988 to another with Beihang University in 2015.
  • Quebec City’s Laval University is very secretive, saying only that “the investment of Huawei is confidential as per the collaborative contracts.” 
  • Queen’s is also very secretive other than stating that its ties with China will “become even more extensive and important in coming years”. 

White Men Responsible For Almost All The Greatest Human Accomplishments

Posted on by

Thursday, 16 July 2020

White Men Responsible For Almost All The Greatest Human Accomplishments

by Dr. Ricardo Duchesne

The biggest reason why Whites are believed to be racist is that they are far the greatest achievers in human history and they created the nations non-whites crave to inhabit. The very existence of White Men goes against the principle of equality since they are responsible for almost 100% of the greatest achievements in all the fields of human endeavor since ancient historical times. This is a big reason why White nations are earmarked for total race mixing, and why White Males are the most resented group.

The following lists come directly from tweets I wrote over the last few months. These tweets are based on careful documentation and extensive research. One of the reasons I was suspended from twitter is that hundreds of complaints were regularly sent against me for speaking about the unique greatness of White men. 
These lists will show that White men are responsible for almost everything that is noble, beautiful, and excellent in history, far surpassing the achievements of all the other races combined. The sheer fact that White men came up with all the disciplinary fields taught in our universities speaks volumes: archaeology, botany, economics, sociology, anthropology, history, biology, chemistry, genetics, physics, medicine, literature, theology, architecture…all of them. 
The greatest painters, novelists, historians, biologists, physicists, classical composers, poets, car designers, mathematicians, architects are White men. White men were the greatest nation builders in history. They discovered and mapped the entire earth, every river, mountain, sea, desert — including every territory inhabited  by non-whites.

100% of the Greatest Modern Inventions 

Printing press  Electricity  Television  Vaccination  Computer  Photography  Airplane  Nuclear Energy  Steam Engine  Telephone  Radio  Rocketry  Mechanized Clock  Oil Drilling  Refrigeration  Pasteurization  Automobile  Internet  Anesthesia Optical Lenses Telegraph  Semiconductor Electronics  Turbine Engine  Plant Breeding  Air-Conditioning  Assembly Line

White Men invented ALL the Scientific Instruments 

Ammeter  Barometer  Sextant  Voltmeter  Thermometer  Galvanometer  Hydrometer  Radar  Hygrometer  Electroscope  Microscope 

Electron Microscope

Accelerometer,  Magnetograph  Telescope  Periscope  Calorimeter  Nanoscale  Telemeter  Seismograph  Cardiograph

The Greatest Books in Philosophy (J = Jew)

The Republic – Plato  Nicomachean Ethics – Aristotle  Meditations – Marcus Aurelius  Sic et Non – Abelard Proslogion – Saint Anselm
Ordinatio – Scotus
Summa Theologica – Aquinas  Novum Organum – Bacon An Essay Concerning Human Understanding – Locke
Human Nature – Hume
Meditations – Descartes
Monadology – Leibniz
Ethics – Spinoza (J)
Critique of Pure Reason – Kant
The World as Will and Representation – Schopenhauer
Course on Positive Philosophy – Comte
On the Genealogy of Morality – Nietzsche
Phenomenology Of Spirit – Hegel
Logical Investigations – Husserl (J)
Being and Time – Heidegger

Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus – Wittgenstein (half J) Human Knowledge – Russell  The Logical Structure of the World – Carnap  Being and Nothingness – Sartre  Truth and Method – Gadamer

The 5 Greatest Ideas in Science 

1. The Atomic Structure of Matter (Physics)  2. The Periodic Law (Chemistry)  3. The Big Bang theory (Astronomy)  4. The Plate Tectonics Theory (Geology)  5. The Theory of Evolution (Biology)

All the Greatest Astronauts in History 

Yuri Gagarin  Alan Shepard  John Glenn  Gus Grissom  Armstrong  Nikolayev  James Lovell  John Young  Alexei Leonov  Buzz Aldrin
Gordon Cooper  Wally Schirra  V. Komarov  Chris Hatfield 
E. Mitchell  T. Stafford  G. Cernan  Ed White  M. Collins

All the Greatest Sculptors

Phidias 480BC  Praxiteles 364BC  Donatello 1386  Riemenschneider 1460  Michelangelo 1475  Cellini 1500  Giambologna 1529  Bernini 1598  Algardi 1598  Girardon 1628 Coysevox 1640  Houdon 1741  Canova 1757  Thorvaldsen 1770  Rodin 1840  Brancusi 1876

Close to 100% of Greatest Mathematicians were European Men

Pierre de Fermat
Évariste Galois
Joseph-Louis Lagrange
Erdős (J)

Cantor (J)
Gödel (J)
Daniel Bernoulli
Ramanujan (India)
John von Neumann (J)

Almost all the Greatest Skyscraper Architects 

Frank Lloyd Wright  Louis Sullivan  Daniel Burnham  Raymond Hood  Cass Gilbert Hugh Ferriss  Le Corbusier  William Van Alen  John Mead

Howells  Renzo Piano  Adrian D. Smith  John Burgee  John C. Portman  William Le Baron Jenney

Greatest Physicists of the 19th century were 100% White Men 

1. Faraday  2. Carnot  3. Mayer  4. Jame Joule  5. Lord Kelvin  6. Helmholtz 


7. Maxwell  8. Boltzmann   10. Young  11. Brown  12. Euler  13. Lagrange  14. Fresnel  15. Michelson

Almost all the Greatest Historians are European 

Herodotus  Thucydides  Polybius  Livy  Tacitus  Bede  Gibbon  Machiavelli  Guizot  Macaulay  Carlyle  Ranke  Trevelyan  Burckhardt

Lefebvre  Mommsen  Toynbee  Rostovtzeff  Duby  Braudel  AJP Taylor

All the Greatest Explorers in History

Erikson b.970  Columbus 1451  Magellan 1480  Dias 1451  Da Gama 1460  Balboa 1474  Cortez  Cabot 1450  Vespucci  Champlain 1567

Cartier 1491  Cook 1728  Stanley 1841  Livingston  Lewis and Clark  Amundsen 1928  Peary  Shackleton 1874 Scott

Russia alone produced more Great Novelists than non-Western nations combined

Turgenev  Chekhov  Tolstoy  Pushkin  Gogol  Nabokov

Dostoevsky  Solzhenitsyn  Gorky  Goncharov  Lermontov  Bulgakov

Almost All Geniuses in History were White Men 

Dante  Shakespeare  Plato  Aristotle  Bach  Mozart  Michelangelo  Galileo  Newton  Napoleon  Julius Caesar  Raphael  Pericles  Tolstoy  0 African, 0 Amerindian, 0 Indian, 0 Moslem

Whites are responsible for almost 100% of Literary Devices in history

Aporia  Alliteration  Appositive  Anti-Climax  Catharsis  Comedy  Catalog  Diatribe  Dialogue  Digression  Drama  Denouement  Dilemma  Didacticism  Elegy  Epigram  Epistolary  Essay  Epic  Euphemism  Fairy Tale  Fantasy  Foil
Foreshadowing  Folklore  Flashback  Fallacy  Frame Story  Figurative Language  Hypotaxis  Hyperbole  Hubris  Hamartia  Hook  Induction  Inversion  Intertextuality  Inference  Lyric  Logos  Meiosis  Memoir  Non Sequitur
Motif  Novella  Nemesis  Neologism  Narrative  Octave  Ode  Omniscient  Onomatopoeia  Parallelism  Paronomasia  Parody  Parrhesia

Parrhesia: To say everything boldly or freely

Plot  Prosody  Realism  Reductio ad Absurdum  Refutation  Romanticism  Rhetoric
Rising Action  Sarcasm  Soliloquy  Satire  Semantic  Sonnet  Surrealism  Symbolism  Synesis  Suspense  Syllogism  Synesthesia  Stream of Consciousness  Tragedy  Trope  Utopia  Vernacular  Vignette

35 oldest universities in the world are in Europe 

University of Bologna  Oxford  Salamanca  Paris 


Cambridge  Padua  Naples  Siena  Coimbra

Best Romance Novels 

Flaubert, Madame Bovary  Bronte, Wuthering Heights (woman) Tolstoy, Anna Karenina  Hawthorne, Scarlet Letter  Austen, Pride and Prejudice (woman)  D.H. Lawrence, Lady Chatterley’s Lover  Goethe, Sorrows of Young Werther  Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet

Only the European Mind generates Paradoxes 

Zeno’s Racetrack Paradox  Paradox of the Heap Newcomb’s Trolley Paradox  Prisoner’s Dilemma

Paradox of the Ravens  Russell’s Paradox  Leonard Euler’s Paradox
The Liar  Achilles and the Tortoise  The Arrow  Sorites Paradox  Forrester’s Paradox  Class Paradoxes

Greatest Political Theorists are White Men

Plato  Aristotle  Cicero  Machiavelli  Montesquieu  Bodin  Grotius  Rousseau 

Hobbes  Locke  Burke  Tocqueville  Hegel  Bentham  Mill  Strauss (J)  Schmitt  Rawls

The founders of Psychology were Western 

Wundt (founder)  Titchener  Brentano  Kulpe  Ebbinghaus  William James  Hall  Pavlov  Thorndike  Lewin (J)  Watson  Tolman  Freud (J)  Adler (J)  Jung

ALL the Top “groundbreaking” Medical advances in History

Stethoscope  X-Rays  Germ Theory  Blood Transfusion  Ophthalmoscope  Anaesthesia

On November 8, 1895, physicist Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen (1845-1923) becomes the first person to observe X-rays

Organ transplants  Antiseptic surgical methods  Vaccines  Catheter  Antiviral drugs  Microscopy  CT Scans  Penicillin

Engineering and Design of Best Airplanes in History 

Cessna 172  Lockheed P-80  Learjet 23  B-29  Bell X-1  Lockheed C-130  Douglas DC-3
Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress

Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress

Boeing 747 F-35 MQ-1  Predator RV-3  F-16
Wright Flyer  Blériot XI  Focke-Wulf  FW-190  British Spitfire  P-51 Mustang  Messerschmitt Bf-109  Messerschmitt 262  Mitsubishi A6M Zero (Jap)  Shturmovik Dreamliner  Lockheed SR-71  Cirrus SR22  Lockheed Constellation

Scientists involved in discovery of DNA double helix, the Genetic Code, were All White except for one 

Mendel (father of genetics)  Weismann Morgan  Miescher  Griffith  Chargaff (J)  Arrhenius  Pauling  Bragg  Franklin (woman)  Watson  Crick  Wilkins

More great thinkers between 1890 and 1930 than Rest of the world in history 

Pareto  Croce  Spengler  Sorel  Bergson (J)  Jung  Dilthey  Husserl (J)  Schumpeter  Durkheim (J)  Meinecke  William James  Mach  Whitehead  Russell  Carl Schmitt  Weber  Mosca  Gramsci

White men, 100%, were behind Theory of Continental Drift, possibly the most difficult theory in science to demonstrate 

Alfred Wegener (1880-1930)  Arthur Holmes  Harry Hess  Edward Bullard

Jean Charpentier  Louis Rodolphe  James Croll  Milutin Milankovitch

All the greatest Theater writers are White men

Molière  Shakespeare  Aeschylus  Sophocles  Euripides  Ibsen  Jonson  Chekhov  Racine  Corneille  Plautus  Shaw  Ionesco  Pirandello  O’Neill  Brecht  Beckett

Whites (along with 2.5 Jews) were greatest in early 20C Atomic Physics (electron, radioactivity, X-rays, neutron, quantum) 

Thomson  Rontgen  Rutherford  Chadwick  Becquerel  Planck  Einstein – J   Bohr – 50% J  Broglie  Schrödinger  Waals  Millikan  Curie  Heisenberg  Dirac  Lorentz  Fermi  Pauli -J

White Men invented all the home appliances Blacks love to use

Refrigerator  Stereo  Stove  Washing machine  Toaster  Microwave  Coffee maker

Food processor  Blender  Air conditioning  Water heater  Vacuum cleaner  Dishwasher

ALL the Greatest-Original Children Stories

The Tale of Peter Rabbit  Where the Red Fern Grows  Aesop’s Fables  The Wind in the Willows  Through the Looking-Glass  Stuart Little  The Jungle Book A Wrinkle in Time   Snow White
Peter Pan
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
The Little Prince
Anne of Green Gables
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Charlotte’s Web
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland
White Fang  Black Beauty  Old Yeller
The Secret Garden

Big Bang theory is White

Lord Kelvin
Edwin Hubble
Georges Lematrie
Alexander Friedmann (half Jewish)
Arno Penzias
Robert Woodrow Wilson
Fred Hoyle
Robert Dickie

White Men wrote All 20 Greatest Books on Science 

1. Origin of Species – Darwin 1859  2. Principia Mathematica – Newton 1687  3. Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems – Galileo 1632  4. On the Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres – Copernicus 1543  5. Physics – Aristotle 6. On the Fabric of the Human Body – Vesalius 1543  7. Micrographia – Hooke 1665  8. De Re Metallica – Agricola 1556.  9. Novum Organum – Bacon 1620  10. Harmony of the World – Kepler 1619

11. Discourse on the Method – Descartes 1637 12. An Anatomical Exercise on the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Living Beings – Harvey 1628  13. The Sceptical Chymist – Boyle 1661  14. Treatise on Light – Huygens 1690  15. Theory of the Earth – Hutton 1788 16. Systema Naturae – Linnaeus 1735  17. Elements of Chemistry – Lavoisier 1789  18. Notable Commentaries on the History of Plants -Fuchs 1542.  19. Opticks – Newton 1704.  20. On the Magnet Gilbert 1600

All the Classical Musical Instruments

French horn

Pipe organ

Almost all furniture types in history and original designs 

Tables  Chairs  Beds  Desks  Dressers  Benches  Commodes  Cabinets  Chests  Drawers  Sofas  Cupboards  Sideboards

ALL the Greatest Adventure Novels written by White males

Gulliver’s Travels  The Three Musketeers  Moby-Dick  Treasure Island  King Solomon’s Mines  Robinson Crusoe  Captain Blood  Tarzan of the Apes  20,000 Leagues Under the Sea  Lord of the Flies
The Call of the Wild  Odyssey
Swiss Family Robinson  Around the World in Eighty Days  The Long Ships  The Worst Journey in the World  Don Quixote  Kidnapped  The Last of the Mohicans

The Road  Captain Blood  Prisoner of Zenda  The Sea-Wolf  Ivanhoe
The Count of Monte Cristo  Master and Commander  The Lost World  The Thirty-Nine Steps  The Cruel Sea  Captains Courageous  The Beach Beau Geste  The Mysterious Island  Roughing It

ALL the most profound words in history 

Atom  Natural Law  Transcendental Ego  Will To Power  Thing-In-Itself  Being-In-The-World  Free Will  Cosmos
Pure I 

Mass  Gravitation  Evolution  Energy  Infinitesimal  Deontology  Syllogism  A Priori
Transcendental Unity of Apperception

More “Golden Ages” in Europe than in other civilizations combined

Classical Greece 600-300 BC  Pax Romana 27 BC to 180 AD  12C Renaissance  Italian Renaissance  Spanish 1580-1680.  Elizabethan 1558-1603  Dutch 17C  Belle Époque, 1870-1914  German Genius, 1750-1960

White Males responsible for 100% of Inventions between mid-1700s and 1840

Flying shuttle Spinning Jenny  Steam Engine  Cotton Gin  Telegraph  Portland Cement  Bessemer process  Battery  Locomotives  Power Loom  Arkwright’s Water Frame  Spinning Mule

Camera Obscura

Henry Cort’s puddling Gaslighting Arc Lamp  Tin Can  Spectrometer Camera Obscura  Electromagnet  Mackintosh Raincoat  Matches  Typewriter  Blueprints  Hydrogen Fuel Cell

Close to 100% of most Decisive and Tactical Battles in History were fought by White Men: 35 out of 39! (* = non whites) 

Battle of Marathon, 490BC  Thermopylae 480BC  Salamis 480BC  *Maling 342BC  Gaugamela 331BC  Lake Trasimene, 217BC  Cannae 216 BC  Ilipa, 206 BC Battle of Zama 202 BC Pydna 168 BC  Carrhae 53 BC  Pharsalus 48 BC  Teutoburg Forest 9 AD  Chalons 451 AD  *Walaja 633 * Yarmouk 636  Tours 732  Hastings 1066  Crécy 1346 Battle of Agincourt: 1415  *Panipat 1526  Cajamarca 1532  Leipzig, 1631  Rocroi 1643  Vienna 1683  Poltava, 1709  Rossbach 1757  Valmy 1792  Ulm 1805 

Leipzig 1813  Waterloo 1815 Gettysburg: 1863  Battle of Sedan 1870  Omdurman 1898  Cambrai 1917  First Battle of Kiev 1941  Operation ‘Barbarossa’, June–July 1941  Midway Island, 1942  Stalingrad: 1942–1943

Rome produced the greatest number of Military Generals in history

Scipio Africanus 236BC  Sulla 138BC  Pompeius 106BC  Caesar 100BC  Gaius Marius 157BC  Sulla 138BC  Marcus Antonius 83BC  Marcus Agrippa 63BC  Germanicus 15 BC  Gnaeus Agricola 40AD  Lucius Lucullus 118 BC  Flavius Belisarius 505AD

Only Whites write Utopias 

Utopia 1516  The City of the Sun 1623  New Atlantis 1627  The Man in the Moone 1638
The Isle of Pines 1668  The Blazing World 1666

Looking Backward 1888  News from Nowhere 1892  The Islands of Wisdom 1922  Walden Two 1948

100% of the greatest Classical Composers in history are Western

Bach  Handel  Mozart  Beethoven  Schubert  Verdi
Mendelssohn (J)  Brahms  Haydn

Chopin Schumann
Mahler (J)

The greatest Formula 1 car drivers of all time are 29.5 white out of 30

Ayrton Senna
Michael Schumacher
Lewis Hamilton (half white)
Sebastian Vettel
Juan Manuel Fangio
Alain Prost
Mika Hakkinen
Niki Lauda
Damon Hill
David Coulthard
Nico Rosberg

The Best Aesthetic Designers of Cars are all White Men

Giorgetto Giugiaro
Ian Callum
Chris Bangle
Walter de Silva
Gordon Buehrig
Marcello Gandini
Harley Earl

Frank Stephenson
Virgil Exner
Ferdinand Porsche
Paul Bracq
Patrick Le Quément
Henrik Fisker

All the Greatest Visual Artists are White Men

El Greco
Vermeer van Delft


Van Gogh

Almost 100% of Philosophies 

Atomism  Cynicism  Empiricism  Existentialism Idealism  Historicism  Materialism  Naturalism  Nihilism  Analytic philosophy
Nominalism  Phenomenology  Positivism  Pragmatism  Rationalism  Realism  Skepticism  Structuralism

Critical Reflections on Canadian Multiculturalism w/ Prof. Ricardo Duchesne

Posted on by
8:46 AM (1 hour ago)

China is Superior to Race-Mixed Brazil but Inferior to White Brazil

Posted on by

China is Superior to Race-Mixed Brazil but Inferior to White Brazil

by Ricardo Duchesne

In our upside down times Western nations exhibit their moral arrogance in self-effacing biases against their culture and histories, attributing their success to external factors such as the “enriching” contributions of immigrants, while blaming their failures on internal factors such as their past white only immigration policies.  Communist China does not care a whit about such moral grandstanding, recently declaring that its culture and its people are superior to Brazil’s, and to all the other peoples of the world.

According to Chinese State media journalist, Ding Gang, Brazilians are lazy slackers incapable of  modernizing their country properly, whereas Chinese people are more intelligent, harder working, diligent, frugal, family oriented, and plainly superior in achieving greater things than other races. “It may sound racist,” writes Gang, “to differentiate development based on culture. But after living in Brazil for a while, you will find out the answer.”

Brazilians are not willing to be as diligent and hard working as the Chinese. Neither do they value savings for the next generation, like the Chinese do. Yet they demand the same welfare and benefits as those in developed countries…Chinese people have huge potential for pursuing family and personal happiness…In terms of political culture, Chinese civilization may not enjoy the longest history of all ancient civilizations, but it has survived vicissitudes for thousands of years and still prospers—the epitome of Chinese people’s vitality and creation—as well as a reflection of the political culture in Chinese civilization.

Breitbart cites other articles by Chinese state media claiming that the downfall of the Soviet Union was due to its lack of a traditional culture as good as China’s, which successfully merged communism with its own magnificent Confucian ethics. The Chinese State media also says that Chinese are superior to the drug addicted, criminally oriented, and lazier Americans. No other people have the same capacity for hard work as the Chinese.

What drives the Chinese to work so hard? It is not only the pursuit of better pay, domestic economy but also their mentality and the workplace culture…Confucianism is still relevant. Even in Asia, Chinese are regarded more hardworking than people of other countries.

It is hard to question Chinese superiority compared to the enfeebled white males who love diversity. But leaving aside this emerging reality, let’s compare China to those regions of Brazil in which whites remain a healthy majority. The Brazilian states with the highest percentages of whites are the three located in the South of the country: Santa Catarina (84% White), Rio Grande do Sul (82.3%), Paraná (70%), and São Paulo (60,6%).

Is it a coincidence that the whitest states of Brazil exhibit the highest economic well-being? These states have the highest level of per capita income, the lowest rates of illiteracy, the highest average life expectancy, the lowest homicide rate and the lowest levels of corruption. The cities of these states enjoy a reputation of being “clean, safe and organized”.

If we add to the whitest states those regions in the Southeast with the highest absolute numbers of whites, namely, São PauloMinas Gerais, and Rio de Janeiro, we are basically talking about the heart of Brazil’s development, prosperity, and modernization.

Many Germans in Rio Grande do Sul

We should keep in mind that the proportion of whites in all these states has been declining over the years. These states were built from the ground up by whites. For example, Rio Grande do Sul was 88.7% white in 1940, now it is 82.3%. São Paulo’s white proportion has declined (in the same years) from 84.9% to 60.6%. Minas Gerais was 64.2% in 1940, now it is 47.2%.

Because they have been the best areas in Brazil, non-white migrants have been flooding in search of the jobs, welfare, and modern living gracefully offered by the founding white population. I inferred this without any evidence. My first search brought a study supporting this inference. According to The Encyclopedia of Global Human Migration:

Internal migration flows were heaviest in movements from the northeastern to the southeastern states. The usual explanation for this movement references poverty and the lack of job opportunities in the northeast combined with the concentration of industries in the southeast, mainly in the state of São Paulo.

How does China compared to Brazil’s whiter areas? The Gross Domestic Product per capita in China was recorded at 7329.09 US dollars in 2017. The GDP per capita of Brazil was estimated to be 11200.00 USD. The Southeast states of Brazil have higher per capita incomes. While we cannot underestimate China’s growing economic power and modernization, a proper comparison between these two nations in terms of their overall economic well being, not just GDP, shows a Brazil with a higher HDI ranking. The whitest regions of Brazil decisively outperform China. The homicide rate by race and by state clearly show that Brazilian whites are as peaceful as the Swiss.

Using the logic and arguments of China’s State media, we have to conclude that the White people of Brazil are superior to the inferior Han people of China. By the same token, however, we must recognize that White nations undergoing racial diversification will be increasingly divided into under-developing race mixed areas and still developing White areas. Claims by the Chinese about their superiority vis-à-vis Western nations undergoing diversification will inevitably sound truer and truer if we don’t stop our traitorous globalist elites.

Exporting Canada’s Model Of Multiculturalism = Ethnocide Of European Peoples by Ricardo Duchesne Ratna Omidvar Canadian Senator Ratna Omidvar tells Germans how to redesign their nation with Third World migration at the Embassy of Canada. We hear everyday that multiculturalism is the uniquely defining characteristic of Canada. The White natives of England, France, Sweden, America, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Spain are now hearing the same. Every Western nation is uniquely multicultural. But there is no denying that Canada’s emasculated elites have been unique promoters of the idea that Canada has a uniquely successful multicultural model that should be adopted by all Western nations. Since about the 1990s, Canada’s elites took it upon themselves to advertise the nation as a “successful model of multiculturalism.” They knew that a momentum was building up in the West for mass immigration, cheaper labour, along with globalism generally. They saw an opportunity to showcase Canada’s initiation of “official” multiculturalism. Thousands of government officials, together with hundreds of simple minded academics, hopped from European country to European country, from conference to conference, ceremoniously insisting that Canada was a proven case that “immigrants help society grow culturally, economically and politically, and that “cultural appreciation of ethnic and religious diversity” is essential for the fulfilment of liberal principles and the creation of a harmonious state. The strategy was simple: first call your nation uniquely multicultural, then rewrite Canada’s history as a nation created by immigrants from diverse places, and then portray the legal enactment of multiculturalism as a recognition of this historical fact. Never mind that for most of its history Canada was a nation created from the ground up by native Europeans with a high fertility rate. There was really only one short period — from 1901 to 1914 — when Canada saw high numbers of immigrants (and these were mostly from Europe and from the United States). During much of its history, many of the immigrants actually emigrated to the United States. The notion that Canada is a nation of immigrants is simply a lie to justify an experiment of “major proportions” implemented in the 1970s to re-create a Canada according to the dictates of cultural Marxism. In the exportation of the phrase “we are uniquely immigrant nations” to Europe we clearly see the lie behind this “uniquely Canadian model.” This label is not about recognizing a historical reality but about bringing about a totally new reality across the West. The idea that European nations were created by diverse immigrants is patently absurd. Ratna Omidvar Pursuit of truth is of no concern to Canada’s humanitarian ambassadors. The aim is to trick Europeans into redefining their nations as multicultural by imitating Canada. This can be seen in a recent cultural event hosted by the Canadian embassy in Germany: “Respect for Diversity and Inclusion of Migrants in Germany.” The leading person in this 2017 summer event was the Canadian Senator Ratna Omidvar. Her unique speech was aimed at encouraging Germans to uniquely “embrace immigration and integration.” The fact that the millions of Moslems and Africans who arrived in Germany did so without any security checks and without any “points system” does not concern Ratna one iota. For this opportunist it is all about diversifying as fast as possible all European nations regardless of the means employed. The message of this “Iranian immigrant” resonated with the full house at the Embassy in Berlin and inspired creative and thoughtful ways to embrace immigration and integration. This Senator, you see, has the title of “Nation Builder of the Decade for Citizenship,” granted by the globalist Globe and Mail newspaper. She is a “founding Executive Director of the ‘think-and-do tank’ Global Diversity Exchange,” the “Co-Chair at the World Economic Forum’s Global Future Council on Migration,” and a “Member of the Order of Canada.” Ratna surely knows what will make Germany great. The Government of Canada called this event “Canada’s Approach,” “Respect for Diversity and Inclusion,” “A Respected Voice on Immigration,” “Strength in Diversity.” Canada has been exporting these phrases for three decades. Don’t be tricked by their pretentious humanitarian tone; these are possible the most deceptive, ethnocidal phrases ever conceived, and perhaps Canada should be credited for this singular achievement. To meet Canada’s ideals, Germans are rewriting their history as a “nation of immigrants,” teaching their students that there is no such thing as a “pure German,” and even saying that Islam has always been part of Germany’s identity! To top it all, they are considering enshrining into the constitution, at the behest of Federal Integration Commissioner Aydan Özoğuz, the idea that all Third World cultures should be assigned the same status in Germany’s identity as German. They are insisting that the “Federal Republic of Germany” be officially declared “a diverse country of immigration” in the constitution as Article 20b. There is no way around it: “respect for diversity” = ethnocide of Germans. Take a listen:

Posted on by

Exporting Canada’s Model Of Multiculturalism = Ethnocide Of European Peoples

by Ricardo Duchesne

Ratna Omidvar
Canadian Senator Ratna Omidvar tells Germans how to redesign their nation with Third World migration at the Embassy of Canada.

We hear everyday that multiculturalism is the uniquely defining characteristic of Canada. The White natives of EnglandFranceSwedenAmericaAustraliaNew ZealandItalySpain are now hearing the same. Every Western nation is uniquely multicultural. But there is no denying that Canada’s emasculated elites have been unique promoters of the idea that Canada has a uniquely successful multicultural model that should be adopted by all Western nations.

Since about the 1990s, Canada’s elites took it upon themselves to advertise the nation as a “successful model of multiculturalism.” They knew that a momentum was building up in the West for mass immigration, cheaper labour, along with globalism generally. They saw an opportunity to showcase Canada’s initiation of “official” multiculturalism. Thousands of government officials, together with hundreds of simple minded academics, hopped from European country to European country, from conference to conference, ceremoniously insisting that Canada was a proven case that “immigrants help society grow culturally, economically and politically, and that “cultural appreciation of ethnic and religious diversity” is essential for the fulfilment of liberal principles and the creation of a harmonious state.

The strategy was simple: first call your nation uniquely multicultural, then rewrite Canada’s history as a nation created by immigrants from diverse places, and then portray the legal enactment of multiculturalism as a recognition of this historical fact. Never mind that for most of its history Canada was a nation created from the ground up by native Europeans with a high fertility rate. There was really only one short period — from 1901 to 1914 — when Canada saw high numbers of immigrants (and these were mostly from Europe and from the United States). During much of its history, many of the immigrants actually emigrated to the United States. The notion that Canada is a nation of immigrants is simply a lie to justify an experiment of “major proportions” implemented in the 1970s to re-create a Canada according to the dictates of cultural Marxism.

In the exportation of the phrase “we are uniquely immigrant nations” to Europe we clearly see the lie behind this “uniquely Canadian model.” This label is not about recognizing a historical reality but about bringing about a totally new reality across the West. The idea that European nations were created by diverse immigrants is patently absurd.

Ratna Omidvar

Pursuit of truth is of no concern to Canada’s humanitarian ambassadors. The aim is to trick Europeans into redefining their nations as multicultural by imitating Canada. This can be seen in a recent cultural event hosted by the Canadian embassy in Germany: “Respect for Diversity and Inclusion of Migrants in Germany.” The leading person in this 2017 summer event was the Canadian Senator Ratna Omidvar. Her unique speech was aimed at encouraging Germans to uniquely “embrace immigration and integration.”

The fact that the millions of Moslems and Africans who arrived in Germany did so without any security checks and without any “points system” does not concern Ratna one iota. For this opportunist it is all about diversifying as fast as possible all European nations regardless of the means employed. The message of this “Iranian immigrant”

resonated with the full house at the Embassy in Berlin and inspired creative and thoughtful ways to embrace immigration and integration.

This Senator, you see, has the title of “Nation Builder of the Decade for Citizenship,” granted by the globalist Globe and Mail newspaper. She is a “founding Executive Director of the ‘think-and-do tank’ Global Diversity Exchange,” the “Co-Chair at the World Economic Forum’s Global Future Council on Migration,” and a “Member of the Order of Canada.”

Ratna surely knows what will make Germany great.

The Government of Canada called this event “Canada’s Approach,” “Respect for Diversity and Inclusion,” “A Respected Voice on Immigration,” “Strength in Diversity.” Canada has been exporting these phrases for three decades. Don’t be tricked by their pretentious humanitarian tone; these are possible the most deceptive, ethnocidal phrases ever conceived, and perhaps Canada should be credited for this singular achievement.

To meet Canada’s ideals, Germans are rewriting their history as a “nation of immigrants,” teaching their students that there is no such thing as a “pure German,” and even saying that Islam has always been part of Germany’s identity! To top it all, they are considering enshrining into the constitution, at the behest of Federal Integration Commissioner Aydan Özoğuz, the idea that all Third World cultures should be assigned the same status in Germany’s identity as German. They are insisting that the “Federal Republic of Germany” be officially declared “a diverse country of immigration” in the constitution as Article 20b.

There is no way around it: “respect for diversity” = ethnocide of Germans. Take a listen:

Deceptive Use Of Scientific Data To Promote Ethnocide Of Europeans

Posted on by

Deceptive Use Of Scientific Data To Promote Ethnocide Of Europeans

by Ricardo Duchesne

Composite Images
Composite Images: Are these women White, Black, or Chinese?

Afew days ago a University of Illinois math professor insisted that algebra and geometry perpetuate “white privilege.” This teacher, Rochelle Gutiérrez, specializes in “equity issues in mathematics education.” She also argued that the pursuit of objectivity is misguided: “Things cannot be known objectively; they must be known subjectively.”

This is obviously a direct attack on the scientific enterprise as it was uniquely developed by Europeans, rooted in the postmodernist argument that there is no objective reality outside the subject’s perspective. Postmodernism is a discourse that came together with the transmutation of economic Marxism into cultural Marxism when leftists came to the realization that their theories about communism and gender equality were not in alignment with reality, with evolutionary theory and human nature. But what if some scientists today were still adhering strictly to the pursuit of objective knowledge while framing their findings according to cultural Marxist aims, twisting their objectively discovered facts to mean something very different from what they objectively mean?

Well, this is happening right before our eyes with respect to one of the most important set of scientific findings gathered recently about the evolutionary genetics and biological identity of Europeans. Population geneticists, archaeologists, paleogeneticists, and evolutionary biologists, are deceptively interpreting the meaning of their objectively gathered findings to justify the racial diversification of Europeans through mass immigration. They are arguing that Europeans don’t have any ethnic identity even though their own findings indicate that Europeans are a unique people with definite genetic identities.

We know that almost every academic in the humanities and the soft social sciences is an ardent promoter of diversity. But too many on our side assume that if only social scientists were to follow more closely the “objective methodology” of the natural sciences things would straighten out. They don’t realize that natural scientists in the West are increasingly framing, bending, and twisting their scientific findings to serve the ideology of diversity.

The Leftist Strawman Argument About The “Pure” European

A recent article exemplifying this insidious manipulation came from the highly respected magazine, Science/AAAS, under the title, “There’s no such thing as a ‘pure’ European — or anyone else,” by Ann Gibbons (May 15, 2017). According to Gibbons, natural scientists have established that:

The German people have no unique genetic heritage to protect. They — and all other Europeans — are already a mishmash, the children of repeated ancient migrations, according to scientists who study ancient human origins. New studies show that almost all indigenous Europeans descend from at least three major migrations in the past 15,000 years, including two from the Middle East. Those migrants swept across Europe, mingled with previous immigrants, and then remixed to create the peoples of today.

There is no such thing as a uniquely German, a uniquely Norwegian, Polish, Swedish, or British people, because “all Europeans are already a mishmash of repeated ancient migrations” from non-European lands.

This is what the scientists are finding, Gibbons says, citing words from Kristian Kristiansen of the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, Doug Price of the University of Wisconsin, Dan Bradley of Trinity College in Dublin, Stephan Schiffels of the Max Planck Institute in Germany, Duncan Sayer, of the University of Central Lancashire, Chris Tyler-Smith of the Sanger Institute in Hinxton, Walter Bodmer of the University of Oxford, and others.

These scientists are claiming that the findings of pure science are negating the “myths” of “the whole concept of an ethnic German,” an ethnic Irish, ethnic Italian, or ethnic Swedish.

Using revolutionary new methods to analyze DNA and the isotopes found in bones and teeth, scientists are exposing the tangled roots of peoples around the world.

But why would an article about DNA and isotopes be framed with the politically charged statement that Germans have “no unique genetic heritage to protect”? Why would this article open with a paragraph mocking Germans in a small town as “neo-Nazis” who believe in a “pure German race” merely because they reacted with anxiety as “busloads of migrants from Syria and Iraq” were settled in their town? Why are these scientists eagerly trying to persuade Europeans that they don’t have an identity “to protect” in the face of mass immigration today?

The genetic make up of Europeans has remained very stable for millennia, with next to zero genetic additions from Africans and AsiansWhy would Ann Gibbons, and the scientists she interviewed, deceptively invoked a straw man — “pure German race” or “pure European” — to argue against what no knowledgeable critic of diversification is arguing today? All differences are differences of degree. The evidence is showing that the genetic make up of Europeans has remained very stable for thousands of years, with next to zero genetic additions from Africans and Asians.

But the scientists I named above, who all work within a cultural Marxist establishment, want to persuade Europeans that they should accept the current massive influxes of migrants with dramatically different ethnic identities as a natural continuation of Europe’s historical experience since prehistoric times. They want to portray opponents of diversification as simple minded racists acting against the scientific truth. It is no accident that this article was picked up by many politically charged news sources, including the New York Times, and many Facebook pages, as a means to counter the rising populist tide against uncontrolled immigration.

Paradoxically as it may seem, the reason Gibbons et al. relentlessly repeat the straw man about a pure European race is because this is the only way they can manipulate scientific findings which are actually showing, to the contrary, that Europeans, in-and-through migratory movements and some genetic mixing and evolution over the course of many thousands of years, evolved right inside the continent of Europe as a uniquely White race.

The Scientific Reality Of Europeans As A Uniquely White Race

There has been genetic mixture, but this mixture produced a uniquely European race divided into ethnic groups. But rather than debating whether this differentiated European race is really a mixed bag of White, Asian, and African racial traits, they pretend that European nationalists are arguing about a pure race so they don’t have to deal with the real debate at hand, which is that European genetic mixture does not preclude the reality that Europeans are a distinctive White people indigenous to the continent of Europe.

Yes, new studies do show that indigenous Europeans descend from major migrations that occurred in prehistoric and in ancient times. But these studies do not show that we can equate these migratory movements, which occurred over the course of many thousands of years, with the massive immigrant arrivals we have been witnessing over the course of 20 years. I will outline here what I know about these migratory movements.

First, in regards to the first migratory movement, Gibbon’s article cites a new view from David Reich which says that a migratory movement from the Middle East which came “as the glaciers retreated 19,000 to 14,000 years ago,” essentially displaced “the first Europeans [who] came from Africa via the Middle East about 43,000 years ago.” Reich’s view is slightly different, actually. He saysthat, as the ice sheet retreated 19,000 years ago, Europe was repopulated by migrants from southwest Europe (e.g., Spain), and then, in a second migratory event, it was also repopulated by migrants from the southeast (e.g., Turkey, Greece), about 14,000 years ago.

Now, what this article is not saying, and what most scientists to this day are reluctant to elaborate upon, is that there was a lot of evolutionary change going on among the prehistoric Homo Sapiens who departed Africa about 60,000 and started moving into Europe about 43,000 years. The populations that were located in southeast and southwest Europe, which Reich is talking about, were also evolving in response to different environmental/cultural pressures and the random effects of genetic drift. These populations were becoming “European” as they evolved in the continent of Europe, acquiring new racial traits. What is a “race” if not a people that evolved certain anatomical and behavioral traits by reason of breeding for thousands of years within a geographical area relatively isolated from other evolving/isolated races?

Fake "first European"
This composite image of the so-called “first European” is really an image before Europe’s inhabitants became genetically European.

These scientists, however, want to give the impression that, insofar as there were these waves of migratory movements over the course of thousands of years, everyone was mixing racially, with no group ever acquiring distinctive racial characteristics. Yet, human groups in the past were generally rooted in lands from which they barely moved, and so when we speak of migrations we are speaking of movements that happened between long intervals of time as a result of major climatic changes, or other environmental pressures, and very slowly over the course of generations.

(Today, in our age of globalization, only a meager 3 percent of the world’s inhabitants are living outside their country of birth. In absolute terms, this 3 percent is quite high, about 200 million people, and since many of these people constitute immigrants moving into Western lands that are relatively less populated than the congested lands of the Third World, they do pose a major threat to the survival of Europeans. But you get my point, in the past, before globalization, the intermixing of peoples was rare.)

Indeed, once the migrants (that Reich is writing about) moved deep into (and many just within) Europe, the inhabitants of Europe did not experience any major genetic mixing from non-European races other than some mixing with farmers who started arriving many thousands of year later, after about 7000 BC, from the Near East. This brings me to the second migratory movement that Gibbons says created a race mixed people in Europe similarly to the race mixed people she wants today through he arrival of Africans and Muslims.

These Near Eastern farmers, it should be noted, are racially classified as “Caucasoid,” and some argue that they spread genes for “white skin” in Europe, while others emphasize how the Nordic climes were already selecting for lighter skin before these farmers arrived. These farmers, moreover, did not spread throughout Europe but moved across the Mediterranean from 7000 BC onward, into Sardinia, Corsica, the coasts of Italy, Spain and Portugal, as well as inland into Greece/Balkans from around 6200 BC. Huge areas across north-central Europe adopted farming without intermixing with these migrants.

The “third” migratory movement Ann Gibbons et al. identified as “immigrants” is the migration that began some 4,800 years ago by “Yamnaya” pastoralists originally located in southern Russia, or present day Ukraine, who went on to mix with the European inhabitants, creating the famous Corded Ware culture, moving all the way to Ireland, and eventually producing, in the words of Gibbons, a “three-part European mixture” “across the continent.”

Gibbons then goes on to say that Germans, Irish, Scots, Celts are a wonderful mixture of two waves of Middle Eastern peoples and one wave of “Yamnaya.” Article after article in science magazine across the West have been spreading this same deceptive image of racial mixing, writing of the “Yamnaya” as if they were an exotic people from the Third World. But in truth the Yamnaya people were Indo-European speakers, the legendary Aryans no less, who came to Europe starting 4,800 years ago, after this population had also evolved White traits.

I explained at length in Faustian Man In A Multicultural Age how the European race evolved in Europe and is therefore indigenous to Europe. I cited scientific journals and magazines similarly engaged in deception. It is amazing how the scientific community is currently misusing science in this way, making Europeans feel that they are not a people, that they have always been made up of “immigrants” from non-White areas, in order to get them to accept the current occupation of their lands by hordes of Africans, Muslims, and Asians. They want European peoples to feel that they are not rooted in any land, that they never managed to create their own identity after living for thousands of years in particular lands, developing their own languages, dialects, folk songs, heroes, flags and history.

Ann Gibbons mockingly portrays critics of immigration as ignorant individuals who can’t cope with scientific truth but would much rather hold on to “neo-Nazi mythologies.” This is a total lie since all the nationalist or “populist” parties in Europe are the ones upholding the principles of freedom and democracy, open debate about the most crucial question of our times, mass immigration. They also tend to advocate socialistic and environmental policies intended to protect their own workers against importation of cheap labour, their own women against mass rapes by migrants, and their own lands against the extreme polluting effects of mass immigration. Critics of immigration are also honest rather than deceivers. And they are against the ethnocide of Europeans.

David Atkinson’s Argument Against Martin Collacott is Pure Defamatory Trash

Posted on by
David Atkinson’s Argument Against Martin Collacott is Pure Defamatory Trash
Martin Collacott, Old School Canadian, Facts and Analysis

David Atkinson’s article, “White supremacists ideas revived in Collacott oped,” spews out one defamatory label after another against Martin Collacott’s June 5 editorial, “Canada replacing its population a case of wilful ignorance, greed, excess political correctness,” without caring to offer one single fact-based, analytically constructed argument.

Collacot effectively condensed in his article the following empirically oriented claims:

  1. that according to professor Eric Kaufmann, “almost seven out of 10 Vancouver residents will be visible minorities within two generations and 80 per cent of the Canadian population (compared to 20 per cent today) will be non-white in less than century.”
  2. that the cost of mass immigration “is huge — with latest estimates indicating taxpayers have to underwrite recent arrivals to the tune of around $30 billion annually.”
  3. that Vancouverites have been “crowded out of the housing market by sky-high prices caused largely by the ceaseless flow of new arrivals.”
  4. that “the quality of life of most residents is negatively affected by increased traffic and commute times, along with congestion and pressure on the health care and education systems.”
  5. that “we are not facing looming labour shortages that we can’t meet with our existing workforce and educational infrastructure. Immigration, moreover, does not provide a realistic means of dealing with the costs associated with the aging of our population.”
  6. that we should consider the fact that those who advocate mass immigration may be doing so for their own personal or political benefits rather than Canada’s economic and cultural well being. The “benefit from continued high immigration include leaders of political parties bent on expanding their political base.” 
  7. that these beneficiaries also include “leaders of immigrant organizations eager to expand their support base and influence,” as well as “developers who want an endless supply of new homebuyers and are major funders of politicians and parties — particularly at the municipal level”.
  8. that Canada did benefit in the past from periods of high levels of immigration, and that “a moderate degree of diversity can make society more vibrant” [but] — “it is quite a different matter when it develops to a level where it overwhelms and largely replaces the existing population”
  9. that “many will bring with them values and traditions that may differ in key respects from those of most Canadians, such as gender equality and concern for protection of the environment.”
  10. that “Canadians deserve a full and informed public debate on the extent to which immigration policy will determine the future of the country. This should form the basis for a sensible public policy based on the long-term interests of the existing population, rather than those of special interest groups.”

Atkinson, who is an academic at Purdue University, does not tackle a single one of these empirically oriented claims, but instead unleashes one vitriolic claim after another, starting with the title which identifies Collacott as a “white supremacist.” The first sentence then calls Collacott’s argument “chauvinistic” and “white supremacist” again. The second sentence says that Collacott’s argument is nothing but a “thinly veiled invocation of ‘Yellow Peril’ rhetoric”. The third sentence dismisses all the claims by Collacott as “antiquated racial ideas”. The fourth and fifth sentences accuse Collacott of reviving arguments for a “White Canada” in the manner of the “anti-Asian exclusion movement in B.C. (and elsewhere) during the early 20th century.”

The sixth sentence equates Collacott’s argument with those who warned in the early 1900s of a “rising tide of oriental immigration.” In each of the next three sentences all we find are the phrases “widespread fear of impending white elimination,” “the irrational fear of an overwhelming Asian influx,” ” Komagata Maru.” The tenth sentence brings up again the word the never heard phrase “white supremacists,” and the eleventh sentence accuses Collacott of using a label, “white genocide,” “derived from the writings of convicted murderer David Lane”. The same eleventh sentence claims that Collacott is merely trafficking in “alt-right… simplistic meme-driven distortions of history, ethnicity, and identity.”

Cultural Marxist School Canadian: Facts and Analysis don’t matter; only defamatory labels do.

Professor Atkinson, how about one argument against the claims of Collacott? Well, in the twelfth sentence he finally brings up one argument  (#9 above), but only to dismiss it as the “same kind of disingenuousness favoured by alt-right activists.” The next sentence accuses, again, Collacott of echoing “his predecessors and the modern alt-right in blaming” those who benefit from mass immigration.

Strange yet true: academics today don’t like it when you blame political leaders, bureaucrats, developers, and special interest groups. Atkinson, it should be noted, has made a a career out of promoting immigration and calling anyone who disagrees with him a “racist.” His “forthcoming book” is entitled The Burdens of White Supremacy: Containing Asian Labor Migration in the British Empire and the United States.

The last three paragraphs of his article more or less repeat the same labels while identifying Collacott with the “white supremacist” exclusionary activists of a century ago, “defending the whiteness of British Columbia.” His conclusion is more of the same: “in reality, Collacott’s commentary squarely reiterates these previous champions of white supremacy.”

There you have it, ladies and gentleman, this is the trash that passes for scholarship among leftist professors who can’t think for themselves, who can’t engage in analysis, in open inquiry, but only in accusations and defamatory statements.

The little bit that can be categorized as historically minded in Atkinson’s article is fundamentally wrong. Essentially, what Atkinson tries to do is equate any objections with immigration today with objections a century ago, which is rather odd for a supposed historian to do, since one of the cardinal lessons in the historical profession is to learn how to judge each historical period on its own terms, to be aware that history is not static, and that immigration patterns, and cultural settings, over a hundred years ago cannot be equated with immigration realities today. Collacott distinctly makes this distinction, stating that he understands that Canada has benefited from immigration in the past. Collacott is only asking for our elites to take seriously the 10 points outlined above. He knows that Canadians are not being allowed to debate this issue openly.

It is truly a disgrace that a professor who is supposed to be a firm believer in freedom of expression and critical thinking, has decided to close off all debate with the extremist use of one defamatory label after another.

Atkinson writes that “Collacott nostalgically yearns for an imagined homogenous past that only ever existed in the minds of the province’s most obstinate white supremacists.” This criticism is common among our poorly educated academics. It is flat out wrong, as late as 1971, Canada was over 96 percent White! Deceiving your students is not a good thing. Let’s have an open debate based on historical facts and empirically verifiable statements, rather than rely on trashy labels.

Canada Spiralling Out of Control, 4: Human Rights Legislation (1951-1954) and the End of “British Liberties”

Posted on by

Canada Spiralling Out of Control, 4: Human Rights Legislation (1951-1954) and the End of “British Liberties”

by Ricardo Duchesne
Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V | Part VI | Part VII | Part VIII

Dominion of Canada bond

The spiral was driven by a set of norms with an in-built radicalizing tendency. This tendency was contained in the supposition that the ethnic inequalities of the world, the wealth of European nations and the poverty of non-European nations, the impoverished status of blacks and aboriginals in the United States and the West generally, were a result of the discriminatory policies, the colonizing and under-developing activities of Europeans, rather than a result of cultural backwardness, differences in aptitudes or geographical lack of resources. If only all humans were granted the same rights to life, liberty, and economic success, the world could be improved drastically in a more egalitarian and prosperous direction.

Fair Employment and Fair Accommodation Practices Acts (1951-1954)

Beginning in the 1940s and through the 1950s, a growing network of groups, academics, media, ethnic associations, and trade unions, operating within a liberal atmosphere, and endorsing a pluralist view of politics, in which the state was seen as just one actor among many others engaged in politics, rather than as the actor in charge of ensuring the collective identity of the nation, pushed for “equal citizenship” and for legislation that would protect the “human rights” of citizens against discrimination. Basing themselves on the UN Charter declaration that every human should have equal rights “‘without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion,” the groups worked tirelessly in the late 1940s and early 1950s, with the Canadian Jewish Congress and the Jewish Labor Committee playing the key roles, to bring legislation in Ontario, then in Canada generally, aimed at ending discrimination in employment, access to public spaces, housing and property ownership.

At first, in the early 1940s, the Canadian Jewish Congress was preoccupied with fighting domestic antisemitism and encouraging toleration and understanding between Jews and Christian groups. But after WWII, Jewish groups decided to go beyond fighting against the perception that they were unassimilable aliens, and instead designed a grand strategy against discrimination generally, through alliances with other liberal and minority organizations. With racism now tied to the actions of Nazis, these groups successfully instilled upon politicians, and the Canadian Anglo elite at large, the view that discriminatory practices were “fascist” and had no place in a liberal nation. By the early 1950s, these liberal groups managed to bring about the Fair Employment and Fair Accommodations Practices Acts (1951-1954), which declared Ontario’s allegiance to the principles of the UN Charter and the UN Declaration of Human Rights in rendering illegal any discrimination in employment and in access to public spaces in Ontario on grounds of race or creed.

These Acts, and other similar legislative measures, culminated, firstly, in the Canadian Bill of Rights enacted by Parliament on August 10, 1960, which is seen as the earliest expression of human rights law at the federal level, in declaring that all persons in Canada have “right to life, liberty and security.” Secondly, it culminated in the Ontario Human Rights Code, passed June 15, 1962, which prohibited discrimination on the grounds of race, ancestry colour, ethnic origin, creed, sexual orientation, age and family status.

The End of “British Liberties”

Canadian Flag, 1922-1957
Canadian Flag, 1922-1957

Now, while it can be reasonably argued that these human rights laws were within the bounds of classical liberal discourse in affording minorities the same legal status, in accordance with the principle that all citizens of a nation should be guaranteed equal rights in the eyes of the law, these acts and codes constituted a dramatic alteration in the traditional language of “British liberties” that had prevailed in Canada before WWII.

Before the Second World war, as Ross Lambertson has observed, “there was scant mention of human rights” not just in Canada but in international law. The idea behind the concept of human rights is that all humans enjoy equal natural rights by virtue of belonging to the human race, which is very different from the “British liberties” idea, which emphasizes one’s membership in a British national culture. These liberties included the principle of parliamentary supremacy, as the very keystone of the law and constitution, meaning that matters involving individual rights would be left to Parliament, which is to say that courts would defer to Parliament regarding issues about individual rights. (In Canada, be it noted, there was a plurality of parliaments within the federal-provincial division of powers).

The “British liberties” ensured by Parliament included such principles as fair play, which meant both fairness in the right of Canadian individuals to freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, and in being treated equal under the law, “no man is above the law,” everyone is subject to the same laws. However, as has been 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, to refuse to associate with members of certain groups, including to hire them or to serve them.” Equality under the law did not mean that individuals were obligated to include within their free associations members regardless of race. Freedom of association was understood to include the right to discriminate on grounds of ethnicity, religion, and sex.

But I disagree with the standing argument that the human rights legislation constituted a break with libertarian liberalism, or classical liberalism. The standing argument says that Canadian liberalism before WWII emphasized individual freedoms rather than equal rights of citizenship. However, in my view, it was not simply that minorities were discriminated in their exclusion from restaurants, barber shops and many other public spaces. It was not simply, as Lambertson says, that the “ideal of freedom was accorded a higher importance than the ideal of equality” (p. 377). It was that the liberalism of this day was still ethnocentric, and this is why there were franchise laws that kept aboriginals in reserves and excluded them from the dominant British nation-state, as well as people of other races, through immigration laws that openly declared Asians and blacks to be unsuitable members of an official Canada intended to be British.

Red Ensign, version 1957-1965
Red Ensign, version 1957-1965

One does not have to agree with discriminatory measures to understand that it is wrong to project the libertarianism of today, devoid as it is of any appreciation for the importance of ethnic identity in its notion that we are all the same as individuals with rights, to understand that Canada’s emphasis on its British collective identity was crucial to the making of Canada, and that today Canada stands open to millions of immigrants encouraged to claim this nation as their own, and, therefore, encouraged to impose their own sense of the political, their ow collective tendencies upon a Eurocanadian people prohibited to have any collective identity.

The libertarianism of Canada before WWII, paradoxical as this may seem to us now, was collectivist in its belief that individual rights were rights which emerged from the British people, not from individuals as members of the human race, but from a particular British race, to which other ethnic groups that were White could assimilate but not people from very different races and cultures.

What made the acts and codes revolutionary was not simply that they were supportive of “equality of rights of minorities, at the expense of the libertarian rights of those wanting to exclude them” (p. 213). What made them revolutionary was that a new liberalism was being advocated in direct challenge to the ethnocentric liberalism that prevailed in the past, a more civic-oriented conception of the Canadian nation, based on universal values, was emerging wherein membership in the nation was defined purely in terms of values of equal rights rather than shared heritage, a common faith, and a common ethnic ancestry. The traditional ethnic nationalism of Canadians was being discredited as racist and illiberal.

In the degree to which this ethnic identity was de-legitimatized, the concept of the political in Canada would be weakened, with Canadians of British and European descent having less recourse to the older argument that it is perfectly within Canada’s political right to decide its ethno-cultural character. Indeed, these legislative changes, which I have only outlined, were the beginning of an accelerating spiral that would bring about ever more radical legislative changes, the end of all immigration restrictions by 1967, the complete redefinition of Canada as a multicultural nation in 1971, and much more.

How Canada Got Immigration Wrong: A Reply to Jonathan Tepperman

Posted on by

How Canada Got Immigration Wrong: A Reply to Jonathan Tepperman

by Ricardo Duchesne

Happier Eurocanadians?

Dreaming about Canada’s Multicultural Model

Jonathan Tepperman, opines in an article in Wall Street Journal, How Canada Got Immigration Right (September 2016), that Trump and the US generally “could learn” from how Canada has been able to produce the happiest population in the world by importing more than a quarter million immigrants every year since the early 1980s. Canadians are so happy, he claims, that they want to keep this level of immigration for an indefinite future, if not increase it — a wish the current liberal government has granted by promising to increase immigration rates to 337,000 a year by 2018.

Apparently, White Canadians in particular are enthralled by the fact that “more than 20% of Canada’s inhabitants are now foreign-born — almost twice the proportion of residents of Sweden, Germany or the U.S.” They cannot wait till the day when most Canadians will no longer be White, Anglo and Quebecois, but a land occupied mainly by Asians, Muslims, and Africans.

Tepperman happily informs us that idealism has not been the only motivation behind this longing for a harmonious multicoloured future in which the “racist past” of White Canadians will be no more. Canadians have shown themselves to be a most “pragmatic” people in coming to terms with the “necessity” of finding new sources of immigrant labour once sources began to dry up in Europe in the 1950s. Not long ago they were a xenophobic people preferring European migrants but their pragmatic inclinations prevailed under the leadership of liberal politicians who devised a highly impressive system of immigrant selection based on a points system wherein applicants for residency were selected on their educational, linguistic and labour skills and their overall suitability in meeting Canada’s economic needs.

Moreover the multiculturalism Trudeau and subsequent governments devised, with every political party on board, involved a two way street in which immigrants were allowed to retain those elements of their culture that would contribute to Canada’s pluralism while encouraging them to integrate to a common modern liberal society.

Picking most immigrants based on their ability to make material contributions began paying dividends that benefited everyone. Indeed, the system has produced one of the most successful immigrant populations in the world. According to the OECD, Canadian immigrants are better educated than any other country’s foreign-born population (53% of them enter Canada with college degrees, compared with 39% in the U.S.). Their employment rate is among the highest in the developed world, and without them, Canada’s workforce would be shrinking and aging.

Tepperman concludes that Canada’s immigration experience has been “spectacular — a record for politicians everywhere to emulate.”

What the Polls Really Say

But this model is hardly spectacular. Canadians are increasingly showing signs of discontent with the immigration numbers and other related issues. Tepperman is wrong in stating point blank that “polls have shown that two-thirds of them feel that immigration is one of Canada’s key strengths, and the same proportion favors keeping it at its current level — or even increasing it.”

Even if we were to accept polls as the only measurement of Canadian wishes (which they are not since one of the key aspects of this model is that Canadians are not allowed to question it lest they are willing to live with the label “racist”) there is polling out there showing that Canadians would eagerly welcome significant aspects of Trump’s immigration proposals relevant to the Canadian context:

  1. In this poll, as reported in September 10, 2016, they seem to agree with Trump that we should screen immigrants for anti-Canadian values: “Two-thirds of Canadians want prospective immigrants to be screened for ‘anti-Canadian’.” This preference for immigrants who are more inclined to accept Canadian values holds across the political spectrum: “Conservative supporters with 87 per cent backing the idea and just 8 per cent opposed compared to 57 per cent support among Liberals and 59 per cent for New Democrat voters.”
  2. Canadians also seem to agree with Trump’s concern about opening our borders to Syrian refugees. According to a new poll from the Angus Reid Institute: “More than 70 per cent of Canadians don’t support the federal government taking in more than 25,000 Syrian refugees, according to a new poll…Two in five respondents think Canada should stop taking in Syrian refugees immediately.”
  3. They also seem to agree with Trump that legal immigration should be cut in the future: In a survey conducted in 2013: “When asked whether ‘less immigration’ or ‘more immigration’ would lead ‘to a better future 25 years from now,’ 61.7 per cent of Canadians said less immigration would be preferable, compared to 34.4 per cent who said more immigration would result in a better Canada.”

The Soft Totalitarianism of the Canadian Model of Multiculturalism

A major flaw in discussions about the merits and demerits of Canada’s model of multiculturalism is the naive supposition that this model is all about tolerance and openness. It is not. It cannot be stated any other way: NO DISSENT IS ALLOWED IN CANADA AGAINST THIS MODEL OF IMMIGRANT MULTICULTURALISM.

The entire society has been structured to make this model work, all the educational and government institutions, media and businesses, are dedicated to making it successful. Therefore, almost all the reports, studies, dissertations, books, and articles produced about this model are biased in their determination to make the system work, show that it is working, and that it can be improved. Whenever problems are identified, they are about the lack of implementation of multiculturalism, obstacles to the integration of immigrants due to “racist attitudes,” “discrimination by White employers” or lack of resources to support newcomers. While some of these difficulties are identified as “problems” in the model, the preferred disposition is to framed them as “challenges” that can be overcome with further advancement of the model.

It is also the case that the method of polling about this model is flawed and does not give a true picture of the actual feelings of many Canadians for the simple reason that Eurocanadians have been brainwashed from the moment they are born to think of multiculturalism as Canada’s identity. They have been compelled to think they must accept immigration, and that if they don’t it is because of “xenophobic fears among Whites.” While positive feelings by immigrants towards multiculti Canada are deemed to be evidence of successful integration, negative feelings by members of the host culture are deemed to be “xenophobic” and thus automatically disqualified as evidence that can be used to show that immigration is not working.

The evidence that counts is of those Canadians who have “progressively” come to accept a multicultural Canada. Citizens with a strong sense of European identity are automatically categorized as “intolerant” and consequently ostracised.

Tepperman notes that a majority of Canadians in the 1960s, 67 percent, opposed any increase in immigration. Yet it does not occur to him to ask why then was mass immigration imposed upon this population? The fact is that even supporters of this policy agree that immigrant multiculturalism has proceededfor the most part by way of non-transparent regulations, executive directives, and administrative discretion rather than by legislative action and popular demand.

The Economic Evidence

Keep in mind that almost 100 percent of the academics in Canada are committed to research intended to the success of this model, “improving” it but never challenging its basic assumptions. Our side has hardly any academics with the means or with the proper political atmosphere to conduct research which focuses on the flaws of the model, and less so on the flaws of the ideology guiding it.

On the surface, looking at data from Citizenship and Immigration Canada, it would seem that, since the mid-90s, that the points system has been a success, in that economic immigrants have constituted around 60 percent of the total, whereas family-class immigrants have constituted around a third of the intake, and refugee inflows about 10-15 percent. It would appear that Canada’s immigration policy has been relatively successful in bringing “quality” immigrants.

But included in the “economic class” are also the spouses and children of the principal economic applicants. For example, it was estimated that in 2005 only 39% of the immigrants classified under the “economic class” were principal applicants selected according to their language skills, level of education, and work experience. As a percentage of all the immigrants granted permanent residency in 2005, only 19.5% were directly selected on the basis of their skills and education.

Moreover, the so-called “highly trained immigrants” have come primarily from countries with educational systems and training standards that are either unfamiliar or lower than Canadian standards. Many have arrived with weak skills in English and/or French, and have not exhibited the credentials, education, and work experience required in high-level Canadian jobs. A survey carried out in 2003 by The International Adult Literacy and Skills Survey on some 18,000 individuals (of whom 3,700 were immigrants) showed that the cognitive skill distribution of immigrants was much lower on average than that of Canadian born individuals. Immigrants from countries in Africa, Asia, Caribbean, and Latin America obtained lower scores on cognitive skills and tests.

Immigrants have not found jobs as quickly as anticipated. Labor market studies in 2006-07, for example, indicate that immigrants who had arrived in the previous five years were less likely to be actively employed, and that higher percentages were unemployed compared to Canadian born workers.

The anticipation that average Canadians would benefit from mass immigration, with a higher proportion being “economic” immigrants, has proven false. It is well-established that Canadian workers’ purchasing power remained flat from 1980 to 2005. According to Statistics, Canada’s analysis of the 2006 census, the median earnings of Canadians (in inflation-adjusted 2005 dollars) have increased by 0.1% since 1980. Not only that, but the earnings of the poorest fifth fell dramatically in that time, by 20.6%, while the top 20% of earners saw their incomes rise by 16.4%.

There is no such thing as a labor shortage in Canada. There is an unwillingness to work for undercut wages due to cheap immigrant labor and imported contract labor. Canadian workers are proud of their political and economic gains against the harsh working conditions of the past, serfdom, peonage, or coolie labor. They do not wish to see an importation of these low-wage, anti-working class values, from the non-Western world just to keep the profits of global corporations high.

One has to consider as well the many elderly relatives of immigrants who use social services without ever having paid for those services during their working lives. Many immigrants hold Canadian citizenship but work abroad, paying no taxes in Canada, and only returning to Canada to use expensive government services. About 11 percent of immigrants have citizenship in Canada and one other country. It has been estimated that 8 percent of Canadian citizens, including those with dual citizenship, or 2.7 million people, live outside Canada.

Economist Herb Grubel of Simon Fraser University, and a Fraser Institute fellow, calculated, among other things, that the costs in services and benefits, in the year 2002 alone, incurred by the 2.5 million immigrants who arrived between 1990 and 2002 exceeded the taxes they paid by $18.3 billion. He also found out that the average immigrant since 1985 has imposed an annual fiscal burden on Canadian taxpayers of $6000, for a total of $25-billion annually for all immigrants. For the fiscal year 2005/06, he calculated that the “fiscal burden on Canadian taxpayers was over $6,000 per capita” “because of the low average incomes of recent immigrants, the low taxes they pay and the government services they absorb.” More recently, he calculated that the total fiscal burden “has risen from $16 to $24 billion in 2005, to $20 to $28 billion in 2010, to $27 to $35 billion in 2014.”

I must add I have always been perplexed by the celebration of a model predicated on a system designed to entice the most educated individuals from the poorer nations where they are in higher need. This is known as “braindrain,” which is a form of imperialism, which goes to show how immoral and hypocritical the Canadian “humane” model of mass immigration really is; on the one hand, calling upon Canadians to cherish other cultures, while, on the other, promoting policies that weaken the economic well-being of these cultures.

Integration Versus Ethnic Enclaves

Sikhs in Canada
Sikhs integrated into Canada

On the question of integration: on the surface, it appear that immigrants are integrating into Canada insofar as only a very small number of them have engaged in terrorist activities, or illiberal practices posing an immediate threat to our liberal values. Immigrants are acquiring citizenship, learning one of the official languages, getting involved in Canadian politics, with some intermarrying outside their ethnic group, getting jobs, and participating in Canada’s educational institutions.

But these facts do not say much; they merely show that the majority of immigrants are integrating into a Canada that is officially defined as a multicultural place committed to mass immigration, and in which the traditional Anglo culture is no longer accepted as the official culture and in which Eurocanadians must accept their reduction to a minority and be forced to compete with skilled workers from the rest of the world as well as with students for university positions.

As it is, the evidence offered by proponents in these matters is flimsy and intrinsically subjective, based solely on the answers immigrants have offered in surveys created by proponents of immigrant multiculturalism. They say there is little evidence of “entrenched racial concentration in poor ghettos,” yet studies do show that Chinese migrants “tend to settle in established Chinese neighbourhoods.” In Richmond, BC, where six out of ten residents are new immigrants, and where half do not speak English in their homes, Chinese-language signs, unaccompanied by English, can be seen everywhere, with multiple incidents of Canadians protesting about the lack of visible English signs.

A comprehensive study of 17 ethnic groups in 12 Canadian cities by Eric Fong and Rima Wilkes (2003) offers reasons for, but does not deny, residential segregation among different ethnic groups in Canada. In February of 2012, the National Post contained an article, As Immigration Booms, Ethnic Enclaves Swell and Segregate, with the following finding:

In 1981, Canada had only six neighbourhoods with ethnic enclaves…Now, that number has mushroomed to more than 260.

Another study which looks into the future, published by Citizenship and Immigration Canada in July 2012, A New Residential Order? The Social Geography of Visible Minority and Religious Groups in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver in 2031, predicts that

…in Toronto and Vancouver, the degree of separation between Whites and Visible Minorities is projected to rise considerably, beginning to approach that in the average US city in 2010 between Whites and African Americans.While in Montreal the visible minority population is predicted to be spread out across “neighbourhoods of all types” (including ones mixed with Whites), it is anticipated that in 2031 “about nine out of ten Whites will live in White-dominated areas.”

Destruction of Canada’s Historic Identity

Ultimately the biggest problem with the Canadian model is that that projections are pointing to a future Canada in which “Caucasians” will be increasingly displaced by people who are “non-white in colour” — the terms Statistic Canada uses. This fact is never seen as an issue by the mainstream political parties and the media. Instead, Eurocanadians who lament their dwindling numbers are categorically denounced as “White supremacists,” while “non-Caucasians in race” who call for a majority Asian Canada are celebrated as vibrant and liberal-minded — regardless of their otherwise intolerant customs, hyper-patriarchal dispositions, and unwillingness to marry outside their race. So, even if many are “aware” that they will become a minority, they are prohibited from discussing this issue unless they wish to be labelled “racist.”

The entire multicultural system in Canada, the policies, hiring practices, grants, media announcements, education, is set up for the advancement of “diversity” and for the benefit of non-European immigrants, which means that many Eurocanadians also stand to benefit as advocates and employees of diversity, since the system offers many economic incentives, jobs within a massive bureaucracy dedicated to the integration of immigrants and the diversification of Canada’s entire society. Diversity ideologues go around parading as upholders of the highest moral principles in human history as they sell-out their heritage, celebrate the culture of foreigners, distort the history of Canada, living easily thanks to the hard labour of past Eurocanadians nation builders. But patriotic Canadians are unsettled by this fake morality, and do wonder whether a model that envisions their reduction to a minority, and that requires them to put down their own heritage, and that even requires them to downplay their foundational role in the creation of Canada, in the name of a fabricated history that would have this nation created by “diverse races,” is as “spectacular” as its supporters claimed it to be.