Monday, 7 July 2008

Will mass immigration and multiculturalism tear Canada apart?

Now that another Canada Day has come and gone and your stomach is allowed to settle after reading all those one sided "puff pieces" about how Canada is so much better than the United States and therefore the best country in the world, which is sort of an unconscious acknowledgment of the greatness of the American nation and its people (you rarely see us comparing ourselves to the Europeans), we should take time out to consider this country's future and where mass immigration and multiculturalism may very well lead us.

When multiculturalism, and the mass immigration industry that feeds it, is ever discussed publicly it is usual through "rose coloured glasses" and in glowing terms often to the point of being embarrassing. The commentary is constrained by the present, rarely if at all does it bother itself to reflect on the current trends and look to the future. It is like someone living in present day Toronto looking out his or her window and seeing what a multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic, multicultural utopia the city has become and talks as if it will stay in that state forever, as if some balance has been achieved never to be disturbed. Our common sense tells us that this is unrealistic and an imagination. Things change and sometimes not for the better.

Mass immigration has dramatically changed the city of Toronto in as little time as a quarter of a century. The city has gone from majority white and native born to majority non-white and foreign born within a single generation. The city was once a Conservative stronghold and now that party can't even get elected in that town and this leads me to comment on mass immigration and its implications for national unity.

Immigration Watch Canada released this weekly bulletin, a paper by Stephen Gallagher of McGill University, that touches on the potential destabilizing effects mass immigration may have on national unity.

Canada simply does not have a high profile immigration advocacy or research organization which questions the need for a mass immigration policy.

So what does all this mean for Canada’s national identity and how does it affect national unity? I would argue we are approaching a crossroads because the implications of Canada’s transition into a diasporatic country are so profound and manifest that the current studied disregard coupled with on-going fundamental demographic change is not sustainable. The implications of this transformation can be broken into the reality in Quebec and the ROC. In ROC , the rooted British and ‘northern’ connected identity has been largely buried and forgotten.

But Francophone Quebec has not forgotten its roots
. In Quebec, collective memories, stories and symbols are deeply rooted and the French language constitutes a formidable nexus of identity. In addition, given sovereignty fears and general economic sluggishness, Quebec has not been a relatively attractive destination for immigrants. Therefore, compared to Toronto and Vancouver, Montreal with 20% foreign born population in 2006 has better preserved its rooted character. Overall, unlike in the ROC, the national re-branding exercise of the sixties and seventies with its new Canadian creed and Charter of Rights did not replace the admittedly evolving Quebecois identity.

[...]

In the Canadian context, all this has real implications for national unity. Immigration has already relegated ‘British North America’ to the history books and more recently rendered national bilingualism and biculturalism unrealistic.

The danger for Canada’s national unity lies in the possibility that both conservative and socialist nationalists in Quebec will reach the conclusion that the French language and culture is more secure outside of Canada than in it.

I have been mulling this same thing over and over in my head for some time now and have come to similar conclusions but Quebec's concerns for self preservation are not the only one we should be considering. We also need to be mindful of western Canada particularly Alberta.

When election time rolls around the government has pretty much been decided at the Ontario/Manitoba border and many of those votes are immigrant votes or the so-called "ethnic vote." The vast majority of these votes resides in Canada's major cities particularly voter rich southern Ontario that hosts a sizable portion of Canada's immigrants. And invariably the "ethnic vote" is a vote for the Liberal Party of Canada. Reviewing the results of the last federal election reveals a split between rural, and Canadian, Ontario, and immigrant urban Ontario. The Conservative Party was able to capture a few seats in Ontario but only in the rural areas outside of seat heavy Toronto and the surrounding area. The vast majority of the ridings in Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) went to the Liberal Party and these ridings are immigrant heavy of host sizable immigrant populations that can swing the vote.

Alberta and much of western Canada is Conservative territory in relation to their eastern cousins. The western provinces may very well start to consider secession if Ontario continues to posses the power to decide governments which are constantly Liberal governments at the most, or weak minority Conservative governments at the least. And many of the seats these parties are vying for are influenced by immigrant voters. The west may feel itself being subjected to an immigration policy designed in Ottawa which has become, more or less, a program to import more Liberal Party voters. In other words the immigration system can be manipulated to break Conservative strongholds like it did to Toronto. So, like Quebec, Alberta may feel it will have to leave confederation to ensure its political and cultural future.

There is also the potential for regions of Canada going exclusively "ethnic" and this can have destabilizing effects as well. What I mean by this is a future Asian British Columbia, hypothetically speaking but possible nonetheless, where Punjabi and Mandarin have become the dominant languages. The province may very well, firstly, split along ethnic and linguistic lines and, secondly, become a kind of "Quebec of the west coast" and seek secession so that they may also become "masters in their own house" albeit on Canadian soil.

These are real concerns and shouldn't be dismissed as alarmist. I do feel that mass immigration and officially sanctioned multiculturalism will be this nation's undoing. In other words, diversity is not this country's strength. Life has a way of handing us unintended consequences and the political dissolution of Canada may be the result of an out of control and mismanaged mass immigration system exacerbated by multiculturalism as domestic policy.

Secondly, although Canada is certainly a leader in promoting cosmopolitan objectives, there appear to be few if any enthusiastic followers. Certainly tension, debate and reflection on the need for migration controls and a strengthening of integration policies which cross over into assimilationism are mainstream preoccupations in Australia, UK and US. For continental European countries and Japan, the draw bridges are up when it comes to mass immigration and diasporatic communities are being strongly directed towards full integration. This should give Canadian decision-makers pause and stimulate a thorough review of the issues related to immigration, integration and citizenship.

This comment runs counter to the many claims made in Canada's leading newspapers that this country is looked to the world over as a leader in immigrant integration and a model to be emulated. It seems that this isn't the case at all.

Finally, Canadian national unity may be endangered by unmanaged immigration. There is an emerging sense among Francophone Quebecers that the French Fact in America may not be compatible with high levels of immigration. At one level, there is a concern that new-Quebecers tend to assimilate into English cultures. This may not be objectively true but regardless, should a consensus arise among rooted Quebecers that participating in the new Canada (with its new creed and demographic reality) is endangering the French language in Quebec, then national unity will indeed be threatened.

Few countries in the world, even immigrants to Canada, will prescribe the same mass immigration multicultural model for their native countries. Why should we?

Canada has been described as a social experiment but experiments do fail and Canada as a social experiment may very well fail. I don't want that to happed and it is not worth the risk either. Countries have dissolved or been torn asunder or divided because the "social experiment" did not work there. Who's to say that Canada will be different? Where's the assurance?

Erstwhile Parti Quebecois leader Jacques Parizeau lamented that "money and the ethnic vote" defeated Quebec nationalist dreams in the last sovereignty referendum. It seems that not money but the "ethnic vote" may eventually give him what he wanted after all. Vive le Canada, libre!

11 comments:

uk visa serf said...

Will mass immigration and multiculturalism tear Canada apart?
Probably not!

Anonymous said...

Probably will.

Anonymous said...

I believe most Canadians would tend to agree with you in the premise that the non-traditional immigration/multiculturalism aspects are slowly tearing our country apart.

However, most native-born Canadians are reluctant to speak candidly as you, lest they be seen as not following the party line and be sent to "re-education camps" (an old communist Russian expression). Of course, that term has now morphed into "sensitivity training courses" - same meaning, different times.

Younger Canadians have no means of comparison because they don't have the benefit of having lived in the '50s, '60s, or '70s. They should be asking their parents and grand-parents if they wish to know some answers to that question.

Majority homogeneous Toronto sprinkled with tiny pockets of racial minorities was a great city to grow up, in comparison to race-rioting U.S. cities during those times. Today, those same American "rioters" have been placated with a vast array of free welfare benefits and affirmative-action edicts so they won't burn down their cities.

In Toronto, the racial transformation in only one generation is simply stunning, and most likely deliberate when the door to European immigrants was slammed shut in favour of mass 3rd world immigration. So to appease any rumbling discontent amongst the newly imported racial minorities arriving from dis-similar countries around the world, Canadian politicians introduced employment-equity laws, so-called "hate" laws, protected persons laws and numerous other special considerations for the imported "special" people that didn't even exist in our country prior to the 1970s.

PaxCanadiana said...

Will mass immigration and multiculturalism tear Canada apart?
Probably not!


What's that based on? What assurances can you give me? A simple two word sentence doesn't count it as a counter argument.

But perhaps you do know what you are talking about. After all, you do live in the U.K. I imagine, making a living off the immigration system no less, and we all know how mass immigration and multiculturalism has unified the kingdom. Am I right?

In any case I'll hazard to say that you are ignorant of Canadian politics and you simply don't know what the hell you are talking about.

Anonymous said...

This guy is so blinded by racism....NATIVE INDIANS ARE ORIGINAL CANADIANS YOU IDIOT.

WHITE PEOPLE IMMIGRATED HERE JUST LIKE MINORITIES ARE CURRENTLY DOING.

YOU DONT LIKE IT? GO HEAD TO EUROPE YOU DUMB ASS MOFO

Anonymous said...

"This guy is so blinded by racism....NATIVE INDIANS ARE ORIGINAL CANADIANS YOU IDIOT."

When I saw your post, I thought to myself... ho-hum, another uneducated buffoon who knows nothing of real history but trots out the same old line about "Native Indians" having exclusive rights to some real estate that he neither invented nor developed.

That puerile line of thought would be similar to me restricting the use of roads, highways and sidewalks to white Canadians only or at the very least, charging a toll to "others".

Further, I can assure you the term "Canadian" was not used by Indians-in-resident during those earlier times. Our nation-state only became a reality in 1867 and prior to that time was a British colony.

Oh, speaking of earlier times, perhaps you've not brushed up on recent discoveries of the "Kennewick Man"?

"WHITE PEOPLE IMMIGRATED HERE JUST LIKE MINORITIES ARE CURRENTLY DOING."

Those earlier White Europeans were "pioneers" who first entered and settled a region, thus opening it up for further occupation and development for other arrivals.

Unlike you, they had no benefit of welfare handouts, no free medical aid, no subsidized housing, etc. - just hard backbreaking working from dawn to dusk in clearing land to make fields to grow their own food or any other labour-intensive work, just to survive from one week to the next.

...and those "minorities" you speak of, are they anything like these thugs?

"YOU DONT LIKE IT? GO HEAD TO EUROPE YOU DUMB ASS MOFO"

Judging from your writing ability, it appears our educational facilities have been a dismal failure for you, so I might suggest you take your own advice and return to your own ethnic point of origin where they perhaps, speak the same language as you.

PaxCanadiana said...

This guy is so blinded by racism....NATIVE INDIANS ARE ORIGINAL CANADIANS YOU IDIOT.

WHITE PEOPLE IMMIGRATED HERE JUST LIKE MINORITIES ARE CURRENTLY DOING.

YOU DONT LIKE IT? GO HEAD TO EUROPE YOU DUMB ASS MOFO


Note how the above statement makes no effort to address the issues I raised in the post. It immediately employs the intentionally distracting and intellectually bankrupt, and I'd say dishonest, racism accusation to say nothing of the name calling. This should tip anyone off that the poster has nothing to say. Next they'll start to correct my spelling and grammar. Typical.

Every time I come across responses or statements like the above I have a hard time figuring out their point.

So I ask what is your point? That since white Europeans colonized native Canadian lands then non-European immigrants have every right to colonize native Canadian lands as well? Is that what you are saying? Because if it is then your statement is an approval for colonialism and that immigration is a continuation of the colonization of indigenous lands only this time mostly by non-Europeans. Many of whom I might add, ironically or hypocritically, come from countries that suffered at the hands of European colonialism. Guess colonialism is only bad when it happens to you. When you benefit from it, well that's a different story now isn't it?

So, if the colonization of indigenous lands was and is wrong, say of Africa or South Asia, then why is it not wrong in the Canadian context? Why the double standard? Why are Canadians supposed to accept what no one else in the world would tolerate?

Regarding the minority population how big should we allow it to get? Should immigration be allowed to reduce the host white majority population to minority status? Should we allow the European/North American character of Canada to be replaced with an Asian one? Is it still Canada when that happens?

Next time you post, if you do at all, come back with something real to say and not some asinine knee-jerk remark. Go back to Europe you say? What do you think is happening there? Besides what makes you think I'm white anyways? Your prejudice? Bigotry? My race is irrelevant to the issues I raise.

Anonymous said...

you dont see too many Canadians going to immigrate to the other countries,if they all come here the world will all be the same........a terrorist shithole

Anonymous said...

Canada's immigration policy is set by the Canadian government which is elected by the Canadian people. Unlike the United States most immigrants to Canada are legal. If you wish to change the immigration policy than sell that to other Canadians so that they elect a government which will restrict immigration. Since the vast majority of Canadians are still white ~ 83%, if your views are held by most then they should have the power to elect a government that wlll limit migration and even disenfranchise as has happened in other countries with migrant populations.

From where I set, immigrants are generally productive and contribute to creating the critical mass needed to achieve scales of economies that are needed in Canada.

Anonymous said...

HOLY FUCK

Anonymous said...

Take it easy. You all need to get a life. Your nothing special. Your just like everybody else. Stop worrying so much about something you'll never be able to do anything about. PaxCanadiana your so full of shit. Really I think I can smell the cock on your breath from here. You need to relax and get laid, stupid! Heil Hitler!