Frank Words On Immigration

[After 5 years, this topic is still not open for discussion.]

Randall Denley, The Ottawa Citizen
January 24, 2003

Canadians are sleepwalking through what’s likely the most profound change of our times.

Statistics Canada confirmed this week what we can see every day on the streets of Ottawa. The nature of our country is changing dramatically due to immigration. Residents born outside Canada comprise 18.4% of the population. Just under four million Canadians belong to visible minorities, up from 1.1 million 20 years ago!!

Visible minorities make up 13.4% of the Canadian population, but that number doesn’t properly describe the impact of visible minorities in Canada’s largest cities.

In Vancouver, the proportion is 49 per cent, in Toronto 42.8 per cent. In some suburbs of those cities, so-called visible minorities actually make up a majority of the population. In Ottawa, one person in five is a member of a visible minority.

Immigration has helped make Canada a very different country from the one the majority of the adult population grew up in. And yet, this is a subject that one rarely hears discussed. On the day the latest story was presented, Canada’s major newspapers thought it more important to comment on the future of the NDP, or next month’s federal budget.

One can argue that the immigrant expansion is a good thing, or a bad thing, but surely it’s a thing worthy of some kind of discussion.

The situation in
Canada is not part of a worldwide phenomenon, but a particularly Canadian story. Our 18.4 per cent of residents born elsewhere compares to 11 per cent in the United States. Only Australia has more foreign-born residents, with 22 per cent.

We are doing something different than most countries, and it has implications. The three million immigrants (the vast majority being non-white – Editor) who have come to Canada in the last decade obviously include huge numbers of high-achieving people who add to our country. But they change it, too.

In the Canadian mind, “multiculturalism” is a warm and fuzzy concept that involves colourful street festivals and better restaurants. Somehow, Canadians don’t look ahead to the time when the Western European traditions that most of us would call Canadian are merely another little piece of an ethnic patchwork quilt.

This country was built by immigrants, of course, but the successive waves of European immigration brought together people who were not as dissimilar as those arriving now. Most of the new Canadian immigrants are from Asia. While we call them minorities here, they are from countries that are vastly larger than Canada in population. They also have rich, strongly-defined cultures and religions.

Canada has never advocated a melting-pot approach, instead encouraging new groups to keep their customs and not merge with the mainstream.

Perhaps we want a country made up of hyphenated Canadians from the widest possible range of races, religions and cultures. Or maybe we don’t. We’ll never know unless we’re willing to talk about it. We need to be able to do this without someone shouting “racism” at the first opportunity.

In Canada, we believe that racism is something that white people feel toward visible minorities. We’re terribly naive if we think that people of other races aren’t also racist. In its simplest form, racism means that people in one group, whatever it is, tend to think that they have some qualities that are superior to those of some other group. Is there any race that doesn’t feel this way?

You aren’t likely to find any identifiable group that says “we’re no good, but we’re terribly fond of the Chinese.”

A proper debate about immigration shouldn’t be about the relative merits of various ethnic groups. Let’s accept the premise that people of all groups are of exactly equal value. That still leaves the issue of whether Canadians want to see the existing culture and customs of their country dramatically changed.

In Ottawa, we have a well-developed sense of the entitlements of our francophone minority, and it’s one that’s appropriate to their status as a founding group. But numbers matter, too. Will francophones still get special status when their group is dwarfed by others? This is the sort of thing we need to think about.

The change immigration has made in Canada is neither purely good, nor purely bad, but it affects all of us.

Our largest cities have already been transformed by recent immigrants. Ottawa is undergoing the same process, but more slowly. We can embrace that change, or argue against it, but let’s not ignore it.

ALSO READ:

Is Racial Diversity Good For Canada?

Multiculturalism – A Dividing Force

Visible-Minorities Vs Invisible Victims

Happiest City In Canada

‘Whiteness’ Studies

The Dreaded “Racist” Label

How Britain Destroyed Itself

U.S. White People – An Endangered Species

The Topic With No Name

Mass Immigration Numbers (Must-See VIDEO)

Advertisements

Violence Against Women

By Maged Thabet Al-Kholidy majed
Yemen Times

This title may sound strange (There Must Be Violence Against Women) but it’s actually not just a way to attract readers to the topic because I really do mean what it indicates. Violence is a broad term, especially when used regarding women. In this piece, I want to shed light on those instances where violence against women is a must.

First, we should know the meaning of the word violence. Longman’s Dictionary of Contemporary English defines violence as “behavior that is intended to hurt other people physically.” However, the term violence mustn’t be confused with other concepts and terms such as gender inequality or absence of women rights.

Occasionally – if not daily – we hear about events occurring in Islamic and Arab societies. Some human rights organizations recently have attacked violent acts against women, standing against any type of violence – even that between a father and daughter – and citing the cases of some women as examples.

Consequently, they offer solutions such as complaining to the police, taking revenge or leaving them men, who are either their husbands, fathers or brothers – with no exceptions.

One such case involved a woman whose husband allegedly had beaten her. Without revealing the husband’s reasons for doing so, such human rights organizations immediately urged the wife to complain to the police and the courts, while at the same time generalizing the instance and other similar solutions to any type of violence.

If a man and woman are husband and wife, the Qur’an (Koran) provides solutions, firstly reaffirming any logical and acceptable reasons for such punishment. These solutions are in gradual phases and not just for women, but for men also.

[…]
Relationships between fathers and daughters or sisters and brothers also provoke argument from human rights organizations, which propose the suggested solutions for all relationships. Personally, I don’t think fathers or brothers would undertake such behavior unless there was a reason for it.

Fathers are responsible for their daughters’ behavior, but human rights organizations deny this too. Brothers also should take action regarding their sisters’ behavior, especially if their parents are too old or dead. If a daughter or sister makes a mistake – especially a moral one – that negatively affects the entire family and its reputation, what’s the solution by such organizations?

[…]

Fathers should handle their daughters via any means that suits their mistake; thus, is it better to use violence to a certain limit or complain to the police? Shall such women then complain to the police against their fathers or brothers? It’s really amazing to hear this.

In some cases, violence is necessary, but there must be limits. Those “good human rights organizations” don’t make any exceptions in their solutions because their aim is to serve society. Will it be a better society once we see wives, mothers, sisters and daughters going from one police station and one court to another, complaining against their husbands, fathers, brothers and even sons?

[…]

Dear readers – especially women – don’t think that I hate or am against women; rather, I simply mean to preserve the morals and principles with which Islam has honored us. I hope my message is clear, since it’s really quite relevant to the future of our societies, which must be protected from any kind of cultural invasion.

ALSO READ:

Importing Violent (Multi) Cultures

Chinese Misogyny At Its Worst

Muslim Violence Tolerated By Some

Multiculturalism – A Dividing Force

Frank Talk On Immigration

Herouxville, Quebec Enters Immigration Debate

Racial Diversity – But Why?

PAXCANADIANA

TORONTO, October 20, 2005 — Canada must do more to capitalize on immigration and unleash the power of diversity if it wants to improve productivity and increase its high standard of living according to Gordon M. Nixon, president and chief executive officer of RBC Financial Group.

We believe that no country in the entire world stands to gain as much economic benefit from diversity as Canada,” said Nixon at the 10th Metropolis Conference, an international gathering focused on diverse cities and hosted by Toronto Mayor David Miller. “If we succeed, we will have an unrivalled advantage. But the flip-side is also true. If we fail, we will pay a heavy cost in lost opportunity.”

“Unleash the power of diversity”? What does that even mean? What power is he even taking about? Does he know what he is talking about?

Take note how the sky is going to fall if we Canadians do not embrace diversity. How are productivity levels and the Canadian standard of living going to decrease if we fail to “unleash the power of diversity”? This is exemplary of the nonsensical rhetoric and scare mongering that typifies the language of pro mass immigration advocates that should illicit laughter but instead gets serious consideration from the like thinking so-called journalists at The Toronto Star.

And how does diversity give us “unrivaled advantage”? Please, I really do want to know and so would the Japanese and Chinese where the lack of diversity has apparently hindered their technological and economic achievements.

“We believe that Canada must target future workforce challenges, not only by raising immigration targets in key sectors, but also by making a concerted effort to release the untapped potential in our current workforce,” Nixon said.

The report highlights that new Canadians currently make up about 70 per cent of the growth in the Canadian labour force, and by 2011 will account for all the growth in Canada’s workforce, as Canada’s population growth stagnates. While the government is considering increasing the number of immigrants from its current levels ranging from 220,000-245,000, the study recommends raising its target to between 300,000 to 400,000 immigrants per year, if Canada is to continue to grow its living standards.

Again, note how the future health of the Canadian standard of living is tied to increasing mass immigration targets. This is a scare tactic to compel Canadians to accept immigration numbers that they are otherwise uncomfortable with.

According to a Statistics Canada survey, the integration of immigrants is a key barrier to success. “It’s no secret that we don’t have the best track record in this area,” said Nixon. “Our most recent immigrants arrive in Canada better educated and at similar stages in their careers as those born in Canada, but evidence suggests that they have not found jobs that match their skill levels, are earning less than those born in Canada, or are experiencing higher unemployment rates. This represents a direct hit to our economy.”

This has been the general trend for immigrants for the past 25 years now. The main reason for this is not the failure to recognize foreign credentials but the fact that there are no jobs for them in the first place. For instance Canada imports just as many engineers into the job market each year as those who graduate from Canadian engineering schools thus doubling the number of job seekers for engineering positions each year. >>More Canadian Immigration Reform BLOG

ALSO:

Is Racial Diversity Good For Canada?

Racial Diversity – A CON Game

Multiculturalism – A Dividing Force

WHITE Americans – An Endangered Species

Destroying Effective Policing With A-A

Immigrant Workers NOT Needed

JAPAN Simply Rejects Mass Immigration

White Britons Are Diminishing

By MATTHEW HICKLEY

WHITE Britons will become a minority in a dozen towns and cities within 30 years, a study has revealed.

Record levels of immigration combined with higher birth rates among newcomers will tip the balance between whites and non-whites and create a string of “superdiverse” cities where no single group will form a majority. The watershed is expected to be reached first in Leicester, where whites will form less than 50 per cent of the population by 2020, followed by Birmingham in 2024, and by Slough and Luton soon afterwards.

London’s population will still be 61 per cent white by 2026, although eight of the city’s 33 boroughs will be ‘plural’, with no one group forming a majority, according to the study from the University of Sheffield. “Britain is becoming ever more plural; our diversity ever more diverse,” said Danny Dorling, professor of human geography. But he said it was becoming harder for experts to generalise about trends because different cities face widely differing experiences.

Global Population Growth is Driven By Developing Countries

Source: United Nations, World Population Prospects: The 2006 Revision (2007).

Leicester, with a large Indian community, has seen its white population fall from 70.1 per cent of the total in 1991 to 59.5 today, and the figure is predicted to fall below a half by around 2020. The city’s Indian population is set to rise from 22.9 to 26 per cent over the same period, with the African population increasing from 0.4 to 11.2 per cent.

Birmingham has strikingly different predicted trends, with the shift in the balance driven mainly by the growing Pakistani community. In general immigrant and ethnic minority populations will no longer be dominated by large, distinct Afro-Caribbean or Asian communities, said Prof Dorling.

Instead increasing numbers will come from countries scattered across the world – from Germany to Guyana, from Sweden to Singapore. Sukhvinder Stubbs, of the Barrow Cadbury Trust which commissioned the study, said: “Regardless of future immigration patterns, it is just a matter of time until cities such as Birmingham become plural.

“Even if we prohibited another single soul from entering the country, the trends have already laid root.” >>Source

ALSO READ:

Immigration Struggles In Britain

Britain’s Multi-Racial Contradictions

100,000,000 NON-Whites In U.S.A.

U.S. White People — An Endangered Species

U.S. White Minority SOON

“Diversity”- The Con Game

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: