Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Canada Immigration, multiculturalism, Suzuki and the federal conservatives.

I agree with Suzuki when he says Canada is full, I don't believe that multiculturisim is working and I think the author is correct about Jason Kenney.


Robert Sibley: Immigration minister Jason Kenney, not David Suzuki, is the one being intolerant

Name-calling, someone once said, is the last refuge of the intellectually bankrupt. Jason Kenney qualifies for that characterization with his denunciation of environmental gadfly David Suzuki�s recent contention that Canada is taking in too many immigrants.

Suzuki, an elder statesman of the evergreen set, was recently quoted in the Paris-based publication L�Express as saying �Canada is full,� arguing, it seems, that to continue to bring in hundreds of thousands of immigrants each year is �crazy.�

�Although it�s the second largest country in the world, our useful area has been reduced,� he said.

That lit the immigration minister up like a firecracker. Resorting to Twitter, Kenney lambasted Suzuki�s remarks as �xenophobic� � the word refers having a morbid dislike of foreigners � and �anti-immigration.� His opinions, according to the Tory minister, are �toxic and irresponsible.�

Now, I�m no fan of Suzuki�s apocalyptic environmentalism. He may be sincere in his ecological concerns, but, like Al Gore, he also makes a lucrative living as a prophet of planetary disaster. In any case, it�s Kenney who�s being toxic.

For decades Canadians have been instructed about the ostensible benefits of mass immigration. They�ve been told huge numbers of immigrants are needed to keep the economy ticking and provide the tax base to pay for all those social programs we enjoy. In recent years, however, this justification for current immigration policies has been questioned by respectable scholars.

�The flow of immigration into Canada from around the world, and in particular the flow from Muslim countries, means a pouring in of numbers into a liberal society of people from cultures at best non-liberal,� Salim Mansur, a political scientist at the University of Western Ontario, said in testimony last year before a Senate committee. �But we know through our studies and observations that the illiberal mix of cultures poses one of the greatest dilemmas and an unprecedented challenge to liberal societies, such as ours, when there is no demand placed on immigrants any longer to assimilate into the founding liberal values of the country to which they have immigrated to and, instead, by a misguided and thoroughly wrong-headed policy of multiculturalism encourages the opposite.�

Gilles Paquet, an economist and professor emeritus at the University of Ottawa, likewise challenges the intellectual assumptions on which immigration policy is based � you know, multiculturalism, diversity and tolerance � arguing that they actually weaken Canadians� sense of national solidarity.

�Being solicitous of diversity risks generating silo-societies, tolerance emphasizes the negative leave-them-alone kind of virtue, and multiculturalism further works at maintaining and enhancing cultural differences,� he writes in his recently published book, Moderato Cantabile: Toward a Principled Governance of Canada�s Immigration Regime.

This isn�t the kind of thing Kenney and crew want Canadians to hear. They want us to accept the Potemkin-village notion of Canada, the comforting fable of Canadians as endlessly tolerant and only too happy to diversify to the point of cultural meaninglessness. (As novelist Yann Martel once said, Canada �is the greatest hotel on Earth.�)

With his irrational denunciation of Suzuki, Kenney demonstrates that those who benefit most from current immigration levels � surely you don�t think the Conservatives would bring in so many immigrants if they weren�t a source of potential votes, or that our productivity-challenged corporate leaders would be happy to reduce a supply of unskilled labour that keeps wages lower than they could be � are quite willing to throw out ad hominem epithets of �racist,� �bigotry� and, in Suzuki�s case, �xenophobic.� They do so to intimidate those reluctant to accept the fairy tale view of immigration. Unfortunately, what Kenney and those who adopt tactics for invective don�t seem to understand is that they are fostering the very conditions of xenophobia and anti-immigrant attitudes that they claim to oppose.

Certainly, I expect Suzuki is sufficiently tough-minded to withstand criticism, and I doubt he�d share my skepticism regarding multiculturalism. (He is, so far as I know, a staunch supporter.) But there�s a requirement for reasoned argument at stake here (heated fine, sarcastic OK, but reasoned always). Suzuki, like any other citizen, is free to express his views, and he should be able to do so without some government minister using the weight of his office, political and moral, to rant against him.

Robert Sibley is a senior writer with the Citizen, attached to the editorial board. His new book, The Way of the 88 Temples, will be published in September.

I thnk Suzuki is wrong, I believe in multi culturism for Canada and I agree that Kenney is an idiot.
Just my opinion.

Look at what multi culturalism has done for Europe the past 1000 years. WAR WAR WAR

Dr. Suzuki, is right on this issue and we NEED to severely restrict immigration to Canada, NOW and also to BAN foreign "ownership" of ANY Canadian firm involved in resource extraction, harvesting and/or transport thereof.

The lie of "official multiculturalism" has been and is now a means of making Canada, into a cultural non-entity and thus make it easier for the Chinamen,etc, to take over and control our resource-rich nation. The very term itself is a contradiction in terms and is simply NOT representative of what Canada, has been or is now, it is just political bafflegab.

This country was founded and built by WHITE, CHRISTIAN people from northwestern Europe, it is OURS and ONLY OURS and it is long overdue to have this fact recognized and respected, or, the eventual results of the current treachery in governments, will result in some very ugly events.

An "oxymoron" for the stooges of our pathetic "education system" and thus "serfs" to the corporate elite who really control and run this country. P.E.T. himself, said, toward the end of his disastrous administration, that this had been a mistake, but, vermin like "Lyin' Brian" and that creature in Sussex St. now, just love this as it is so easy to manipulate those foolish enough to be hornswoggled by such a phoney policy.

While, we are at it, ANY immigrant who comes here to wait 3 years for citizenship, such as the hordes of "Hongers" and THEN moves "home" to make money, but, upon retirement, comes to Canada, for our social benefits, should be "de-naturalized" and not allowed back into this country.

Suzuki, is on the right path, here, but, he is still FAR TOO supportive of so-called "refugees" and we don't need a bunch more of these parasites, either!

Parasites is right. New immigrants can injoy a 5 year tax free holiday. It takes 3 years to become a Canadian citizen but almost all apply to be non-resident to avoid taxation. Others transfer their holdings bringing in income to offshore trust companies endorsed by our government so they can avoid paying taxes on all worldwide income. No wonder Canada is the country of choice.

You opinion is wrong. Your world and the real world are two different planets. Multiculturalism has never worked, is not working and will never work.

Why not check out the state of affairs in England and see how their experiment panned out. It's becoming a muslin state and the host folk are now becoming the minority. Ask them how it's working for them?

A poll would most likely be for less immigration. The bigger question is, what to do about it.

And France, and Germany and Sweden....etc etc etc.

Why go to a country and try to make it more like the place you left? If you like that way of being so much then just stay there in the first place.

This applies to North America as well.

Ask the Native Indians what they think of Immigration.

Most who claim to be for multiculturalism do so without any personal buy-in. In other words, they're all for welcoming immigrants as long as they don't move into their neighborhood.

Looked at another way, it has been said that one's tolerance for diversity is dependent on your distance from it. Liberals in homogenous neighborhoods promote something that doesn't affect them.

To me, the real issue is increasing the white birth rate. The tragedy of the two earner household in order to live a comfortable middle class lifestyle has been a natural selector for small families and resultant unchecked immigration. Something has to change in order for whites to desire - and be able to afford - large families once again.

Splendid point. They were powerless to do anything about it. Or not powerful enough. Before the Europeans came does anyone know about any peoples moving in on established cultures?

The availability and use of the birth control pill has made the two wage earner family possible. In the long run, it is what will destroy us.

Exactly!

Actually, I am in favour of multiculturalism and I live in an area of Vancouver that is most definetely "multi".
I have absolutely no problem with it and I am pleased that my Adult children were able to grow up in such an environment. We have lived in the same area for 60 + years. When we first moved in ( I was a new born ) the area was 99% Caucasian, now it's likely 20% at best. Doesn't bother me at all.
I think that rather than harping on "White Christian" heritage and all that, we should be encouraging immigration from hard working, educated people, regardless of race.
As a few other have said or intimated, we are all immigrants in Canada, just that some have been here a few years longer than others.
BTW, my lovely wife of 40 + years is part FN so her side of the family has mine beat by aeons. That is unless you believe, as some do, that the first people in what is now known as Canada were some sort of early "Northern European" travelers.

Many of the hardest working people I know moved here from somewhere else. Their kids win a lot of the academic awards in school too. Just saying!

Canada is full, we need to start decreasing the population. The world's population increases by more than the total population of Canada each year.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

From a strictly environmental perspective, you are correct and this is a difficult point to have some Canadians understand, given the propaganda that is "force-fed" kids from "pre-school" until they graduate from university.

It is an ECONOMIC issue, in respect of WHO advocates for large scale immigration, easy to obtain citizenship and the foul lie of "Official Multiculturalism."

The loathsome, sleazeball real estate and related business hucksters that advocate such an infamous and false policy are "in it for the money", and rate right down there with child molesters and drug dealers, IMO.

So, I think that you will find that professional ecologists and other working scientists, WILL tend to your view on this, however, as we know only TOO well, that gang of crooks in Victoria and their counterparts in Ottawa, do NOT "believe" in scientific research, historical reality as demonstrated by archaeological studies and are "gung ho" for MORE immigrants, as they see this as THE WAY to MORE $$$$ for them and their cronies.

I think, that a "steady state" population level of 40-50 million citizens is about right for Canada and the best means of establishing this is natural increase of the number of descendents of the original pioneers, as well as allowing those immigrants in that are willing to live and work in "East Dogbite" Manitoba or "Mosquito Mtn" AB.

An example is the numbers of Filipino immigrants who move here to STAY and become GOOD Canuck citizens, not to just obtain our passport, work back where they came from, move here at age 65 and then DEMAND our social services. Many of these Filipinos, are now living in what WERE "dying" towns in Canada's hinterland as did so many Euros. post "Great War" and "WWII" and this is GOOD for our beloved country, IMO.

So, a nationally beneficial immigration policy IS certainly "doable", but, then, we have that beady-eyed little postal clerk and all he stands for........

Beady eyed little postal clerk- good one. LOL. Unfortunately we have a situation as previously stated - the forced low birth rate by over taxation, but our government in all it's wisdom brings in more immigrants instead of lowering taxes, so families can afford more children. What will undoubtedly happen in the near future is that whites will become a minority in their own county much like Toronto is at present. Crime rates are climbing at an alarming rate with all the new immigration, and the vermin they spawn. It doesn't matter who you vote for, it's out of control and only a rebellion will stop it. But Canadians are happy sitting on their couches eating pop corn and drinking beer while watching TV every night, and can't be bothered to even comment or write a letter to their elected officials to tell them that we are sick and tired of this BS.