Modest

If it was a matter of "a handful of generations" I would not be already unhappy now ! When I came to Canada I already knew that the old white population is in a process of attrition, but I was unable to foresee that the process is so brutally accelerating so that I can see the change in less than a generation in Montreal (and not in Toronto) . . . The liberals like to speak about sustainability in economy and mineral resources matters, but not ethnicities. They like to wail frequently about the species of cockroaches and birds, reptiles and rats, that risk extinctions, but they never care about the risk of extinction of whites.

I think that your point of view is unavoidably ethnocentric (freedom as the paramount and legitimate aim of any human effort) but still more sad also very pessimistic: no, really I don't see why the whites' people struggle to survive as a racial community (of course between other racial communities on this planet), has to lead necessarily to a gloomy isolationism. If you are happy that arabs and the chinese or blacks next generation will listen pop music (you are really an adult?) , for others that's not enough, if there will be only chinese or arabs, or worse, only blacks and not white people too. I don't share your idolatry of the so-called ''freedom'' typical of the Western societies, but I admit that when allowed rationally and without blind dogmatism and stupidity (as unfortunately sometimes it is more and more dispensed in Canada and the West) freedom is a real value that any human being strive to have. Culture, yes it matters, and the Western culture has a value and a flavor that I want to see endure in time, but that's not enough: I am a human, and as ANY human I have sensibilities that are not simply cultural and abstract: I may like to see ''free'' young people making stinky the streets on which I go, with joint smoke and odor, but maybe I like to see also female faces that have no muzzles (maxillary prognathism), and no nappy hairs, and no noses spread on 3/4 of the faces and no thick, saggy lips, as I saw when I was young, and actually as I saw till recently. Fact is that we can still have both, cultural elements preserved and the ethnic and racial survival also - no ome tried to promote seriously this survival, because canadian and western and modernized world governments have no attention to pay to such things. Or maybe we cannot have both, situation in which you choose to rather preserve western culture and I choose to rather preserve the ethnicity - I am an atheist and as any immigrant always voted liberals, but if I have to choose between having a christian or muslim wife that it is white, or indian, or arab, or chinese, I will chose THAT rather than have as wife a black or mulatto wife that is atheist, liberal and enlightened. The same goes with which citizenry I/d like to have around me. I don/t know if esthetical preferences make someone racist, but if it make I am a racist without wishing to be one and hating that. My only consolation is that my esthetical preferences are widespread shared - blacks have the same esthetical preferences as me as long as more than a third of them succeed to marry a white woman, but less than 3% of whites and asians ever marry a black woman. One more thing to say: you speak about freedom as if it is something absolut, as there is a place (the Western world?) where freedom is absolute and clearcut. There is no such thing, Nowhere. The freedom it is limited already in any country and in any human society - the western societies allow male sexual mutilation, but ban female sexual mutilation. The english-speaking societies make of freedom of religion a fetish and an idol (imposing limits on what one can do and say about religion and religious people), meanwhile the french-speaking (and german-speaking) societies allow for restrictions on religion freedom, valuing more the freedom FROM religion, i.e. the stupid and toxic indoctrination of people, especially children. Western societies historically allowed for obscene levels of inequality, even if everyone knows for a long time that there is no real freedom without having a shelter, food, health and a job. Freedom, even in the most favorable social context, has a cost, a social cost made to pay by some of us, that are free (or maybe not so free) to become prostitutes, or people working in health-ruining trades. The excesses of drug, alcohol and sexuality which one see in young people in Western societies have for some of these young costs (life, or maybe better to say death, or at least health hazards), that have to be put also on the side of drawbacks of the freedom western-style. Freedom better to be tweaked responsibly and from time to time adjusted for the necessary aims of the time. NOW, with a whole race in the process of getting extinct, maybe we have to readjust the freedoms to better produce what it is necessary. There is no risk making that, in my opinion, because humans are always and anywhere the same, and they strive for the same things: freedom cannot disappear from the list of cherished values of any human being living now, in 1000 years from now, or 1000 years ago.

Yes, of course... But only if you look at the whole population, as if you look at the young people in Mtl, the Africans are not so far of being or becoming a majority - where you look, there is only nappy hair, noses spread wide and muzzle-faces (maxillary prognathism) to see in the very young cohorts. And if you look in Mtls' hospitals to see who breed like rabbits, once again the Africans rule. The arabs are the only one that still have at least two children, but hey, you are the same guy who want them to be barren but enlightened.

Mais oui, mais oui . . .

I am still happy, as at least you let for now aside the tired label "racist"; not that I believe retarded excludes somehow racist . . .

The Quebecers de souche seem to be in a terrible hurry to get extinct, so much that they are concerned even about what lives live the religious people they import to replace them, and that already for a long time. Why just import once a batch of Muslim Arabs enough to redress the fertility of the province and make the business happy with that cheap workforce ? They prefer to make the immigrants in their image, i.e. barren, in order to import each year for ever, large masses of people to be digested by their death-prone and only death-generating society.

Bad conclusion... Actually I like the secular West very much, but it happens that the West is no more the West, and today the Quebec is no more the Quebec in which I came to live 20 yrs ago. The Quebec government is so stupid or so incapable that it can attract only Africans (racially) to settle here, or at least in Montreal only Africans reproduce themselves enough to be visible. For that reason I prefer to protect the Arab muslims, because they happen to be the last human-faced community still breeding to some extent in Quebec. Let them alone! As of its "secularist" character, I did like it VERY MUCH (I am an atheist, with atheists parents, now in an atheist family, so I am at ease in a laicist social context) for a long time actually, as long as I didn't realize yet that the secularism is RAPIDLY wiping out the population in Canada and in the West, letting me to live practically in a racially African country (or province). Don't jump to conclusions . . . I despise religion and I dislike the naïveté of the religious people, but if I am forced to choose between living in an African country which is democratic, rich and secularist and bla-bla-bla, or in a middle-age style, poor and religious country peopled by humans like me (euro-asian), I will chose to swallow aaaaall my anti-religious prejudice and live with people with human faces, not with muzzles.

You have to ask yourself what it is the final effect of your strive to educate people and make them thinking critically. You have more informed and smart people, yes, but in the same time you make them rabid individualists, anxious, barren and cynical. Half of the school children in Quebec have problems linked to anxiety !!!!!! And the fact that they cannot feel a community as long as the promoted ideology in schools and media is savage individualism and an obscene search of diversity for the sake of diversity, it is responsible for that sad situation. You killed catholicism and by doing that you killed yourself as a people. Now for the sake of that losing ideology you want to kill islam, making the Arabs barren as yourself. I do not agree with what you want to do.

What you want is to make a barren hedonist monster of ALL your fellow citizens. It doesn't work: by choice you can go down the history bin with nothing left behind, but others that happen to live here have their right too to keep their tradition that made them essential and indispensable for province economy and society. Factually religion is bullshit. Dogmas are stupid and of disheartening low moral level, and religion (any) brings unnecessarily stupid hatred and miserable lives for their followers. But if you are honest and not a full idiot you realize also that it is far better than secularism and democracy, because at least is able to make a community alive - making children (not looting others' societies people), valuing himself (and not self-hating to the point of wiping himself out racially in a generation or less) and its own culture and tradition, which for sure is no better and no worse than any other one. Under the disguise of care for the others' children what you want to promote here is a culture of death, in which we ALL, collectively, go extinct for the sake of a failed ideology. Your are free to go extinct ! You almost succeeded, actually. And there is no loss for the others if you, the Quebecers de souche, go extinct, au contraire, but let others survive especially if they choose to. Religion has its role to play in a society.

Is there, right there in what you cite above. But you have been conditioned by education not to see it, and if by accident you see it not to understand it as a normal human being.

Maybe "the Muslims drag the society back to the dark ages". Fact is that this "back" and these "Dark Ages" are the normality of ANY human society that ever existed. One can deplore the stupidity and the toxicity of religious dogmas and the unfair character of many patriarchal rules (and I for one deplore it sincerely), but NO modern society (and in no case Canada) have succeeded in making a rationalist and a respectful society of the human rights, and in the same time being minimally functional: ALL modern societies need year after year to import MASSIVELY people provided by... "the unfair and the bigoted traditional societies". As long as you still fail to find a solution to YOUR own dysfunctional society, in order to make and keep it time-resilient and sustainable demographically (which is the most basic feature), otherwise than taking other societies' pret-à-user humans, that they still KNOW how to make, keep silent !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you have a minimal morality and a minimal sens of fairness. let alone rationality. And let down your ridiculous superiority complex.

The Muslims kids in Quebec "need most" the anti-religion classes only in your opinion. You want them to be brainwashed by the the ultra-secularist government of the Quebec province into becoming they too the hedonist zombies you, the Quebecers-pure-laine are, i.e. people with no respect for and no knowledge of their own traditions, with no respect for their ethnicity, living aimless and barren lives by choosing to make no children. Zealotry is also what you want to do to them, that is to force some normal people that help Quebec still keep kind of a human face by making beautiful babies, as your women pure laine bear no child at all, or, worse bear des-petits-mamadous.

I don't believe that the vegans have no point in their militantism. I say only that in a province that provides almost half of the prostitutes in Canada while having less than 20% of total population of the country, there is some more urgent problems to solve than saving pigs and chickens. Anyways, they have made the wrong choice of city to target in their campaign by choosing Montreal restaurants to terrorize, because Montreal is already racially speaking an Haitian city - the vegans have only to wait quietly some 10 or 15 years from now, time to let all the old pure laine left go into their graves, and there will be no more beef eaters, as le cassave and le diri blan ak sos pwa nwa will prevail.

The cold war logic is no more the decisive factor in Israel;s case, and your idea that an unified territory of what is now Vietnam never existed before the communists captured the south is wrong.

Maybe killing Muslims (Palestinians) and robbing them of their country is worse than simply brainwashing Muslims (Uyghurs). That may explain why there is no peep, for instant, from the Muslim world (actually there was already, but your attention is rather focused on other issues).

Well, if you suspect that and offer no proof or explanation, that is at best soporific as observation, and at worst stupid.

Any reason is good enough to avoid confronting the reality !

The pro-israeli lobby here can forgive germany or uk for voting the resolution (for sure, there are in these countries other clowns that scream the tired slogan which makes any anti-Israel stance an anti-Semite one), but they expect Canada, with its traditional servile government to vote as usual.

What appear so "clear" to your benighted mind it is unfortunately simply a fiction: I suggest to the moderators to confirm that I and Youkon have different IPs and different email addresses associated with our accounts. Youère not trollled, you just have to confront uncomfortable ideas, a situation which seems to be over your can.

Rue, you seem to conflate 2 people, me (Modest) and Yukon. I don't think that killing israelians is per se a solution to the big injustice made by western-european imperialists by creating a jewish state on top of others homes, and not even to the new mad plundering made now be the ultranationalistic israelian government. It would be already a good thing to see that the Israelis kill less Palestinians. As for instant the victims are the Palestinians . . . If we like it or not, the heartless and immoral policies of the Israel are naturally promoting hatred, which hatred if enough time let to simmer in the Palestinians can make the wish for mass killings of Israelis a probable and expected reaction. The Jews by being Jews should have known already better than that, for that matter. . . To defend the policies of Israel now equals promoting almost a form of fascism and anyway a regime that impose an ethnic state and an apartheid where that cannot work. These are NOT very Canadian values or practices . . . As for the scope of use of the term pathognomonic, even google can help you to see that figuratively it is used also in strictly non-medical contexts. But I for one can adopt your humpty dumpty restriction and promise to not use it here anymore. As for your question if I am Canadian, my answer is no: I am a Canadian citizen, and I live in Canada, but that as you already know means nothing, because there is nothing specific Canadian to make someone Canadian: no ethnicity, no race, no language and no culture exist, that can unite those people living north of the 49th parallel. Some people still live here because for instant it is better to live than in other places, that;s all. . . That's what makes Canada (as US) a place where there is a state without a people, at least not a people in the sens one can speak of German people, Russian people or Chinese people.

it's ironic, and really pathognomonic for the wickedness of the vast majority of states today, that only such a pariah as north korea and zimbabwe condemn the terror poured by Israel on powerless and poor palestinians. With the help of western imperialists, the Jews once plundered (the better) half of the territory on which the palestinians lived. Now, the Jews want to plunder still more territory, and the international community says nothing. Wonderful ! And some clowns here want to shame us for canada being at least this time on the side of the more moral and principled position.

Naturally, as long as the revenues and the wealth of those paying 70% in taxes are also 70% (or more) of the total... They have no merit and the rest is not owing them nothing.

Would be a big chance the US not to be a democracy! Actually is midway between a full democratic regime and an authoritarian one. Which is bad, as anyone can see... Fact is that under authoritarian or elitist regimes people live better lives than under pseudo-democratic regimes that follow blindly popular wishes. Democratic Athens was in a continuous war, waging war after war and terrorizing its neighbors (and actually their brothers, ethnically speaking) and killing its own youth. USA, the so-called model of democracy is the champion of war-waging in modern era. Hitler reached power by electoral means and the social revolution of the Bolsheviks had a huge popular support, having the assent of the majority of people of Russia at the time of their relatively peaceful access to power (in contrast with the mere political revolution offered by socialists and conservatives of the time). Democracy means giving in to any immoral, irrational, excessive, toxic and self-destructive desire of the masses. The result one can easily see in any modern society, e.g. the Canadian one, which still exists (though precariously) only by continuously, massively and parasitically looting other societies' human resources. The most basic feature of any human society ever existing, i.e. the capacity to auto-reproduce itself in time, is pathetically lacking in any modern democratic society, forcing these societies to double down in malignity today by looting human resource from those that yesterday were dispossessed by them of material resources. Geo-politically, democracy = cancer. And anyone knows, cancer spread, unfortunately...