I am Groot

And that's all they do. That needs to change.

Not yet they're not. And while the Brits seem to be moving along well there are a lot of complaints about the Aussies as they try to build their version. Someone recently called it the most expensive, least armed large vessel ever produced.

All that is nice in theory. But largely unworkable in reality. A lot of businesses find cooperation better than competition, thus price fixing and oligopolies. Who is going to take down Google anyway, or Microsoft? Who is going to challenge the big banks, either here or in the US? And stop them from doing stupid things. That includes stupid things done by greedy CEOs who know what they're doing will ultimately be bad for their companies in the future but want to maximize their bonuses today. Way back in the dawn of time, when we still recorded history on stone bl\ocks with chisels, one of my teachers in one of my business courses - I don't even remember which or who - told me that perfect Capitalism would be as dreadful for ordinary people to live under as any other economic system. Thus it has to be tempered by government.

Well now is your chance to enlighten me, oh wise one! Explain how the other 130 odd countries with smaller populations than ours survive. With many of them thriving. And yet we can't. I'm not the one ranting about Capitalism. If you want specific policies implemented within this flawed Capitalist system, other than having a microphone up the ass of every politician and senior bureaucrat, please let me know and we can discuss how that would work.

Nice rant. Of course, it completely fails to address the points I made. But then... you can't, can you?

Again, the people who we most want to keep out tend not to be terribly sophisticated. Else we'd not hear of cases where they're denied citizenship in European countries for refusing to shake hands with their interviewer. And as I've already written, you don't ask straight out, bald faced questions about what they think of Jews or women. A written test would be best. They're supposed to know enough English to want to immigrate here, after all. In fact, we should be increasing the English/French requirements of immigrants like Australia did. Don't be a fool. I've always been nuts. That's got nothing to do with politics.

Ah, so you actually ARE putting a few more conditions on who you want here.

Granted. But what system do you think would be free of the effects of human greed, ambition, and lust for power?

Shhhhh! You're not supposed to mention that!

Absolutely! But I hate Jews and homos and all infidels who don't worship God as I do and want them to DIE! I hate their guts and everything about their lack of morals and their filthy whore women who are only fit to be raped and used by godly men like me! I also have no intention of getting a job since your degenerate society will pay me money to stay home and have many children I will teach to believe as I do in the new world Caliphate where all who think and worship differently will be executed! Where's my passport, you infidel swine!?

Okay. But even if we accept that do you believe it's wise to implement similar policies today? I mean, it was dumb to apply to minorities but it's even dumber to apply to the majority. I thought I had explained it clearly. The vast majority of racialized people in Canada (exempting indigenous people) are immigrants or their children. Why are all our policies designed to benefit them at the expense of white people? Just a minor point of clarification to say that at the time when slavery was legal there was no Canada. This was British colonialism. The number is roughly accurate tho

Do you want a cookie? Weren't people raped in all kinds of settings? Wasn't sexual assault and molestation something society didn't take much interest in? Even date rape was a concept we didn't pay much attention to back in the day. Much less something within the family. There were abuses in every institutional and residential setting, from boy scout campgrounds to boarding schools for the elites, from institutions for the mentally retarded (that used to be a word) to prisons, juvenile detention centres, and even ordinary schools and churches. A responsibility they did to whom? There are 1.5 million blacks in Canada. In the 1971 census there were 30k. Which means something like 95% of blacks in Canada are immigrants or their kids. What 'responsibility' do we have to them? The same rough figures would be applied to Asians. Why do we have 'responsibility' to them? I mean, you can make an argument about indigenous people but no one else.

Describe all systems. ALL. What Capitalism brings with it and Socialism fails, is a general level of economic comfort that allows the majority of people to have at least some disposable income and time.

You're free to move out onto the Arctic tundra if you want. But that's not where immigrants are going. They're going to Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. This whole nonsense about what a big, empty country we are has always been disingenuous since almost everyone lives in a dozen large, urban centres and virtually all immigrants go to those cities. As for our 'minimal internal market', which ignores our free trade agreement with the US, as well as one with the EU, forty million puts us among the largest countries in the world, population wise. There are 36 countries with larger populations and about 160 with smaller populations. And among those with smaller populations are nine out of ten of the world's best places to live.

Why do we need to speak about it? Were any of us there then? Have we not changed so that such behaviour patterns are now extremely unusual and rarely encountered? We don't even have the excuse the American Left is obsessed with, of 'making it up' to groups that suffered under racism. Well, except the natives. But everyone else was only in Canada in very minimal numbers back then. Explain to me the logic of giving institutional preferred admittance, hiring and promotion to immigrants or the children of immigrants in order to 'make it up' to their color group from back in the day when neither they nor their ancestors were even here to 'suffer'.

No. That's not how these screening tests work. Haven't you ever done one for a major company? They ask you a bunch of questions that lead in certain directions but reveal a lot about your personality, interests, and temperament. And the idea these people are so clever and will disguise themselves fails given how easily they lose out in other jurisdictions. Some of them just by refusing to shake hands with a person of the opposite sex. Or we could just give potential immigrants from certain parts of the world a far lower priority than from other parts of the world. That's a blunter tool but it would help a lot.

That we don't have one is because the elites long ago decided it was sinful to think our society, our culture, and values, were in any way superior to anyone else out there. That's what's behind the whole idea of multiculturalism, of telling immigrants not to bother changing or integrating but to retain and take pride in their homegrown culture and values. The problem with this silly-assed view is it has no resemblance to reality. It's the view of the elites who jet around the world but only stay in 5-star hotels, and so airily talk about how we're all equal. But we're not. The demonstrations in the streets should tell us that. Our belief in tolerance is not the general belief out there. Even what we consider bigotry or racism is laughably minor compared to the bigotry and racism that is mainstream in most of the countries that are our major sources of immigrants. The spirit of compromise is another strong Canadian cultural trait that many parts of the world don't have in their cultural fabric at all. In much of the world it's "I win, you lose" as much as possible. Between individuals and between groups. And the huge numbers of people coming here are coming from countries whose cultures are incredibly corrupt from top to bottom and everywhere in between. That's not something we really want or need to import either. Look at this story. This demonstrates the degree of blithe, unreasoning hatred for Jews in the Arab world, and the near complete lack of concern for what we in the West would consider civilized behavior. I know there are people here who hate to generalize on an entire people, and I'm sure there are Muslims out there in the wide world who don't hate Jews, but they appear to be a distinct minority. And even the ones not much inclined to rape and murder them seem to be comfortable with applauding those who do. And if you think the survey would be much different if it asked people in Pakistan or Indonesia or Malaysia, well, I have my doubts. So thanks, but no thanks. I don't want these people in my country. And I don't care if screening would fail to get many. It would get most. These are not terribly sophisticated people. And that's the beauty of it. The more sophisticated you are the less likely you'd be to have the kind of mentality we don't want. A recent survey of 8,000 Arabs across 16 Middle East and North African nations, including Jordan, showed overwhelming support for Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre. Around two-thirds of respondents said the terror attacks in southern Israel were a “legitimate resistance operation”; 19% said that the massacre was a “somewhat flawed but legitimate resistance operation.”

Agreed. What good is it? What good would it be even if the appeals fail? The time for the courts to step in and put a stop to an unconstitutional act in progress would have been THEN, not now, long after the fact.

Economics is still the only reason for calling for reduced immigration that is acceptable to the mainstream media. Note, not even sound economic reasons broadly supported across Canada are enough to persuade even a single politician in English Canada to suggest reducing immigration. Not one. That's how tightly policed opinion is among the elites. To suggest there might be cultural reasons, concern for the kind of people we are, our values and beliefs, that we might want to protect that and only bring in as many immigrants as we can integrate - that's still completely forbidden in the mainstream. Although that would be absolutely mainstream in almost every other country in the world. But here, the elites have made any belief in the worth of Canada's values, culture and historical institutions akin to worship of Adolph Hitler, a clear sign of white nationalism and white supremacy.

You onl y think that because you're not paying attention. The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next. Abraham Lincoln We can already see the attitudes of younger Canadians influenced by this kind of thing. They have less respect for freedom of speech, and half of them want Socialism as their preferred economic system.

Stephen Rosner Bronfman (born 23 January 1964) is a Canadian businessperson, philanthropist, environmental activist and scion of the Bronfman family. He is the Chief Revenue Officer of the Liberal Party of Canada and a senior advisor to Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Bronfman

This is an American cliche. I'm not surprised you believe it since the Left in Canada, particularly the more progressive ones, get ALL their ideological views from their US counterparts. But while this belief might have some substance down south it does not in Canada. You remember Canada? I remember Canada when Jean Chretien decided to make life hard for his successor who he thought had backstabbed him to take his job. So he passed a law that banned political donations from anyone but human beings, and greatly limited those. No more $25k dinners from the Liberals' corporate friends. This bill did no harm to the Tories and only a little to the NDP. It really hammered the Liberals, though. Now stop a moment and consider why that would be. A line in a new report around that time said it very clearly. The Conservatives, and to a lesser extent the NDP got most of their donations in small amounts from large numbers of people. The Liberals, on the other hand, tended to get their donations in large amounts from a much smaller base. It has long been the Liberal party that the corporate world embraced, and who embraced them in return. The influence of the Desmarais' and Irvings and Bronfmans in particular, has been deep and powerful. I believe one of the Bronfmans is still their head fund raiser.

Mmm, no. It started with the universities and their marxist views on equity instead of equality, the 'oppression' and 'racism' of western Capitalist countries, including Canada and their consistent indoctrination of students in a wider and wider number of courses. This viewpoint that merit didn't count, that European, ie, White culture, values and history were ripe with evil and racism and colonialism and oppression has been spread by graduates throughout the elite classes. They have been especially successful in academia, media and government. Notably, these are the areas where people of marginal talent who shrink from competition, and who would most desire a system which ignores merit would prosper and even thrive. Thus we get these leftist loonies with the power at Parks Canada to decide they'll change the story of Anne of Green Gables because the writer was a purveyor of colonialist white oppression'. We get children at schools being taught that white people are all racist and oppressors and everyone else is a victim. We get drag queens reading to children and a law that says any man who decides tomorrow that they're a girl is welcome in girls swimming pool change rooms. Not to mention a prime minister whose every statement and policy is full of virtue signaling and kowtowing to various BIPOC groups as he whines about Canada's systemic racism. The corporate world might have embraced all this out of cowardly virtue signaling but they didn't come up with it. You guys did.

That's a part of it. But I think we let oligopolies and duopolies take over much of our corporate sector, and their influence with government became greater and greater. And what they wanted, since they catered to a homegrown customer base, were more customers. Rogers and Bell can't sell more and more phones unless there's more and more people. And it's not like they can export their service to New York. Loblaws isn't opening new stores in Main. TD might be buying up banks in other countries but to expand HERE they need more people. So they got more people. The cheap and easy way. Through political influence. And it's not like they had to pay much. The politicians decided back in the 1980s that immigration was a way to bring in voters who would be loyal to them, if they brought in the right kind, and then came Trudeau, who not only liked the idea of importing Liberal voters but fell under the influence of people like the Century Initiative's Dominic Barton, who represents those big corporate interests. I don't know any Canadians who, back in 1967, Canada's centenary, thought it would be a good idea to flood the country with so many immigrants that the population would double and immigrants would become the majority of the population just in their lifetime. This was not what the people wanted. This is entirely a policy driven by the elites.

This kind of ridiculous twaddle could never originate with anyone who isn't left wing. And no government not looking to ingratiate itself with the Left would ever publish it. “Gender binary is a colonial and white supremacist structure rather than a natural and indisputable truth,” it stated, before linking to a couple of online blog posts and CBC articles as evidence. “Because of colonialism, gender in Ontario and Canada, and specifically in the education system, still tends to be understood in binary terms or as being on either end of this ‘spectrum,’ or somewhere in between it,” it lamented. “European settlers forced their rigid views on gender upon the civilizations they invaded, reforming Indigenous gender roles through colonial restrictions as a tool to align patriarchal family and kinship structures that mirrored the privileged European family systems during the time of invasion.” “Every single student needs to learn about gender diversity in all areas of the curriculum, inclusive of science and mathematics, and not just in language arts and history,” reads the instruction. “Knowledge about gender diversity in the study of biology is important, for example. Learning about trans and gender diverse communities for their brilliance beyond gender-based activism, survival in the face of violence and transition stories that center linear representations of transition is vital.” https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-trans-affirming-toolkit-tells-teachers-to-put-ideology-above-biology