I am Groot

It's interesting when you read the stories that look beneath the surface of this government's pious pronouncements to see the authoritarianism beneath. Not that surprising from a man who admires China's authoritarianism. These consultations are being marketed like they’re evidence of democracy in action, but that’s not exactly the case when you look under the hood. Previous expert consultations released in July consisted of a handpicked panel that broadly agreed with a censorship regime; further, these experts were paid for their input. In a previous round of online consultations last spring, which also pertained to media regulation, Canadian Heritage deliberately filtered out feedback from individuals who didn’t agree with the Liberals’ “National Action Plan on Combating Hate.” The feedback survey at the heart of these consultations was altered to prevent dissenters, labelled “non-allies” by one public servant, from completing the full set of questions. As has been the habit of Trudeau and his party the new online censorship laws seem primarily designed to appeal to various ethnic identity groups need for 'protection' from 'harm'. And as usual, there's the Liberal party both exaggerating the danger and presenting itself as the glowing white knight there to protect them from the evil white community they must all fear and despise. But once this law is in place how many arrests will we see? Something similar to the UK, perhaps, were thousands are arrested every year for social media comments? Well, if it helps the Liberals get more votes I suppose they figure that's more than worth the cost. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jamie-sarkonak-trudeau-liberals-want-to-treat-adults-like-kids-with-online-harms-bill

Oh, brother. Now Trudeau is jetting off to the Yukon to get his face on TV and act like "MAN IN CHARGE!"

While Trudeau described the object as "unidentified," Maj. Olivier Gallant, a NORAD spokesperson, told The Associated Press that the military had determined what it was but would not reveal details. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/norad-monitoring-airborne-object-north-1.6745575 Wtf? Why hide this? Whoever sent it knows what it was. Was it a friggin balloon or something else? What happened to open, transparent government anyway?

So okay, the media made a big fuss about the first balloon and the US administration was criticized for being so lackadaisical. So I get they shot down a second smaller one right away, except its strange no one is calling it a balloon. So if it's not then what was it? Now Trudeau of all people gives the okay to shoot down a third one over the Yukon. And again we don't have any description of what it was. I mean, a balloon is pretty unmistakable, isn't it? So why not just call it a balloon? And if it's not then wth was it? I don't believe they don't know what it is. Politicians don't okay shooting missiles at thing when you don't know what they are, particularly Trudeau, who's very much the peacenik type. I assume the Americans prodded him to do it, but we don't seem to have any information about why. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-norad-high-altitude-object-canada/

California was never a slave state. It's absurd they want to pay reparations to people for slavery. This seems more like virtue signalling and a desperate desire to show how 'anti racist' the supporters of this nonsense are.

You are imputing an emotionalism to my statements which does not exist. I assume this is some sort of debating tactic? I am using it as an example of the way the Left, and the government in particular works at dividing people. The emphasis the Trudeau government has put on 'celebrating' black history month seems to be driven not by their desire to celebrate whatever contributions Black people may have made to Canada but on dragging out before a receptive progressive media more examples of how Canada was a racist society and how poorly we treated black people. It's another shaming exercise, paid for with our tax dollars. BTW, I did a search on my name and the word 'throat' and found nothing. So I presume you're simply using this to once again suggest a degree of emotionalism - and thus a lower level of rationality - to me here. Another debating tactic on your part. Though not a very honest one. Am I? Have I suggested that discrimination is a good thing? Have I called for white people to be hired ahead of black people or native people? I have not, in fact, made any suggestion about ameliorating the situation, merely pointed out the situation itself. I would presume you would be aware that the most likely remedy I would propose is for governments, including the courts and both public and private corporations to treat everyone equally without regard to race or religion, to hire, promote or give opportunities to people without regard to their race. Stop demonizing Canada and Canadians for things done everywhere in the world and largely done to a much nastier degree than here. Stop holding our ancestors up to modern standards of inclusiveness and tolerance when no one else in the world of that time is held to a similar standard. I would also suggest that we pay careful heed to the social fabric and the need for a sense of shared identity and nationhood, slow down immigration, and work to integrate newcomers into the fabric of Canada, requiring them to not simply move from their own homeland to a large ethnic enclave here if they wanted to ever get citizenship. I think that given the demand for citizenship here vs the available supply we should make it much harder to obtain in order to bring in only the very best.

The social contract is based on largely like-minded people with common values and history helping one another, cooperating, and compromising. But when people stop feeling like their community is full of people like them and is instead full of strangers and those with completely different values, beliefs, interests, and loyalties that social contract frays and breaks. A government report found that Canada's ability to absorb new immigrants was reaching capacity, that ethnic enclaves were growing and more and more immigrants were choosing to not bother learning English or French, just staying among their own kind. The government responded with a huge increase in immigration.

Didn't he go to the UN and apologize for Canada being a racist, genocidal state or something?

It's not about equality. It's about 'equity'.

Which means you filled out some forms, yes? This tells you nothing about how those forms are dealt with on the other end, the amount of time visa officers have to go over them, or what they might or might not be doing to vet those applications. There are lots of test examples online for people to practice with. I doubt it's difficult. Especially since there's no real writing involved. No essays. Just checking boxes. That's not how these tests work. They don't simply ask "Do you think gay people should be killed?" or something equally obvious. Have you ever had a personality test for a job application? They tend to ask a series of psychological questions to garner you're likely attitudes. And yes, you can cheat at any test if you put enough effort in, but we still have tests for everything, now don't we? You might need to pass a two or three hour test to get a job so why is there no test to pass to become a permanent resident of Canada and a simple 20 question checkbox test to become a citizen?

Perhaps. But conservatives don't tend to let go of them quickly or easily. And some of them are useful as touchstones to a common past, a common sense of identity, such as the Royals. That's when we HAD common touchstones and a common past, when we had some identity that made us more of a people. That Trudeau would proudly say we had nothing, no common identity, and weren't a nation ought to have precluded anyone voting for him again. I'd like to see him try to say that to Quebecers. You mistake what I've written. I haven't laid the culture wars at his doorstep. They are indeed being fought all over the anglosphere - and mostly ignored in other countries. This is all American influence. But while Trudeau didn't bring the culture wars here he and the Liberals most definitely saw them as extremely useful to their electoral hopes. Black history month is not a new things under him. The effort being made to publicize it is. Is anything I've written incorrect? What is it you're complaining about here? That I'm pushing back against the Left's attack on Canadian traditions and history, on western culture and values? Should I and others simply ignore it? Ignore the open discrimination? Bill Maher was saying something the other day to the effect that discriminating against a minority produces resentment and an inevitable backlash, but when you're openly discriminating against and denigrating the majority that backlash is going to be a lot more violent. I admit to being human. I admit to being influenced and to resentment over this bullshit. Why shouldn't I?

That's what YOU'RE arguing about. What I'm arguing about discussing is the way the Liberals have used things like Black history month to normalize the division between different races/ethnicities in order to advance their poll numbers.

That answer is like saying every politician is corrupt and dishonest so why pick on Donald Trump. There is bad and then there's awful. The heart of conservatism - and I am a conservative - is a belief, support and pride for the traditions, values, culture and history of your people (which the Liberals know full well). Since Trudeau's culture war is designed to destroy all of that I can hardly not be on the other side of that war, now can I? I mean, this is the main point of his and the Liberals in their identity politics. They know that if they can associate conservatism - with its support for traditions and values - with racism/white superiority/islamophobia/homophobia it increases their electoral chances immeasurably. And it's working, too. Note that Sir John A MacDonald has had his statues torn down everywhere but Sir Wilfred Laurier, who followed him, has largely escaped any condemnation despite his views and actions on natives being arguably worse than MacDonald. At least MacDonald gave some natives the vote (he had wanted all of them to be able to vote but the Liberals fought fiercely against this). Laurier swiftly removed it once in office.

You're not a fool. The cite was a pretty clear example of how government officials don't write things down they don't want people to read. You know that. So I can only regard your response as deliberately disingenuous. And whether I like Trudeau or not is also irrelevant. If you've been following politics at all the last seven years you know very well his desperate efforts on behalf of getting votes from various ethnic/immigrant groups. One of the ways to do that is scare them - which is what this government does every election - and portray himself as their saviour. You appear to be so wholly committed to the multicultural thing that you regard any pushback against it as anathema.

First of all the citizenship test is a different topic from the proposed 'values test' for prospective immigrants. The Citizenship test is for landed immigrants who have been here several years. I would stiffen it, for one thing. Twenty multiple choice/true or false questions? Seriously!? That's it!? I guess we don't value our citizenship very much if that's all you need to do to get it! But the test the candidate (whose name eludes me) proposed for prospective immigrants was an interview where they would be asked questions designed to reveal their tolerance level for things like female equality, female education, gay rights, freedom of speech that offends, respect for other religious groups, etc. They have such tests in Western Europe included with their citizenship tests, and it's not hard to fail them. There have been a few examples of people being refused citizenship for refusing to touch members of the opposite sex (ie, shake the hand of the interviewer). Prospective citizens there are also asked to demonstrate their command of the language and local politics, what they've done since arrival to begin to integrate, to name friends they've made not from their ethnic group, clubs or sports teams they've joined/followed, etc. I don't think that's a bad idea myself.

Where've you been? It's been systemic for many years. It started in academia and quickly spread to government and media, then to other public sector companies and now into the private sector. But it's strongest in academia, which has largely managed to eliminate almost anyone with conservative or even moderate beliefs from its ranks and is intent on indoctrinating the next generation behind them. Witness the clown show that is Dalhousie's law school. Bear in mind these easily outraged little snowflakes will be the people future governments select judges from. https://globalnews.ca/news/9475253/dalhousie-law-students-walkout-racism/

Uh, yeah, I doubt I can either. The fact is we have a performative government whose every effort is directed at one thing; improving its election chances. It has held steady to that obsession since the day it was elected. It does nothing whatsoever without that being the key objective. All this identity war/culture war stuff dividing us is most definitely deliberate on their part. Every appeal, every virtue signal, every dressup performance towards this or that minority group is designed to portray Justin Trudeau as their white knight, ever ready to save them from the big, bad evil lurking outside the reach of his mighty sword of tolerence.

As a matter of fact I do know a director there. But anyone who has kept track of ordinary news here in the last decade knows very well what I said was fact. I remind you, presuming you're old enough, that during the Tory leadership convention which elected Andrew Scheer one candidate dared to propose we interview prospective immigrants and give them a 'values test'. This outraged the entire mainstream media, other candidates, and of course, other parties. Apparently because the outrageous implication was that our own values were somehow better than that of some of the people in Pakistan or Afghanistan. During that certain information came out, some of it quoted from a pro-immigration book written by a professor who had studied the system, which showed almost no one got interviews and that visa officers had only minutes to go through a file before approving or disapproving the application. The facts about the 'test' for immigration are readily available online. It's 20 true or false/multiple choice questions. This media report is a few years old but is from the former head of Immigration Canada, and sets out some of the issues. AFAIK nothing has changed with regard to what he's written here.

Not a bit of it. But that's the clear point of this and similar exercises. This sort of thing is why you have people saying we shouldn't celebrate Canada Day, why statues are pulled down and all references to Canada's history are replete with whiny complaints about how bad our people were. We bring in half a million immigrants a year. We expect them to want to integrate and be a part of the Canadian family, and then we go on endlessly about what a shit family it is, what a shit country it is, and how everything in our country was horrible. And yes, it does work, especially on younger people who are indoctrinated in this garbage by their teachers.

We do not vet immigrants other than giving a cursory look at their educational credentials and checking their names against terrorism watch lists. We do not interview them nor ask them any questions about what they think or believe. Including whether they despise certain types of people or certain practices which might be common in Canada. Once here, the test for citizenship takes about 20 minutes and consists of true or false and multiple choice questions.

Trying to shame people is not a nice thing to do when those people have done nothing to be ashamed of. But you do you.

Why does it matter? It matters because it helps propel the narrative of the Left about what a horrifically awful country Canada is and was. It helps further the view that racism and all sorts of phobias (always context-free) are, above all other things, the means to measure a nation's accomplishments. It helps divide Canadians, instill resentment in black Canadians and tries to shame white Canadians. It propels the vandals and intellectual halfwits pulling down statues and substituting black authors for Chaucer, Shakespeare, Dickens, and Poe, and other great authors who happen to be 'dead white males'. It is used to justify the deliberately racist hiring and promotion practices of government and large corporations and the racist legal practices wherein violent felons are given a tweak on the cheek and pat on the head, and sent out onto the streets to murder people because they happen to be Black. It's all a part and parcel of the building racism in this country brought about by people who despise Capitalism, Western cultural history and the freedoms which underpin democracy.

Is this supposed to mean anything? I'm not denying there were black people in Canada. There were natives, too, and Chinese and Indians. Do they all get their own history month? Black people simply were not numerous enough to be of any importance in Canadian history.

And how many black vets do you imagine we had? The entirety of Canada's black population was about 30k in 1971. It was so low it wasn't even recorded prior to that. I doubt we had more than 10-15k black people in the 1940s. There is no sense to this 'black history month'. We took it from the Americans because our progressives take all their ideas from the Americans. Edit: looked it up. About 600-700 served in construction units. Only bout 100 served on the front lines.