What kind of criteria should immigrants meet?

Machjo · May 18, 2009

I was shocked at some comments in another thread, so I'm putting this out to see what people really think.

Borg · May 18, 2009

I was shocked at some comments in another thread, so I'm putting this out to see what people really think.

Why would you be shocked.

To date many of the minorities we have brought in are becoming anything but welcome - gangs, drugs, and much more - much of it coming from the imported trouble that we are now afraid to deport.

We can we not deal with them because they do not care about our laws - they make their own - and in some cases want us to change to their legal syatem.

What is it now - something like 40,000 people ordered deported from Canada and they cannot even be found?

Seems you lead a rather protected / sheltered life - why would anyone want that type of person in this country?

All brought to you in the name of cultural diversity - thanks to the damned liberals and their supporters - something that many here support.

Hell, many who immigrate will not support cultural diversity - and you will tell me I am the racist.

One does not have to be white to be a racist.

Import trouble and you will have a poor country. Import people who want to be Canadian and you will have a country.

Borg

Edited May 18, 2009 by Borg

Wild Bill · May 19, 2009

I was shocked at some comments in another thread, so I'm putting this out to see what people really think.

I'm glad to see you changed your questions! In your other attempts ALL options included racial criteria!

Talk about rigging poll results!

I think some folks are hypersensitive to the fact that certain areas of the world DO have a crime problem and DO send us immigrants who are not desirable!

I have one friend and workmate from Jamaica who told me that there is one part of Jamaica where all the 'undesirables' live, heavy on crime and violence. He brought his family to Canada to avoid all that. Now he sees other Jamaicans in Canada who came from that part of the island everyday. He firmly believes that they are undesirables and are still engaged in their old habits. I have to accept that he has a closer perspective than I do but nonetheless, I don't find it logical to assume that EVERYONE who lives in a bad part of town is bad themselves! Some folks are just poor! There's no shame in that.

There was also a newspaper account last year of a woman who was a refugee from war-torn Sudan. She had fled armed gangs who raped and killed people in vast numbers. She had had family members murdered and been raped herself. She got her family out and brought them to Canada, where they started a new life.

She was living in St. Catherines, Ontario and one day in a supermarket she looked up across an aisle to see one of the high ranking officers of those "death squads" she had fled from her home country! Apparently, he was one of those who had raped her! She tried to get some answers from the "system" as to how this fellow could have been allowed into Canada but to no avail. So she went to the press.

Anecdotal evidence is not of high value but when there's a LOT of smoke the chances are good we have a fire! What these stories tell us is that the REAL problem with Immigration Canada is not that they have racial quotas that some would disagree with for racist reasons!

Rather, the problem is that Immigration Canada must be very poor at screening new immigrants, particularly with the refugee backlog.

I guess we should be thankful that Idi Amin never applied to come to Canada.

Edited May 19, 2009 by Wild Bill

Machjo · May 19, 2009

I'm glad to see you changed your questions! In your other attempts all options included racial criteria!
Talk about rigging poll results!

Sorry, I don't know what happened there. Anyway, it's fixed now. Strange though. In the other thread we were reading some pretty racist comments about immigrants, yet when the question is posed directly in a poll, they quickly shy away.

Wild Bill · May 19, 2009

Sorry, I don't know what happened there. Anyway, it's fixed now. Strange though. In the other thread we were reading some pretty racist comments about immigrants, yet when the question is posed directly in a poll, they quickly shy away.

Perhaps you're too quick to label someone who disagrees with you as a racist! Some of those posts were observations the poster had made about how there seems to be higher percentages of some races in certain situations than others.

For instance, I think it might have been Argus who make the point that in the poorer and more crime ridden parts of some towns we tend to see a much higher number of visible minority immigrant faces.

This is NOT a racist comment if the numbers bear it out! If we take in too many immigrants who are from poor third world countries and for what ever reasons including education are unable to find jobs then you don't have to be a racist or even a rocket scientist to expect them to end up in those areas.

Still, the fault would be ours. We should have screened them better. However, many of them are no doubt refugees and you can't expect refugees to all be engineers. Obviously they are not getting enough support to help them fit in.

I'm cynical enough to believe that is because the Liberal government got the photo-op when those poor people entered the country and after that lost interest in them.

Anyhow, perhaps you might be a bit too quick to dismiss someone who merely disagrees with you as simply a racist. I know it makes a quick and easy rebuttal but it's really not a positive step towards arriving at any sort of truth. Someone can vote to only have competence based criteria for entry yet believe there are an excessive number of Jamaicans involved in crime around Jane & Finch in Toronto.

They may be WRONG when we look at true statistics but their observation is NOT necessarily racist!

Moonbox · May 19, 2009

What these stories tell us is that the REAL problem with Immigration Canada is not that they have racial quotas that some would disagree with for racist reasons!

I think this is EXACTLY our problem. Having racial quotas is a form of racism in and of itself. I'm not saying that we should only be bringing white anglo-saxons into Canada, I'm saying that requiring us to accept some abstractly generated number of people from "X" ethic group is drastically limiting our abilities to bring qualified and productive immigrants into our country. By using these 'quotas' you're basically saying, "Sorry, this MORE qualified applicant is being turned down because he doesn't belong to 'X' ethnic group." That's the very definition of racism and it brings affirmative action to an all new low.

Machjo · May 19, 2009

I think this is EXACTLY our problem. Having racial quotas is a form of racism in and of itself. I'm not saying that we should only be bringing white anglo-saxons into Canada, I'm saying that requiring us to accept some abstractly generated number of people from "X" ethic group is drastically limiting our abilities to bring qualified and productive immigrants into our country. By using these 'quotas' you're basically saying, "Sorry, this MORE qualified applicant is being turned down because he doesn't belong to 'X' ethnic group." That's the very definition of racism and it brings affirmative action to an all new low.

OK, now this is where there might have been a misunderstanding. I certainly oppose any kind of quota, be it based on race, ethnicity, religion, etc.

Essentially, it should be an objective standard that all applicants must meet. He who meets it, meets it; he who doesn't, doesn't. Of course this would limit immigration to English and French speaking applicants, thus meaning that we'd be accepting more immigrants from former British or French colonies, naturrally. This would not necessarily be based on race though. As I'd mentioned before, a Phillipino is more 'Americanized' in terms of language, education, religion and culture than even a German on average. this would naturally mean that we'd likely get more immigrants from Hong Kong than Macao, or Jamaica than Algeria, simply owing to the language test.

Having said that, though, if an individual Phillipino's English is poor and has minimal education, while a German is fluent in English or French and has an engineering degree, certainly we should accept the German and not the Phillipino. Again, he who meets the standards gets in, the rest don't. It ought to be completely colour-blind.

The furthest that I could tolerate race-based preference might be if two candidates are equally qualified for a job and so we give it to the visible minority. But that should only come as a tie-breaker... and even that is something I'd feel uncomfortable with. I'm just saying that if we are going to give any race-based preference, that's the furthest we should go.

Wild Bill · May 19, 2009

"There is only ONE race! The human race!

And so say we all!"

---Cmdr. Adama of Battlestar Galactica

sharkman · May 19, 2009

I read down the poll questions looking for something that would check criminal activity, that would be my highest priority, next being skills/career criteria. However, we should always have room for those fleeing state sanctioned evil of any kind.

Moonbox · May 19, 2009

Having said that, though, if an individual Phillipino's English is poor and has minimal education, while a German is fluent in English or French and has an engineering degree, certainly we should accept the German and not the Phillipino. Again, he who meets the standards gets in, the rest don't. It ought to be completely colour-blind.
The furthest that I could tolerate race-based preference might be if two candidates are equally qualified for a job and so we give it to the visible minority. But that should only come as a tie-breaker... and even that is something I'd feel uncomfortable with. I'm just saying that if we are going to give any race-based preference, that's the furthest we should go.

Well you and I are on the exact same page then.

The problem with immigration, unfortunately, is that the German engineer's application is stuck behind about 5 million refugee applications and by the time his is even looked at, he's moved to Australia or somewhere instead.

We need to be able to get THROUGH the applications faster and let the qualified immigrants, no matter what their race, move to this country before we even START to look at the poorly-educated and unskilled ones.

I don't care what race or ethnicity the person comes from, providing they can show us their background qualifications. Language is almost secondary, because a qualified and/or educated worker with a background of work history likely has the motivation to learn quickly.

Our problem is that we accept TOTALLY unqualified applicants in the first place. No skills, no work background, no language skills and no education should = Decline. Period.

Muddy · May 19, 2009

I am all for honest hard working immigrants coming to Canada and I could care less their colour ,religion or race. What I do have a problem with is those who wish to impose their culture on Canadians. I have no time for those who wish to carry on the wars and prejudices of their old country. Have a look at the Tamil Tigers here. Enough said. It was not until Trudeau that this country got into the multicultural business that separated us into gettoes. Official multiculturism is a failure. Immigrants who once came to these shores did not go off and fight against fellow Canadians. We also don`t need pretend Canadians who go home to places like Lebanon and expect when the balloon goes up that the rest of us have to rescue them. Come here and welcome all ,but darn it accept the existing culture.

wyly · May 19, 2009

I am all for honest hard working immigrants coming to Canada and I could care less their colour ,religion or race. What I do have a problem with is those who wish to impose their culture on Canadians.

imposing their culture on Canadians, do we have a Canadian culture?, our culture is creation of all the ethnic groups that have come here, this normal for any country cultures change even in ethnically homogenous countries....

I have no time for those who wish to carry on the wars and prejudices of their old country.

well that's a bit unfair as our governments representing us has no qualms interfering in other countries domestic affairs...

Have a look at the Tamil Tigers here. Enough said. It was not until Trudeau that this country got into the multicultural business that separated us into gettoes. Official multiculturism is a failure. Immigrants who once came to these shores did not go off and fight against fellow Canadians.

multiculturalism gave immigrants an equal footing with anglo immigrants, descrimination against non Brits was very real in Canada, we're a better country because of multiculturalism...we had prior to Trudeau a country with 2 classes of citizenship...

We also don`t need pretend Canadians who go home to places like Lebanon and expect when the balloon goes up that the rest of us have to rescue them. Come here and welcome all ,but darn it accept the existing culture.

once you're a Canadian you have the right to live where you wish, there are over a half million Canadians living in the USA right now do you have a problem with them or is just those in Lebanon?

Machjo · May 19, 2009

I read down the poll questions looking for something that would check criminal activity, that would be my highest priority, next being skills/career criteria. However, we should always have room for those fleeing state sanctioned evil of any kind.

I could certainly agree with a criminal record check as part of the criteria, and it probably is already anyway, or so it ought to be.

As for refugees, I'd limit it to those fleeing from existentialist persecution, not actionalist. If a person is persecuted for his Faith or what he is, then yes. But if he's persecuted for what he's done or for his involvement in political activities, no matter how noble the cause, then no, otherwise it's too easy for a person to purposely go out of his way to try to attract persecution to himself as a pretext to immigrate.

Machjo · May 19, 2009

Well you and I are on the exact same page then.
The problem with immigration, unfortunately, is that the German engineer's application is stuck behind about 5 million refugee applications and by the time his is even looked at, he's moved to Australia or somewhere instead.

We need to be able to get THROUGH the applications faster and let the qualified immigrants, no matter what their race, move to this country before we even START to look at the poorly-educated and unskilled ones.

I don't care what race or ethnicity the person comes from, providing they can show us their background qualifications. Language is almost secondary, because a qualified and/or educated worker with a background of work history likely has the motivation to learn quickly.

Our problem is that we accept TOTALLY unqualified applicants in the first place. No skills, no work background, no language skills and no education should = Decline. Period.

Then I apologize if there was a misunderstanding before. I do agree that to be fair to the candidates, we do have a responsibility and a duty towards them to inform them on government website in both English and French of the precicely defined objective standards that must be met to enter Canada. This way, before paying the fees for the interview and tests, etc., he can know in advance by looking at whether or not he meets said criteria. Also, this avoids problems down the road. If he's refused entry, we have the duty to inform him of why he's been refused along with a referense to the website to check it out for himself. If he meet the criteria, then he knows even before the interview that he'll be accepted. The textbook for the test could be offered in pdf format along with practice tests. It's up to the applicant to prepare, and no preference is given to anybody, and no quotas. Very simple and straightforard. He meets the objective and high standards, he gets in. He doesn't, he doesn't. Simple as that.

And as for refugees, we should only accept what is required of us in international agreements we may have signed before, no more. We respect our obligations and agreements, but no more than that.

Machjo · May 19, 2009

I am all for honest hard working immigrants coming to Canada and I could care less their colour ,religion or race. What I do have a problem with is those who wish to impose their culture on Canadians. I have no time for those who wish to carry on the wars and prejudices of their old country. Have a look at the Tamil Tigers here. Enough said. It was not until Trudeau that this country got into the multicultural business that separated us into gettoes. Official multiculturism is a failure. Immigrants who once came to these shores did not go off and fight against fellow Canadians. We also don`t need pretend Canadians who go home to places like Lebanon and expect when the balloon goes up that the rest of us have to rescue them. Come here and welcome all ,but darn it accept the existing culture.

I could agree with the principle that once abroad, a Canadian citizenis on his own. Travel at your own risk and buy insurance. As for the Tamil Tigers, if our government was taking sides in that war, then I could see passions flaring up. But if our government is minding its own business re: Sri lanka, then the Tamils need to accept that it's not our fight.

As for 'multi-culturalism', any country needs a common coulture. Sure it's possible for people to be bicutural in the national culture plus their own. But to have no common culture leads to chaos, and that's wha we're witnessing now. We have many cultures, but no common culture.

Machjo · May 19, 2009

imposing their culture on Canadians, do we have a Canadian culture?, our culture is creation of all the ethnic groups that have come here, this normal for any country cultures change even in ethnically homogenous countries....

I can agree with the point that Canada has never had a common culture, and that has always been a problem. In that repect, we can't blam Trudeau for it. All he'd done was acknowlede it, though he did make things worse by doing that. Instead, he should have acknowledged that Canada needs to develop a common culture.

well that's a bit unfair as our governments representing us has no qualms interfering in other countries domestic affairs...

This I agree with too. If our government sticks its nose in other countries' affairs, then it's asking for a response from us. If the government takes a side, then so do we, and in a democracy, there's no guarantee it'll be the same side. This is what the UN is for. If the feds have an issue with another country, bring it up at the UN and deal with it through the UN according to UN resolutions.

multiculturalism gave immigrants an equal footing with anglo immigrants, descrimination against non Brits was very real in Canada, we're a better country because of multiculturalism...we had prior to Trudeau a country with 2 classes of citizenship...

There's still plenty of racism in Canada today. As for respecting individual cultures, I can agree with that, and I think the intentions of multiculturalism were good. But it was flawed in that while we can each bask in our own individual cultures, a common culture is also needed to allow us to understand one another. This balance between multiculturalism and national integration can only be achieved through biculturalism in the individual culture and the national one.

once you're a Canadian you have the right to live where you wish, there are over a half million Canadians living in the USA right now do you have a problem with them or is just those in Lebanon?

Canadians can live wherever they want, but once outside our borders, they're responsible to fend for themselves and find their own way home. No freedom without responsibility. They go hand in hand.

g_bambino · May 20, 2009

It was not until Trudeau that this country got into the multicultural business that separated us into gettoes.

Actually, I think Canada's been separated into ghettoes for centuries before Trudeau showed up. There were at least three, originally. The difference is that now there's more instead of less.

_{[ed. to correct #]}

Edited May 20, 2009 by g_bambino

Machjo · May 20, 2009

And somebody actually voted to introduce racial criteria. Should I be surpised?

Edited May 20, 2009 by Machjo

Leafless · May 20, 2009

Actually, I think Canada's been separated into ghettoes for centuries before Trudeau showed up. There were at least three, originally. The difference is that now there's more instead of less.
_{[ed. to correct #]}

What a terrible and unpatriotic thing to say.

CANADIEN · May 20, 2009

Why would you be shocked.
To date many of the minorities we have brought in are becoming anything but welcome - gangs, drugs, and much more - much of it coming from the imported trouble that we are now afraid to deport.

We can we not deal with them because they do not care about our laws - they make their own - and in some cases want us to change to their legal syatem.

What is it now - something like 40,000 people ordered deported from Canada and they cannot even be found?

Seems you lead a rather protected / sheltered life - why would anyone want that type of person in this country?

All brought to you in the name of cultural diversity - thanks to the damned liberals and their supporters - something that many here support.

Hell, many who immigrate will not support cultural diversity - and you will tell me I am the racist.

One does not have to be white to be a racist.

Import trouble and you will have a poor country. Import people who want to be Canadian and you will have a country.

Borg

The MAJORITY of immigrants are not criminals.

The MAJORITY of immigrants do work for a livng.

The MAJORITY of immigrants obey our laws.

The MAJORITY of immigrants want to be Canadians.

Machjo · May 20, 2009

Actually, I think Canada's been separated into ghettoes for centuries before Trudeau showed up. There were at least three, originally. The difference is that now there's more instead of less.
_{[ed. to correct #]}

Just the Firt Nations and Inuit alone can be divided into many distinct cultural communities, each with their own language and culture, and possibly spiritual paths. Then some Vikings arrived on the East coast in around AD1000. Then in 1497 John Cabot explored the Atlantic Coast. Jaques Cartier in 1534. Soon afterwards, colonization begins. Then the Franco-British Wars. Then futher colonization from all over Europe, soon to be followed African slaves, and by Asians (remember the chinee building the Trans-Canada Railway). Then large-scale migration after the European Wars again. When has there not been constant cultural shifts going on on this continent for the last 400 years and more? Essentially cultural change and immigation is now a part of a well-established tradition going back hundreds of years on this continent. It certainly did not just appear when Trudeau showed up.

Looking at it that way, trying to stop immigration is anti-traditionalist, ironically enough.

Machjo · May 20, 2009

Borg, I'm starting to get the impression that you believe that Canada had been wall-to-wall caucasian since the time of Adam and Eve and that suddenly, once Trudeau was in power, poof, out of nowhere Canada suddenly had all these cultures to contend with. Multi-culturalism in Canada is nothing new. Have you ever read Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. His first chapter elaborates on the cultural diversity of the Roman Empire of the time. All large territorial bodies throughout history have always been multicultural. Even smaller ones like Poland. Did you know China has 56 officially recognized ethnic groups?

Here's a picture of a typical Western Chinese girl:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Uyghur_girl.jpg

In fact, did you know that in Eastern China, such people are sometimes discriminated against and thought of as thieves?

Russia, India, Arabic countries, they're all bursting at the seems with different cultural groups. The question is, how they handle it. Some handle it well, others don't. But the fact is that human migration has been going on ever sinse the first man started on a treck for better pastures. Nothing new under the sun.

Edited May 20, 2009 by Machjo

g_bambino · May 20, 2009

When has there not been constant cultural shifts going on on this continent for the last 400 years and more? Essentially cultural change and immigation is now a part of a well-established tradition going back hundreds of years on this continent. It certainly did not just appear when Trudeau showed up.

Well, I was thinking specifically of Canada, and further focused on its origins; so the three original "ghettoes" were the First Nations' communities, and the British and French colonies. You're correct that from then on, more varieties arrived here and created not-so-vaguely defined ethnic enclaves; the Dutch in Ontario, the Polish in Saskatchewan, the Sikhs in Vancouver... Still, these pre-Trudeau clots of similarly cultivated people don't seem as forced and enforced as the ethnic-towns in our cities today; they seemed more spontaneous and transmutable rather than like a controlled product of an experiment in social engineering.

g_bambino · May 20, 2009

Multi-culturalism in Canada is nothing new.

Multiculturalism is not. Official multiculturalism, however, is.

As well intended as it was, I'm not sure it's turned out to have been all that successful. As I understand it, multiculturalism was defined in legislation following the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, and thus "multi" was only originally meant to be "dual" or "bi". Over the ensuing decades, the original intent was stretched to fit every single possible permeation of human culture, to questionable results.

As evidence, though, that multiculturalism isn't new in Canada, here's an interesting cartoon from 1911.

_{[ed. to add]}

Edited May 20, 2009 by g_bambino

Smallc · May 20, 2009

I think that, more than anything, no matter whether or not we like or dislike multiculturalism, the line below is what really matters...and I think that for many of us, it's still true. Canadians are patriotic people...if not in the usual sense of the world. So many of us live in nearly complete satisfaction with our country...despite our small complaints. We should never forget the line \/\/\/

"Let us be English or let us be French . . . and above all let us be Canadians." - Sir John Alexander MacDonald

Edited May 20, 2009 by Smallc