Is this really racism

[Phred Dobbs]

             British commentator Douglas Murray has pointed out the seriously flawed double standard of the Muslim community- and his remarks are pertinent not just in Britain but around the world- including in Canada. Murray pointed out that Muslim girls of 16 and up are often ordered out of school by their devout parents and married off to older Muslim men in forced marriages according to Sharia Law. 

Murray points out that if 16 year old blond and blue eyed girls were being forced out of school and compelled to sexually serve an aged husband against her will - the Liberal world would be outraged! And yet our staunch feminist PM Justin has NOTHING to say about this!

Just as there are apologists for Islam- so there were apologists for Nazism and Communism. 

For instance- our Liberal prime minister Mackenzie King travelled to Germany and met- one on one with Hitler in 1936. King came back to Canada to tell parliament that “Hitler is a dour but basically good man who is bringing some much needed hope and discipline to the German people”! King went on to denounce Winston Churchill as a “warmonger and rabble rouser” for his hostility to Nazism!

Our Liberal prime minister Pierre Trudeau made a series of fiery speeches denouncing the war against Nazi Germany as “British Imperialism”!

During the Cdn conscription crisis of 1942, Pierre Trudeau told us that any Cdn politician who supported conscription “should be hanged” and Trudeau publicly volunteered to tie the hang mans knot!

In the 1930`s a series of famous journalists toured the Soviet Union and came back extolling the virtues of the Soviet state- without every having noticed that Stalin was in the process of deliberately starving 8 million Ukrainians to death because they held awkward political views! 

Journalists on the left also scoffed at the existence of the Soviet re-education camp system that treated political prisoners to a daily diet of beatings, exposure to frostbite, semi starvation and disease. Journalists scoffed when British stevedores unloading shipments of Russian lumber- cut by Gulag inmates- were repulsed by the number of severed fingers, toes, hands and feet that turned up in the shipments.

Before he was prime minister, Pierre Trudeau travelled to Red China and somehow managed to avoid spotting the vast Soviet style Chinese Gulags that murdered tens of millions of people. In fact - Pierre heaped fawning praise on Chairman Mao for “his genius in rushing 30 million Chinese to the gallows’ in the Great Leap Forward! Which does suggest that Pierre was well aware of the murderous Chinese gulags!

Our Muddle Liberal prime minister Justin has told us “he likes the way Chinese communists get things done”! Does Justin also approve of the way Chinese communists write the history and totally control ALL aspects of Chinese life to rthe point where you can be shot for disagreeing with the Party?

Sacha Trudeau has told us that bloody handed Cuban Soviet dictator Castro was a very close family friend of the entire Trudeau family- what sort of values must one have to call a torturer and dictator a “close family friend” ?

And what sort of family values do the Trudeau`s hold that would encourage Sacha Trudeau to tell us in an open letter that dictator “Castro was the greatest South American leader of the 20th century- and far superior to any elected leader”?  

There are apologists for all manner of vile dictators just as there are apologists for radical Islam. We should shout down and shut down ALL the apologists- such people should NOT be allowed to hold public office in a democracy!

Cdns deplore racist propaganda- of any stripe. For instance we FIRED an Alberta high school teacher for being a Holocaust denier and for inciting hate against Jews. We deported German born immigrant Ernst Zundel because he was a Holocaust denier who persisted in handing out anti Jewish literature that incited hate of Jews. So why then is our muddled Pm Justin IGNORING Muslim Imams who are inciting hate against gays by telling us gays are sinners and that it is okay to kill gays so they will not be able to sin in future? And why is our muddled PM Justin who THINKS he is a feminist- ignoring Muslim immigrants who want to impose Sharia Law on us? After all, Sharia Law would gut about half our current constitution and turn Cdn women into property- not even able to leave the house without permission from hubby and without a suitable male relative as escort! Do Liberals even understand the word HYPOCRITE?

[taxme]

On 6/22/2017 at 3:54 AM, Michael Hardner said:

It has made headlines in England - I saw the video from the Daily Mail feed I think.  I'm sorry your sensibilities have been offended, but maybe now you can wake up to see that people find these views unacceptable.  I think you may have learned something outside whatever bubble you get your news from.

There's no whatever reason here.  There's no doubt.  She was clearly stupid, and yes racist.  Sorry but people just don't share your views anymore.  You can open your eyes to that, or blame the media for it - that's your choice.

 

The other night I was listening to Tucker on FOX news and he was questioning and was very wondering as to why the liberal media never reports on the many white people shot and wounded or killed by the police in America. He quoted the figure of 457 white people that have already been shot in the past couple of years in America by the police but yet we never see the American liberal media make a big deal out of it. The only time the American MSM goes crazy on killings is when some white cop shoots and kills some black person.

Why do you think this is so? Just asking.  

[turningrite]

On 6/8/2018 at 4:12 PM, taxme said:

The other night I was listening to Tucker on FOX news and he was questioning and was very wondering as to why the liberal media never reports on the many white people shot and wounded or killed by the police in America. He quoted the figure of 457 white people that have already been shot in the past couple of years in America by the police but yet we never see the American liberal media make a big deal out of it. The only time the American MSM goes crazy on killings is when some white cop shoots and kills some black person.

Why do you think this is so? Just asking.  

In my opinion, the situation you point to illustrates the degree to which many on both sides of the ideological divide fall into the trap of what's called "bias confirmation," whereby they seek examples to justify their own pre-existing perceptions and views. Interestingly, this has become a particular specialty of the left in recent years. I suspect that in the U.S. proportionately more blacks than whites are shot by police. Part of the reason is, no doubt, racial bias. But another aspect, often ignored on one side of the debate, is that blacks are more likely to come into conflict with law enforcement officers. There are many reasons, including economic circumstances, to explain this, but activists tend to cherry-pick incidents to justify the validity of their chosen beliefs. This approach can backfire, however, as was the case in the hysterically reported attack on a young school girl's hijab in Toronto several months ago. It turned out, as the police later confirmed, that no such attack had occurred even though it garnered national and international attention and inspired calls at the highest levels for a further crackdown on the largely supposed menace of "Islamophobia,"  an effort that mainly seems to focus on placing increasing restrictions on free speech. Agendas too often overtake facts in much of this.

[taxme]

3 hours ago, turningrite said:

In my opinion, the situation you point to illustrates the degree to which many on both sides of the ideological divide fall into the trap of what's called "bias confirmation," whereby they seek examples to justify their own pre-existing perceptions and views. Interestingly, this has become a particular specialty of the left in recent years. I suspect that in the U.S. proportionately more blacks than whites are shot by police. Part of the reason is, no doubt, racial bias. But another aspect, often ignored on one side of the debate, is that blacks are more likely to come into conflict with law enforcement officers. There are many reasons, including economic circumstances, to explain this, but activists tend to cherry-pick incidents to justify the validity of their chosen beliefs. This approach can backfire, however, as was the case in the hysterically reported attack on a young school girl's hijab in Toronto several months ago. It turned out, as the police later confirmed, that no such attack had occurred even though it garnered national and international attention and inspired calls at the highest levels for a further crackdown on the largely supposed menace of "Islamophobia,"  an effort that mainly seems to focus on placing increasing restrictions on free speech. Agendas too often overtake facts in much of this.

I only wanted to inform members here that it is not only black people that are being shot and killed by white or black policeman/woman. 457 white people being shot by the police in one year is not a small number to overlook and avoid not to want to mention those killings. But the liberal media will never willing report anything about how many white people are shot and killed by the police. This needs to be reported not hidden. This is just another case of who cares what happens to white people. They all are only a bunch of racist nothings. 

I do not believe that the shooting of black people has anything to do with racial bias but more to do with the crime that those blacks were committing at the time they got shot for it. It is quite obvious that the liberal MSM is being racially bias here alright against reporting on white people who get shot by the police. You have so called black leaders like the Reverend Jackson and Al Sharpton who never talk about how many blacks are killing blacks every year and appear to not give much of a dam about it. But let some white cop shoot a black man and they go ballistic and even the MSM appear to want to go ballistic over it also. The liberal MSM appears to always enjoy trying to stir up trouble. Why do they have to mention race anyway? Why not just say a man who was committing a crime was shot and killed by police. Why always bring in race or color here? 

Indeed the liberal media and even our dear leader PM got their azzes kicked over that false report about reported by that lying Muslim woman. The media and the PM just could not wait to make and turn the incident into a racist story. It backfired on them. That sure looked good on them alright. 

[taxme]

On 3/24/2018 at 7:04 AM, Phred Dobbs said:

             British commentator Douglas Murray has pointed out the seriously flawed double standard of the Muslim community- and his remarks are pertinent not just in Britain but around the world- including in Canada. Murray pointed out that Muslim girls of 16 and up are often ordered out of school by their devout parents and married off to older Muslim men in forced marriages according to Sharia Law. 

Murray points out that if 16 year old blond and blue eyed girls were being forced out of school and compelled to sexually serve an aged husband against her will - the Liberal world would be outraged! And yet our staunch feminist PM Justin has NOTHING to say about this!

Just as there are apologists for Islam- so there were apologists for Nazism and Communism. 

For instance- our Liberal prime minister Mackenzie King travelled to Germany and met- one on one with Hitler in 1936. King came back to Canada to tell parliament that “Hitler is a dour but basically good man who is bringing some much needed hope and discipline to the German people”! King went on to denounce Winston Churchill as a “warmonger and rabble rouser” for his hostility to Nazism!

Our Liberal prime minister Pierre Trudeau made a series of fiery speeches denouncing the war against Nazi Germany as “British Imperialism”!

During the Cdn conscription crisis of 1942, Pierre Trudeau told us that any Cdn politician who supported conscription “should be hanged” and Trudeau publicly volunteered to tie the hang mans knot!

In the 1930`s a series of famous journalists toured the Soviet Union and came back extolling the virtues of the Soviet state- without every having noticed that Stalin was in the process of deliberately starving 8 million Ukrainians to death because they held awkward political views! 

Journalists on the left also scoffed at the existence of the Soviet re-education camp system that treated political prisoners to a daily diet of beatings, exposure to frostbite, semi starvation and disease. Journalists scoffed when British stevedores unloading shipments of Russian lumber- cut by Gulag inmates- were repulsed by the number of severed fingers, toes, hands and feet that turned up in the shipments.

Before he was prime minister, Pierre Trudeau travelled to Red China and somehow managed to avoid spotting the vast Soviet style Chinese Gulags that murdered tens of millions of people. In fact - Pierre heaped fawning praise on Chairman Mao for “his genius in rushing 30 million Chinese to the gallows’ in the Great Leap Forward! Which does suggest that Pierre was well aware of the murderous Chinese gulags!

Our Muddle Liberal prime minister Justin has told us “he likes the way Chinese communists get things done”! Does Justin also approve of the way Chinese communists write the history and totally control ALL aspects of Chinese life to rthe point where you can be shot for disagreeing with the Party?

Sacha Trudeau has told us that bloody handed Cuban Soviet dictator Castro was a very close family friend of the entire Trudeau family- what sort of values must one have to call a torturer and dictator a “close family friend” ?

And what sort of family values do the Trudeau`s hold that would encourage Sacha Trudeau to tell us in an open letter that dictator “Castro was the greatest South American leader of the 20th century- and far superior to any elected leader”?  

There are apologists for all manner of vile dictators just as there are apologists for radical Islam. We should shout down and shut down ALL the apologists- such people should NOT be allowed to hold public office in a democracy!

Cdns deplore racist propaganda- of any stripe. For instance we FIRED an Alberta high school teacher for being a Holocaust denier and for inciting hate against Jews. We deported German born immigrant Ernst Zundel because he was a Holocaust denier who persisted in handing out anti Jewish literature that incited hate of Jews. So why then is our muddled Pm Justin IGNORING Muslim Imams who are inciting hate against gays by telling us gays are sinners and that it is okay to kill gays so they will not be able to sin in future? And why is our muddled PM Justin who THINKS he is a feminist- ignoring Muslim immigrants who want to impose Sharia Law on us? After all, Sharia Law would gut about half our current constitution and turn Cdn women into property- not even able to leave the house without permission from hubby and without a suitable male relative as escort! Do Liberals even understand the word HYPOCRITE?

Welcome to the new Canada where all of us won't know as to who or what the hell we are anymore. One can call or state that they are something other than the normal and the government will accept it. For someone to question or challenge it could get them in trouble with the government and be sent of to the Canadian gulag. The people of Ontario are better off today because that liberal no mind Wynne was the one that wanted words like mother and father, he and she or husband and wife gone. The teachers were ordered by Wynne and her liberal government to not use those words mentioned anymore in school. The children must be reeducated and indoctrinated with liberal stupidity and foolishness. 

There was no doubt about it that Trudeau was a communist at heart. If he could have he would have turned Canada into another Soviet Stalinist communist country with plenty of gulags built just for the people he did not like. Why would any freedom loving country or it's people would want to have a communist as their PM is really bizarre. And the Canadian people did it again. As if papa Trudeau wasn't enough they elected another Trudeau who is carrying on from where his old man left off. Destroy Canada period. Shocking. 

[turningrite]

33 minutes ago, taxme said:

I only wanted to inform members here that it is not only black people that are being shot and killed by white or black policeman/woman. 457 white people being shot by the police in one year is not a small number to overlook and avoid not to want to mention those killings. But the liberal media will never willing report anything about how many white people are shot and killed by the police. This needs to be reported not hidden. This is just another case of who cares what happens to white people. They all are only a bunch of racist nothings. 

I do not believe that the shooting of black people has anything to do with racial bias but more to do with the crime that those blacks were committing at the time they got shot for it. It is quite obvious that the liberal MSM is being racially bias here alright against reporting on white people who get shot by the police. You have so called black leaders like the Reverend Jackson and Al Sharpton who never talk about how many blacks are killing blacks every year and appear to not give much of a dam about it. But let some white cop shoot a black man and they go ballistic and even the MSM appear to want to go ballistic over it also. The liberal MSM appears to always enjoy trying to stir up trouble. Why do they have to mention race anyway? Why not just say a man who was committing a crime was shot and killed by police. Why always bring in race or color here? 

Indeed the liberal media and even our dear leader PM got their azzes kicked over that false report about reported by that lying Muslim woman. The media and the PM just could not wait to make and turn the incident into a racist story. It backfired on them. That sure looked good on them alright. 

Although some in Canada would like us to believe otherwise, anti-black racism in Canada is different from that in the U.S., as my educated white American mother used to point out. She often noted that she was raised to be terrified of black people and to believe that separation of the races was the only practical means of coexistence. She said that when she was growing up (in the North) in the 1930 and 1940s official segregation was the law in much of the South and unofficial segregation remained a practice in much of the North. I think the American racial consciousness is largely grounded in a deeply (but at least now acknowledged) problematic history. Canada has a different history and a different experience. Anti-black racism certainly existed here in the past and still exists today. But it is not historically ingrained. Personally, I'm skeptical about arguments that it is a "systemic" aspect of Canadian society, although anti-indigenous systemic racism has existed and to some extent remains relevant. I think there's too strong a tendency, especially among activists, to broadly and inaccurately ascribe American experiences, attitudes and problems to Canadian contexts.

As for the falsely reported hijab attack, I don't know that the public was ever fully informed of its motives. But it certainly contributes to skepticism about the veracity of claims of racial or religious intolerance. I think the PM, activists and media who played up the story owed Canadians a big apology, which in my recollection we didn't get.

[taxme]

6 minutes ago, turningrite said:

Although some in Canada would like us to believe otherwise, anti-black racism in Canada is different from that in the U.S., as my educated white American mother used to point out. She often noted that she was raised to be terrified of black people and to believe that separation of the races was the only practical means of coexistence. She said that when she was growing up (in the North) in the 1930 and 1940s official segregation was the law in much of the South and unofficial segregation remained a practice in much of the North. I think the American racial consciousness is largely grounded in a deeply (but at least now acknowledged) problematic history. Canada has a different history and a different experience. Anti-black racism certainly existed here in the past and still exists today. But it is not historically ingrained. Personally, I'm skeptical about arguments that it is a "systemic" aspect of Canadian society, although anti-indigenous systemic racism has existed and to some extent remains relevant. I think there's too strong a tendency, especially among activists, to broadly and inaccurately ascribe American experiences, attitudes and problems to Canadian contexts.

As for the falsely reported hijab attack, I don't know that the public was ever fully informed of its motives. But it certainly contributes to skepticism about the veracity of claims of racial or religious intolerance. I think the PM, activists and media who played up the story owed Canadians a big apology, which in my recollection we didn't get.

I don't believe that the blacks in Canada were ever treated as badly as they were in America. Many blacks in the American past were slaves at one time where as here in Canada blacks were never real slaves. I think that the liberal MSM are the ones that are always trying to make and look for something racist that was said or done and then try and blow it way out of proportion and try and make it appear to be a racist incident. There are laws on the books against promoting discrimination hatred or violence towards anyone of any color and if someone felt like they were being treated differently to others then they can always go to the government and seek help. I don't think that we all need to hear about what that Muslim woman said happened. She made a fool of a lot of people. But now what she has now done is make her people appear to be story tellers because that is the impression that most people will believe that this is what they like to do is to make stories up to gain sympathy for her as a Muslim and because she is a Muslim living in a racist country. 

That will be the last thing the PM or the Canadian media will ever do is apologize for their stupid actions where they really hoping that they had themselves areal nice juicy racist story to report on. The liberal buffoons. 

[Argus]

4 hours ago, turningrite said:

Although some in Canada would like us to believe otherwise, anti-black racism in Canada is different from that in the U.S., as my educated white American mother used to point out. She often noted that she was raised to be terrified of black people

And fear is the basis of most prejudice against Black people today. Fear and wariness borne of the extremely high Black crime rate, especially violent crime.

[bush_cheney2004]

4 hours ago, taxme said:

I don't believe that the blacks in Canada were ever treated as badly as they were in America. Many blacks in the American past were slaves at one time where as here in Canada blacks were never real slaves.

 

Not true....Canada certainly had slavery, especially in Quebec.

Being "black" is/was no treat in Canada, as was being Asian, Ukrainian, Acadian, or "aboriginal".

Canada has it's own brand of racism and language hate.

[turningrite]

12 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Canada has it's own brand of racism and language hate.

That's true. But the history of anti-black racism is much different in Canada in comparison to the situation in the U.S., where it is institutionally and culturally ingrained as a result of historical circumstances. This week, for instance, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a restrictive voter registration law in Ohio that many critics believe disproportionately impacts black voters. It's almost inconceivable that such a law would either be enacted or withstand a court challenge in Canada. Racism, of course, is often practiced at the individual level. Canada has its own problematic history of systematic exclusion and repression, particularly with its indigenous peoples, but in contrast with the situation in the U.S., systemic discrimination against black people is neither a general nor intractable feature of Canadian law and society. 

[PIK]

On 6/22/2017 at 3:05 PM, Omni said:

Racism seems to be much more acceptable to Americans. Hell they even let white cops shoot black motorists for a burned out signal light.

https://www.thespectrum.com/story/opinion/2018/06/10/black-motorists-lying-cops-racial-profiling/688837002/

 

Read this and tell me who is being racist??

Edited June 13, 2018 by PIK

[bush_cheney2004]

4 hours ago, turningrite said:

That's true. But the history of anti-black racism is much different in Canada in comparison to the situation in the U.S., where it is institutionally and culturally ingrained as a result of historical circumstances. This week, for instance, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a restrictive voter registration law in Ohio that many critics believe disproportionately impacts black voters. It's almost inconceivable that such a law would either be enacted or withstand a court challenge in Canada.

 

Perhaps, but Canada has it's own version of voting discrimination, ex-pats are barred from voting in Canadian elections after loss of residency (several years).  This may or may not impact certain ethnic groups disproportionately.   This goes far beyond voter registration..it is legal disenfranchisement.

 

Quote

Racism, of course, is often practiced at the individual level. Canada has its own problematic history of systematic exclusion and repression, particularly with its indigenous peoples, but in contrast with the situation in the U.S., systemic discrimination against black people is neither a general nor intractable feature of Canadian law and society. 

 

I would agree that it is less in scope and scale, if only because there was a much smaller population of black people in Canada to be exploited as a conscripted labour pool (i.e. slavery).    But Canada certainly has a history of systemic discrimination against many groups, including black people.   Today, so called "aboriginals" (what a word !) bear the brunt of institutionalized racism in Canada.

 

 

[PIK]

25 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Perhaps, but Canada has it's own version of voting discrimination, ex-pats are barred from voting in Canadian elections after loss of residency (several years).  This may or may not impact certain ethnic groups disproportionately.   This goes far beyond voter registration..it is legal disenfranchisement.

 

 

I would agree that it is less in scope and scale, if only because there was a much smaller population of black people in Canada to be exploited as a conscripted labour pool (i.e. slavery).    But Canada certainly has a history of systemic discrimination against many groups, including black people.   Today, so called "aboriginals" (what a word !) bear the brunt of institutionalized racism in Canada.

 

 

I agree with this policy and I am also against dual citizenship.

[turningrite]

39 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Perhaps, but Canada has it's own version of voting discrimination, ex-pats are barred from voting in Canadian elections after loss of residency (several years).  This may or may not impact certain ethnic groups disproportionately.   This goes far beyond voter registration..it is legal disenfranchisement.

 

 

I would agree that it is less in scope and scale, if only because there was a much smaller population of black people in Canada to be exploited as a conscripted labour pool (i.e. slavery).    But Canada certainly has a history of systemic discrimination against many groups, including black people.   Today, so called "aboriginals" (what a word !) bear the brunt of institutionalized racism in Canada.

 

 

Your argument about anti-black racism in Canada is not in fact entirely correct. I believe Upper Canada (Ontario) was the first jurisdiction in the Western Hemisphere and within the British Empire to ban slavery when its colonial legislature enacted legislation to do so in 1793, long before slavery was banned throughout the British Empire in the 1830s. The notion that slavery didn't survive merely because of the small number of blacks living in British North America is somewhat specious. Slavery increased along with the arrival of Loyalists from the American States in the 1780s, some of whom brought slaves with them, which by some estimates expanded the practice by 300 to 400 percent, but it was quickly shut down due both to a legislative response (as in Upper Canada) and by the courts, which simply refused to enforce the rights of slaveholders. While blacks have, of course, faced social and economic discrimination in Canada, this has not substantially been predicated by an institutional or legal framework that has intended to create the situation. In fact, it might well be argued that some other minorities have from an institutional perspective been treated more harshly.

Canada's treatment of its indigenous peoples, on the other hand, remains a stain on the country's psyche and reputation. It is an issue the country is only now beginning to comprehensively address.

[bush_cheney2004]

34 minutes ago, turningrite said:

Your argument about anti-black racism in Canada is not in fact entirely correct. I believe Upper Canada (Ontario) was the first jurisdiction in the Western Hemisphere and within the British Empire to ban slavery when its colonial legislature enacted legislation to do so in 1793, long before slavery was banned throughout the British Empire in the 1830s.

 

OK, but slavery was an economic system that was pervasive around the world, including propagation by the British empire.   Spain was far more instrumental in banning slavery early on, including many years before Ontario in North America (British slaves escaped to Florida and converted to Catholicism/military service).   Britain's slavery ban in the 1830's did not free all existing slaves as there were exceptions for certain parts/commerce in the empire.

Vermont banned slavery in 1777, and four other American colonies in the northeast had done so by 1789.

 

Quote

 While blacks have, of course, faced social and economic discrimination in Canada, this has not substantially been predicated by an institutional or legal framework that has intended to create the situation. In fact, it might well be argued that some other minorities have from an institutional perspective been treated more harshly.

 

Canada had every bit of legal and social discrimination against blacks and other minorities as seen elsewhere.   Segregation was commonplace in many parts of Canada, reflection the social and economic norms of the time.

 

Quote

Canada's treatment of its indigenous peoples, on the other hand, remains a stain on the country's psyche and reputation. It is an issue the country is only now beginning to comprehensively address.

 

Agreed....Canada's past and continuing treatment of First Nations people, land, and resources remains far worse than any prior history with slavery.

[turningrite]

18 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

OK, but slavery was an economic system that was pervasive around the world, including propagation by the British empire.   Spain was far more instrumental in banning slavery early on, including many years before Ontario in North America (British slaves escaped to Florida and converted to Catholicism/military service).   Britain's slavery ban in the 1830's did not free all existing slaves as there were exceptions for certain parts/commerce in the empire.

Vermont banned slavery in 1777, and four other American colonies in the northeast had done so by 1789.

Canada had every bit of legal and social discrimination against blacks and other minorities as seen elsewhere.   Segregation was commonplace in many parts of Canada, reflection the social and economic norms of the time.

Agreed....Canada's past and continuing treatment of First Nations people, land, and resources remains far worse than any prior history with slavery.

I believe Vermont's slavery ban was more symbolic than practically effective as slavery continued to be practiced in the state for several years following the ban, as has been noted in academic analyses. In most other Northeastern states, I believe slavery was gradually but effectively curtailed over time by the courts, as was the case in British North America as well. As for systemic anti-black racism, could you point out a circumstance in Canada where systemic (i.e. institutionalized) civil rights violations existed and were sustained against blacks into the modern era? Unlike in the U.S., Canada, for instance, didn't practice segregation in its armed forces and as far as I'm aware didn't formally apply legalized voting restrictions against black citizens. Of course, there was social and economic discrimination against blacks, as was the case with many other minorities as equally was the case throughout much of the world. Ironically, one of the motivations for Upper Canada's 1793 legislated slavery ban may have been to disincentivize new settlers, mainly arriving from the U.S., from bringing blacks into the colony. It would be interesting to know whether this was the case as the incidence of slavery reportedly rose substantially with the influx of Loyalists following the American Revolution. 

[bush_cheney2004]

4 hours ago, turningrite said:

 As for systemic anti-black racism, could you point out a circumstance in Canada where systemic (i.e. institutionalized) civil rights violations existed and were sustained against blacks into the modern era?

 

Racial segregation and discrimination into the "modern era" has been highlighted in Canadian media (e.g. public accommodation, housing, employment, immigration), and there were segregated Canadian military units during both world wars when blacks were not otherwise purposely excluded from serving.  

This timeline provides specific circumstances of systemic racism against black people into the modern era:

http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/305051/Blacks-in-Canadian-Human-Rights-and-Equity-History#vars!date=1873-07-07_22:08:58!

Example:

Quote

Black Canadian Nurses

Until 1944, Black women were barred from attending nursing schools in Canada. In the United States, Black women had been admitted to nursing schools since the 1890s.

 

[turningrite]

21 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Racial segregation and discrimination into the "modern era" has been highlighted in Canadian media (e.g. public accommodation, housing, employment, immigration), and there were segregated Canadian military units during both world wars when blacks were not otherwise purposely excluded from serving.  

This timeline provides specific circumstances of systemic racism against black people into the modern era:

http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/305051/Blacks-in-Canadian-Human-Rights-and-Equity-History#vars!date=1873-07-07_22:08:58!

Example:

 

You appear to be citing examples of social and economic discrimination, which undoubtedly did (and do) exist. In fact, throughout virtually the entire Western world 'Social Darwinism', which postulated a racial hierarchy topped by people of European origins, was a dominant cultural ethos from the mid-19th century until the mid-20th century. It was a rational used to justify imperial power and authority (i.e. "the white man's burden") throughout that period. And In the U.S. it buttressed a system of institutionalized (i.e. formalized) discrimination that emerged from the impacts of large-scale slavery, rendering it a potent social and political force that has significant resonance even in the present. Realistically, there is simply no "systemic" parallel to the Canadian situation, which is not to argue that anti-black racism, in particular, didn't and doesn't exist in this country. Interestingly, while Social Darwinism has diminished throughout the West since WWII, forms of it, accompanied by notions of racial hierarchy, survive in many non-Western societies.

[taxme]

On 6/13/2018 at 12:17 PM, turningrite said:

Your argument about anti-black racism in Canada is not in fact entirely correct. I believe Upper Canada (Ontario) was the first jurisdiction in the Western Hemisphere and within the British Empire to ban slavery when its colonial legislature enacted legislation to do so in 1793, long before slavery was banned throughout the British Empire in the 1830s. The notion that slavery didn't survive merely because of the small number of blacks living in British North America is somewhat specious. Slavery increased along with the arrival of Loyalists from the American States in the 1780s, some of whom brought slaves with them, which by some estimates expanded the practice by 300 to 400 percent, but it was quickly shut down due both to a legislative response (as in Upper Canada) and by the courts, which simply refused to enforce the rights of slaveholders. While blacks have, of course, faced social and economic discrimination in Canada, this has not substantially been predicated by an institutional or legal framework that has intended to create the situation. In fact, it might well be argued that some other minorities have from an institutional perspective been treated more harshly.

Canada's treatment of its indigenous peoples, on the other hand, remains a stain on the country's psyche and reputation. It is an issue the country is only now beginning to comprehensively address.

Canada has acknowledge it's bad treatment of Indians in the past. Yet today after all these years of trying to make up for what was done to them they still whine and cry about racism. Where does it end? Probably billions of Canadian tax dollars have been paid out in compensation to make lives better for Indians of Canada. But are they thankful for all that old whitey has done for them over these past several decades? NOPE. It will never end either until they are told enough already. Dry up. If they are not happy with their lives today well stop living and leave out old whitey. As far as I am concerned Old whitey has done his fair share of trying to make life better and great for them. Enough already. 

[taxme]

On 6/12/2018 at 6:05 PM, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Not true....Canada certainly had slavery, especially in Quebec.

Being "black" is/was no treat in Canada, as was being Asian, Ukrainian, Acadian, or "aboriginal".

Canada has it's own brand of racism and language hate.

1. I don't believe that I have ever seen any pictures of blacks in chains in Canada. Can you produce any especially in Quebec? 

2. Being white was no treat either. There were just as many white people being treated just as badly as those you mentioned above in earlier days. No one was immune from discrimination. Just because one is white does not give them any breaks. 

3. Just about every country on earth has it's own kind of brand of racism and religious or language hate. Trying to mix all the many races and religions and traditions and languages altogether like what we see happening today in most countries is only going to make things worse. But try telling that to the likes of liberal multicultural Trudeau? Forget it. 

[turningrite]

6 minutes ago, taxme said:

Canada has acknowledge it's bad treatment of Indians in the past. Yet today after all these years of trying to make up for what was done to them they still whine and cry about racism. Where does it end? Probably billions of Canadian tax dollars have been paid out in compensation to make lives better for Indians of Canada. But are they thankful for all that old whitey has done for them over these past several decades? NOPE. It will never end either until they are told enough already. Dry up. If they are not happy with their lives today well stop living and leave out old whitey. As far as I am concerned Old whitey has done his fair share of trying to make life better and great for them. Enough already. 

I think indigenous Canadians have valid arguments where it comes to harm and neglect. We have to remember that until well into the 20th century Canadian "Indians" were legally considered to amount to being wards of the state. Their rights and entitlements are stipulated in the Royal Proclamation of 1763, which is incorporated into the Canadian constitution. In return for crown sovereignty over their lands, indigenous peoples were given the right to negotiate treaties for lands over which they'd retain control (i.e. "reserves") and the crown would ensure that their material needs would be met. The first of these conditions was only spottily accommodated and governments have in many cases only barely met the second. I think the historical approach to the "Indian problem" is that for decades, and even now to some extent, indigenous peoples have been viewed by governments and the general population as being an inconvenience. Governments attempted, sometimes by force, as with residential schools, to assimilate them, but met with little success, which was achieved alongside much abuse. Going forward, new solutions have to be sought. Now, indigenous Canadians have civil rights equal to other Canadians but the social and economic legacies of past institutional neglect and harm endure. I'm not convinced that some of the proposals put forward by activists are wise or practical, but the rights of indigenous Canadians are ingrained in the basic law of the land and can't be ignored. We all have to deal with that reality even if some find it irksome.

[taxme]

48 minutes ago, turningrite said:

I think indigenous Canadians have valid arguments where it comes to harm and neglect. We have to remember that until well into the 20th century Canadian "Indians" were legally considered to amount to being wards of the state. Their rights and entitlements are stipulated in the Royal Proclamation of 1763, which is incorporated into the Canadian constitution. In return for crown sovereignty over their lands, indigenous peoples were given the right to negotiate treaties for lands over which they'd retain control (i.e. "reserves") and the crown would ensure that their material needs would be met. The first of these conditions was only spottily accommodated and governments have in many cases only barely met the second. I think the historical approach to the "Indian problem" is that for decades, and even now to some extent, indigenous peoples have been viewed by governments and the general population as being an inconvenience. Governments attempted, sometimes by force, as with residential schools, to assimilate them, but met with little success, which was achieved alongside much abuse. Going forward, new solutions have to be sought. Now, indigenous Canadians have civil rights equal to other Canadians but the social and economic legacies of past institutional neglect and harm endure. I'm not convinced that some of the proposals put forward by activists are wise or practical, but the rights of indigenous Canadians are ingrained in the basic law of the land and can't be ignored. We all have to deal with that reality even if some find it irksome.

Personally, and I may be speaking for many more Canadians is that me, myself and I as a Canadian taxpayer as had enough of apologizing and paying out tax dollars to every group of people that were hard done by white Canadians in the past. And with all the legal and illegal refugees illegally entering into Canada where will it all end for the Canadian taxpayer's in Canada. The Canadian taxpayer's have and still are paying out billions of their tax dollars to try and make repairs for what has been done to other groups of people. It needs to stop. Enough already. Will politicians ever start to think about the Canadian taxpayer's of Canada for a change dammit. 

[turningrite]

2 hours ago, taxme said:

Personally, and I may be speaking for many more Canadians is that me, myself and I as a Canadian taxpayer as had enough of apologizing and paying out tax dollars to every group of people that were hard done by white Canadians in the past. And with all the legal and illegal refugees illegally entering into Canada where will it all end for the Canadian taxpayer's in Canada. The Canadian taxpayer's have and still are paying out billions of their tax dollars to try and make repairs for what has been done to other groups of people. It needs to stop. Enough already. Will politicians ever start to think about the Canadian taxpayer's of Canada for a change dammit. 

I know what you're saying and I'm sure you're correct that a lot of Canadians would agree with you. However, this is a problem we (in the collective sense, as successors to the British) created. Indigenous Canadians didn't create the reserve and welfare model. We basically promised them forms of accommodation and support in return for taking their land. And as their rights are enshrined in the constitution we can't just say we don't want to deal with their claims.

[jacee]

On 6/12/2018 at 4:24 PM, turningrite said:

Although some in Canada would like us to believe otherwise, anti-black racism in Canada is different from that in the U.S., as my educated white American mother used to point out. She often noted that she was raised to be terrified of black people and to believe that separation of the races was the only practical means of coexistence. She said that when she was growing up (in the North) in the 1930 and 1940s official segregation was the law in much of the South and unofficial segregation remained a practice in much of the North. I think the American racial consciousness is largely grounded in a deeply (but at least now acknowledged) problematic history. Canada has a different history and a different experience. Anti-black racism certainly existed here in the past and still exists today. But it is not historically ingrained. Personally, I'm skeptical about arguments that it is a "systemic" aspect of Canadian society, although anti-indigenous systemic racism has existed and to some extent remains relevant. I think there's too strong a tendency, especially among activists, to broadly and inaccurately ascribe American experiences, attitudes and problems to Canadian contexts.

As for the falsely reported hijab attack, I don't know that the public was ever fully informed of its motives. But it certainly contributes to skepticism about the veracity of claims of racial or religious intolerance. I think the PM, activists and media who played up the story owed Canadians a big apology, which in my recollection we didn't get.

She was a child.

Her parents apologized.

[turningrite]

On 6/25/2018 at 2:20 AM, jacee said:

She was a child.

Her parents apologized.

Did the media or the politicians who played up this incident apologize for so willingly throwing mainstream Canadians under the proverbial bus?