Jump to content

Don Cherry's Racist Rant on Immigrants


Teena

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

Right because immigrants have no culture.  :rolleyes:

Most immigrants were British in 1869. Canada's core culture is a British Colony under the British Crown populated by British subjects, not your cultural mosaic multi-cultural bullsh*t. Your liberal whitewashing does not change actual Canadian history.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

It's called multiculturalism.  

Well sure...

And basically this is the Canada I grew up in.

Catholic High School divided between Irish and Italians with some Carribeans mixed in.

Grew up in an Italian neighborhood that became Hasidic Jewish over time.

Hanging out on the Danforth in Greek town and then to little Italy. Worked for the parks in a Jamaican neighborhood.

My parents hung out with other European immigrants, mostly Spanish doctors and their wives from a variety of backrounds.

Attended German school. Made a Quebec girlfriend on summer holiday and went to visit her in Quebec city... her parents were actually Swiss French.

My wife is Ukranian Canadian... pure stock 2-3 generations Canadian.

I have only known a Multicultural Canadian national identity.... I know no other.

But is this Post National? Canada has always included more than one culture... English and French... under one National Compromise.

All that happened is we opened up that compromise to more than just the French.... although the French are still Extra-special.

Edited by DrYouth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DrYouth said:

I have only known a Multicultural Canadian national identity.... I know no other.

That because the Liberals were out to erase Canadian national identity and replace it with what the Liberals thought was our national identity. If you don't know your own history, something as vacuous as multiculturalism can fill the void and encourage you to keep voting Liberal. This whole process began back in the 1960's, it was there intention for it to be all that the new generations of Canadians growing up ever knew, you are proof it worked like a charm in no time flat.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first wave began in the late 1800s and early 1900s, with the arrival of new groups of immigrants from Eastern Europe (Russians, Polish and Ukrainians), Western Europe and Scandinavia.

A second immigration boom following World War II continued to favour immigration from the British Isles, but a significant number of immigrants also arrived from Western Europe (Germany and the Netherlands) and Southern Europe (Italy, Greece, Yugoslavia and Portugal) from the 1950s to the 1970s. At the time of the 1971 Census, 28.3% of immigrants were born in the United Kingdom and 51.4% were born in another European country.

Not to mention the thousands of Chineese in the 1800's.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

The first wave began in the late 1800s and early 1900s, with the arrival of new groups of immigrants from Eastern Europe (Russians, Polish and Ukrainians), Western Europe and Scandinavia.

A second immigration boom following World War II continued to favour immigration from the British Isles, but a significant number of immigrants also arrived from Western Europe (Germany and the Netherlands) and Southern Europe (Italy, Greece, Yugoslavia and Portugal) from the 1950s to the 1970s. At the time of the 1971 Census, 28.3% of immigrants were born in the United Kingdom and 51.4% were born in another European country.

Not to mention the thousands of Chineese in the 1800's.  

Mostly British, like I said. You aren't refuting me, you're supporting my case. 1971 is not 1869, pro tip.

Just like you always do when you don't even read and/or when you don't comprehend what you quote, thinking it's some argumentative mic drop. Keep making my case for me.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

The point is that they are from all different cultures.  

Different cultures coming to Canada does not mean that was Canada's core identity. They assimilated to British culture when they got here and lived under British rule of law, and all other immigrant groups from different cultures combined didn't eclipse the British population for quite some time after Confederation, for nearly a century. Multicultural Canada is predated by British North America for centuries, you are just trying to erase history, to rob credit from the British, in order overrate the contributions of other cultures.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Different cultures coming to Canada does not mean that was Canada's core identity. They assimilated to British culture when they got here and lived under British rule of law, and all other immigrant groups from different cultures combined didn't eclipse the British population for quite some time after Confederation, for nearly a century. Multicultural Canada is predated by British North America for centuries, you are just trying to erase history, to rob credit from the British, in order overrate the contributions of other cultures.

Really?  I guess that's why I just had a big bowl of pasta for lunch instead of tea and crumpets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Canada's core culture is a British Colony under the British Crown populated by British subjects, not your cultural mosaic multi-cultural bullsh*t. 

It's arguable, but I would say you're dead wrong.  The American Revolution came, in part, because of the Crown's agreement to allow multiculturalism in Canada, in the form of French Canadians being allowed to keep their religion and language.  The Americans didn't like that.  I would also argue that George III reward of territory in the form of settlements was a nod to the 3rd of the three founding culture having a measure of rights in the new country.  

 

The Americans were ahead of us in founding a democracy, but we were thinking of multiculturalism at least to a degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's arguable, but I would say you're dead wrong.  The American Revolution came, in part, because of the Crown's agreement to allow multiculturalism in Canada, in the form of French Canadians being allowed to keep their religion and language.  The Americans didn't like that.  I would also argue that George III reward of territory in the form of settlements was a nod to the 3rd of the three founding culture having a measure of rights in the new country.  

 

The Americans were ahead of us in founding a democracy, but we were thinking of multiculturalism at least to a degree.

The American Revolution was not about being jealous of Quebec, please, that was so far down the list of grievance as to be essentially irrelevant.

Biculturalism with a contribution from the natives, is not the multiculturalism of Pierre Elliot Trudeau. The Liberal propaganda you've been consuming of course conflates the two, so the Liberals can conflate Liberal identity with Canadian identity, to win more elections. But you've been brainwashed by adherents to this Liberal dogma, and you refuse to admit that they lied to you.

Edited by Yzermandius19
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

Multiculturalism, the view that cultures, races, and ethnicities, particularly those of minority groups, deserve special acknowledgement of their differences within a dominant political culture.

 

:rolleyes:

Liberal Party of Canada Multiculturalism is the claim that there is no dominant culture, only a collection of smaller cultures that are superior to the dominant culture of the repressive past, which must be suppressed so they can fill the vacuum created by the absence of the dominant culture with collection of smaller cultures. That is Canadian Multiculturalism, the Post-National State, not the more agreeable sounding concept you describe to conflate the two, just as the LPC does.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Liberal Party of Canada Multiculturalism is the claim that there is no dominant culture, only a collection of smaller cultures that are superior to the dominant culture of the repressive past, which must be suppressed so they can fill the vacuum created by the absence of the dominant culture with collection of smaller cultures. That is Canadian Multiculturalism, the Post-National State, not the more agreeable sounding concept you describe to conflate the two, just as the LPC does.

The Canadian Multiculturalism Act affirms the policy of the Government of Canada to ensure that every Canadian receives equal treatment by the government which respects and celebrates diversity.[how?] The Act also:[9]

  • recognizes Canada's multicultural heritage and that this heritage must be protected
  • recognizes Aboriginal rights
  • recognizes English and French remain the only official languages but that other languages may be used
  • recognizes equality rights regardless of race, religion, etc.
  • recognizes minorities' rights to enjoy their cultures.

Section 3 (1) of the Act states:[10]

It is hereby declared to be the policy of the Government of Canada to

(a) recognize and promote the understanding that multiculturalism reflects the cultural and racial diversity of Canadian society and acknowledges the freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage

(b) recognize and promote the understanding that multiculturalism is a fundamental characteristic of the Canadian heritage and identity and that it provides an invaluable resource in the shaping of Canada’s future

(c) promote the full and equitable participation of individuals and communities of all origins in the continuing evolution and shaping of all aspects of Canadian society and assist them in the elimination of any barrier to that participation

(d) recognize the existence of communities whose members share a common origin and their historic contribution to Canadian society, and enhance their development

(e) ensure that all individuals receive equal treatment and equal protection under the law, while respecting and valuing their diversity

(f) encourage and assist the social, cultural, economic and political institutions of Canada to be both respectful and inclusive of Canada’s multicultural character

(g) promote the understanding and creativity that arise from the interaction between individuals and communities of different origins

(h) foster the recognition and appreciation of the diverse cultures of Canadian society and promote the reflection and the evolving expressions of those cultures

(i) preserve and enhance the use of languages other than English and French, while strengthening the status and use of the official languages of Canada; and

(j) advance multiculturalism throughout Canada in harmony with the national commitment to the official languages of Canada.

I guess that's why so many languages are our official languages today.  :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Cannucklehead said:

What you described to me borders on white supremacy/fascism.  Not my Canada.  

lol

No need to go full throttle white supremacy/fascism there scooter...

You will spill your pasta.

Yzer is simply tugging on the curtain of our "multiculturalism" identity.

The bedrock of Canada is firmly set on British values of liberalism...

Our national heritage is not equally divided among all cultures... our Parliament, our judiciary, all of our institutions have evolved out of our British heritage.

We extend these liberal rights to our new immigrants... but that does not make our foundational culture "multuculture"...

Nothing to panic about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

But you've been brainwashed by adherents to this Liberal dogma, and you refuse to admit that they lied to you.

Ahhh... the old ad hominem approach.  Riiight, I forgot why I had blocked you.  

I'm not a Liberal, but if anyone wants to have a civilized discussion I will be out walking my Liberal dogma...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Ahhh... the old ad hominem approach.  Riiight, I forgot why I had blocked you.  

I'm not a Liberal, but if anyone wants to have a civilized discussion I will be out walking my Liberal dogma...

Go ahead, put your head back in the sand and live in your little bubble. Ignore the entire point and get butthurt that someone pointed out how wrong you were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Popular Now

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,755
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Joe
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Community Regular
    • Matthew earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Joe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Matthew went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...