Multiculturalism has been disastrous for Canada

[Michael Hardner]

29 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Another thread that underscores why I identify as an Earthling.

Once ya'll get your silly countries off my planet maybe we can develop a more common values-based culture that kids usually have their heads around by the time they graduate kindergarten.

Maybe global depopulation will be the issue that brings us all together?

At some point do we declare a winner of the great race for richest man on earth?

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

Maybe global depopulation will be the issue that brings us all together?

I was just thinking the surviving witnesses to it will be the wealthiest most powerful people on Earth.

I don't think it'll faze them in the least. In actual fact it'll just be regarded as the inevitability of nature's way.

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

At some point do we declare a winner of the great race for richest man on earth?

Or does everyone get a Participation Trophy regardless of the outcome or effort?

They didn't build that.

[blackbird]

4 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Science has proven evolution

That is a completely false claim.

There is no proof.  Why do you think it is called a theory,  the Theory of Evolution.  Because it is just a theory of course.

It was dreamed up by Charles Darwin in the 1800s and subsequently most of the world swallowed simply because they didn't have the faith to accept what the Holy Scripture says.  It says God created the universe and all creatures and man in six days and rested the seventh day.  It sounds much more scholarly to say science found the answer and it is evolution, which is nonsense.  It was never proven.  Nobody was around to observe evolution because it supposedly occurred over millions of years.  Therefore it could never be repeated in a laboratory.  It is not something that can be repeated.

I would recommend you obtain the book Darwin's Universe:-  From Nothing, By Nothing, For Nothing, Survival for nothing, by Yan T. Lee.  Darwinists hope to bury God in an avalanche of a causeless universe and a godless evolution. (from back cover)

The book explains clearly why this evolution is false.  Atheism is a long, hard, cruel business.  It claims we are all a pure accident of the cosmos.  Therefore life has no meaning and no purpose.  We live and die and that is the end of it.  It is an existence without hope.

You can buy it on Amazon.  It is worth the money.

 

[Michael Hardner]

The ultimate point of racism is vanity: MY people, MY skin, MY point of view is... superior.

It allows people to seal themselves off from reality and nurse their own feelings.  

It's odd to me that some people who feel this way consider themselves 'conservative'.  Because our western traditions have always been about (ostensibly) believing in pragmatic dialogue to resolve differences, so that we can move forward, economically, and "pursue happiness".

Racism is about sitting by yourself, and applying lipstick while staring lovingly into a hand-held mirror.

"Aren't I beautiful ?"

If it's good for you, then go for it I suppose.  But I'm more interested in discussing reality.

And, to throw a bone to both-sidesism, there's no point in being ashamed of your peoples' past either.  You're not accountable for the triumphs or shames of your race.  Learn from it and move on.

Yes, racism is a thing, but it's not the cause of all of our ills.  Nor can we use it to stifle conversations about common problems like immigration.  In fact, I feel like Canada has finally arrived at a point where we can openly criticize immigration without some stigma.

[I am Groot]

13 hours ago, eyeball said:

The menagerie of Freaks at the Freakers Ball under the Big right wing Tent. You know, where the space laser people and white-replacement people and anti-vax, anti-Semite and pro-Semite people etc etc can put their differences aside and focus all their attention on the left.

And the Left is the font of normality and sanity, right? There are no crazies there. I mean, if you don't count the Left's absolute worship of the sacred victim, their willingness to see their nations destroyed rather than stop masses of backward immigrants and migrants coming in (most of who hate the Left and its policies!), their determination to push the trans agenda at all costs, their hatred of economic success and free speech.

[I am Groot]

18 hours ago, herbie said:

Sing the same song once again and loudly deny it is purely racist.

You people on the fringe left don't scare anyone anymore with your constant shrieks of 'waacciiiiissst!" You apply it to everyone who disagrees with you, regardless of evidence. 

18 hours ago, herbie said:

Never seen your "Chinese" neighbour buying Christmas trees?
Never seen the TV channel where the hockey game's announced in Punjabi?
Seen a Haitian eat at Timmie's?

This is the hasty generalization fallacy. Just because you might see a few people do something does not suggest the group does this. Back in 2017, before your hero Justin Trudeau opened the borders, the Immigration department warned that too many immigrants were coming in too fast to be absorbed. It warned that integration should not be assumed as a default, that ethnic enclaves were growing, that immigrants were taking longer to learn English, that their economic prospects were diminishing. It also warned of an impending housing crisis. The Left completely ignored it.

18 hours ago, herbie said:

People aren't beaten into assimilation here they blend in at the speed that's comfortable. And the rest of us gain by taking and adapting some of what they bring.

What do they bring? Most of our new immigrants come from failed societies. And they are largely failed societies because of the culture and values of the people living there. That's especially true of Muslim countries, who are doomed to eternal poverty because of their Islamic laws and the culture of acceptance Islam fosters.

No one said beat anyone into submission. But why are driver's licences, even commercial driver's licences, available in dozens of languages? If you can't speak the local language, you shouldn't be allowed to drive. Governments put out all kinds of information and forms in multiple languages now, so that newcomers don't have to learn English. We deter the necessary integration in dozens of small ways we never used to even as the immigrants we bring in now are vastly more different from us than their predecessors, and then simply presume they will integrate like their predecessors did.

18 hours ago, herbie said:

Tried that colonialist "assimilation" BS in the past with residential schools and 60s scoops and you're one of them constantly griping over paying the price for that utter fail.

We should have finished the job. Both we and the natives would be a lot happier and a lot more prosperous today.

[I am Groot]

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I get it, but.... there has to be some kind of acknowledgement of the irony here:

Canada's multiculturalism is a long-standing attribute of our culture, in different forms over the years.

It's a generation or so old. And I note that Canada has been going downhill since it was imposed. How has multiculturalism helped Canada at all, vs harmed it? Why would we completely ignore the leaders of the UK, France and Germany who realized it was a terrible mistake and backed away from it?

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

So... who decides what our culture is?  I'm feel like we have more common values than culture.

You mean like Carney saying Islamic values are Canadian values? Seriously? I don't think so. Do you want Islamic values to become Canadian values? Western culture is the most advanced, sophisticated and tolerant in the world. You want toss that away so we can be more like the Muslim world?

[I am Groot]

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

People are repulsed by how unfair and arrogant it is, on the whole.

Define racism.

I'm not disagreeing on what you wrote above. But somehow, it's racist to hire a white man over a black man just because he's white but it's very noble to hire a black man over a white man just because he's black. So what exactly is racist in a world where government, universities, and corporations deliberately engage in racial hiring and promotion?

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Acknowledging that races are different is simple and not offensive.

If the races are different, if cultures are different, why does the Left insist that they're all exactly the same, and that all profesions and occupations must have the exact same percentage of every identity group as exist in the population as a whole?

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Deciding that one is 'superior' and that it happens to be yours is wrong-headed and arrogant.

Given that the term 'racist' is applied to religions and nationalities now, what if one religion IS, in fact, superior to another?

[Michael Hardner]

7 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. It's a generation or so old.

2. And I note that Canada has been going downhill since it was imposed.

3. How has multiculturalism helped Canada at all, vs harmed it? Why would we completely ignore the leaders of the UK, France and Germany who realized it was a terrible mistake and backed away from it?

4. You mean like Carney saying Islamic values are Canadian values? Seriously? I don't think so. Do you want Islamic values to become Canadian values? Western culture is the most advanced, sophisticated and tolerant in the world. You want toss that away so we can be more like the Muslim world?

1. Interesting. I had to look up when it started, and Wikipedia sent me to this: 

https://utppublishing.com/doi/10.3138/jcs.48.2.100

Multiculturalism started in Alberta! 1971.  54 years ago. 

Did not know that. 

2. That's an observation. It's hard to tie them together as causal, given that the rest of the Western world has gone more or less the same path. 

3. I don't think you're framing it accurately. Europe never embraced it nor shunned it. We have this moniker for accepting immigrants that's different than their ambivalence, but it's not so cut and dried. 

4. I don't know how you can possibly get that from what I said. As such I'm just going to leave it.  I will say that Islam never had a Reformation, because they were always rooted in backwaters where it wasn't worth it to go in and convert anybody.  Those backwaters may never be converted, but they don't have to be either.

Edited September 21, 2025 by Michael Hardner

[I am Groot]

35 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

The ultimate point of racism is vanity: MY people, MY skin, MY point of view is... superior.

What if they ARE? Not due to race, because racism isn't about just racism anymore. But if my people ARE superior to your people because MY people are flexible, adaptable, united, educated, and sophisticated, but yours are superstitious, ignorant, prone to violence, and think compromise is weakness?

35 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's odd to me that some people who feel this way consider themselves 'conservative'.  Because our western traditions have always been about (ostensibly) believing in pragmatic dialogue to resolve differences, so that we can move forward, economically, and "pursue happiness".

It's odd to me that some people don't understand that the root word of conservative is conserve. The absolute core of conservatism is about conserving the traditions, values, cultures, and structure of society. Which explains why conservatives have ALWAYS been the least content with large-scale immigration in every country and the most unwilling to allow change without proven value.

[Barquentine]

2 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

The absolute core of conservatism is about conserving the traditions, values, cultures, and structure of society.

By definition, conservatives are averse to change. They can't handle the truth that change is the way of the universe. You can grow and change or just fade away.

[I am Groot]

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Interesting. I had to look up when it started, and Wikipedia sent me to this: 

https://utppublishing.com/doi/10.3138/jcs.48.2.100

Multiculturalism started in Alberta! 1971.  54 years ago. 

That's a generation to me given I was alive then.

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. That's an observation. It's hard to tie them together as causal, given that the rest of the Western world has gone more or less the same path. 

Can you demonstrate any way it has improved Canada in any demonstrable way other than a better choice of restaurants? I can think of a number of ways it has harmed us.

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

3. I don't think you're framing it accurately. Europe never embraced it nor shunned it. We have this moniker for accepting immigrants that's different than their ambivalence, but it's not so cut and dried. 

And look at what's going on in Europe now. Massive upheavals in country after country, the rise of far-right groups to political power all because the Left absolutely refuses to compromise their lofty ideals and control their borders. This includes the US. 

David Frum said it in 2017, "If liberals insist that only fascists will enforce borders, then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals refuse to do.".

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

4. I don't know how you can possibly get that from what I said.

It's what Carney said. 

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I will say that Islam never had a Reformation, because they were always rooted in backwaters where it wasn't worth it to go in and convert anybody.  Those backwaters may never be converted, but they don't have to be either.

The problem is we've brought two million Muslims into our country. So if they don't integrate, if they retain their medieval Islamic cultural values, there will be constant friction between them and the rest of the country.

4 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

By definition, conservatives are averse to change. They can't handle the truth that change is the way of the universe. You can grow and change or just fade away.

Is all change good? Conservatives can handle change. What they don't want is unproven change. The fads the Left adopts and eagerly embraces, despite much evidence that they'll be good for anyone. The government laws on trans, is one such change, as are DEI and multiculturalism.

Edited September 21, 2025 by I am Groot

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, I am Groot said:

1. What if they ARE? Not due to race, because racism isn't about just racism anymore. But if my people ARE superior to your people because MY people are flexible, adaptable, united, educated, and sophisticated, but yours are superstitious, ignorant, prone to violence, and think compromise is weakness?

2. It's odd to me that some people don't understand that the root word of conservative is conserve. The absolute core of conservatism is about conserving the traditions, values, cultures, and structure of society. Which explains why conservatives have ALWAYS been the least content with large-scale immigration in every country and the most unwilling to allow change without proven value.

1. If that's your opinion, that's great. But it's subjective. There's no objective better people than another. Every people have their attributes... Positive, negative, and ultimately neither. Because they have to work through them to get by as a people, every Quirk of a tribe looks ugly to another tribe. 

Homogenization unleashes a progressive energy that is usually harnessed towards economic improvement. The USA, 19th century, seems to be that. But of course, it's an opinion. I can state my reasons, but I can't prove it. 

2. Maybe so. But conservatism in the West is about establishing individual rights, as well as a people's Council of leaders and media to govern and lead as new items come up. 

Part of that radical change that came out of philosophy and politics of the 18th century was Establishment of tolerance and elimination of the monarchy.

Tracking how tolerance has expanded, it has been a straight line of increased tolerance since the beginning. Conservatives buy into it gradually, eventually providing the final stamp of approval for increased rights for... For... Let's say.... Marginalized groups.

[Barquentine]

6 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Is all change good?

Of course not.

 

6 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

The fads the Left adopts and eagerly embraces, despite much evidence that they'll be good for anyone. The government laws on trans, is one such change, as are DEI and multiculturalism.

Your opinions are just that. Opinions.

[Michael Hardner]

10 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

 

1. Can you demonstrate any way it has improved Canada in any demonstrable way other than a better choice of restaurants? I can think of a number of ways it has harmed us.

2. And look at what's going on in Europe now. Massive upheavals in country after country, the rise of far-right groups to political power all because the Left absolutely refuses to compromise their lofty ideals and control their borders. This includes the US. 

3. David Frum said it in 2017, "If liberals insist that only fascists will enforce borders, then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals refuse to do.".

4. The problem is we've brought two million Muslims into our country. So if they don't integrate, if they retain their medieval Islamic cultural values, there will be constant friction between them and the rest of the country.

1. Pretty much all Western countries have increased immigration over the generation.   If you want to say that it's had a negative effect, you have to compare it to something else which is actually kind of impossible.  The economy demands growth, and immigration is seen as a way to do that. 

2. I'm not going to say that because the far right doesn't like immigration then immigration is a problem. That seems to be where you're going. 

3. I think that's an astute observation.

4. The evidence is that they're assimilating.

[I am Groot]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

1. If that's your opinion, that's great. But it's subjective. There's no objective better people than another. Every people have their attributes... Positive, negative, and ultimately neither. Because they have to work through them to get by as a people, every Quirk of a tribe looks ugly to another tribe. 

Cultural relativism. Yes, I understand the theory that you can't properly judge another culture given your mind is operating within the dictates of your own.

But let's look at the Muslim world. Generally speaking, other than a few oil rich states (which needed the West to develop their oil and needs western technicians to keep it flowing) the Muslim world is pretty backward. It's GDP is about $4,400 per year as opposed to $19,300 of the rest of the world. It has 9 scientists, engineers and technicians per 1000 people vs 141 in the West. More books are translated into Spanish every year than have EVER been translated into Arabic. They have high infant mortality rates, lower lifespans, and only 2 Muslims have ever won a noble prize in science, and both were working in Western universities.

By this it's clear that Muslim culture and values are not as good as Western cultural values.

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Homogenization unleashes a progressive energy that is usually harnessed towards economic improvement. The USA, 19th century, seems to be that. But of course, it's an opinion. I can state my reasons, but I can't prove it. 

The US motto is e pluribus unum - out of many, one. Their society is built on newcomers adopting American values, culture, and behaviour and largely abandoning their own. Multiculturalism is the opposite of that. It's newcomers retaining their cultures and values.

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

2. Maybe so. But conservatism in the West is about establishing individual rights, as well as a people's Council of leaders and media to govern and lead as new items come up. 

I'm not sure what this means. A people's council? Of leaders and media? Conservatives embraced democracy, but media don't govern. At least, they shouldn't.

And the underlying base of conservatism is assumed and continues to take places within democracy.

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Part of that radical change that came out of philosophy and politics of the 18th century was Establishment of tolerance and elimination of the monarchy.

But it didn't abandon its core philosophy of protecting the existing order, and the culture, values, and traditions on which it was founded. And I do not see how inviting in the world's most intolerant people and then telling them they don't have to adapt and integrate into OUR culture and values is going to lead to anything good.

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Tracking how tolerance has expanded, it has been a straight line of increased tolerance since the beginning. Conservatives buy into it gradually, eventually providing the final stamp of approval for increased rights for... For... Let's say.... Marginalized groups.

The problem with the term 'marginalized' is that it presumes that a group is underperforming through no fault of its own but due to some action against it by the majority. Today, that is not the case. Underperforming groups are responsible for their own underperformance.

[I am Groot]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Pretty much all Western countries have increased immigration over the generation.   If you want to say that it's had a negative effect, you have to compare it to something else which is actually kind of impossible.  The economy demands growth, and immigration is seen as a way to do that. 

Is Sweden better off today thanks to its embracing immigration? It now leads the West in rape, and especially in gang rape. It has daily hand grenade attacks from ethnic (Muslim) street gangs. Its economy is fraying and its sense of unity coming apart. It is facing a crisis due to its failure to integrate these newcomers because it blithely told them they didn't have to integrate but could retain their own customs and values.

I use Sweden because it's a perfect example of a previously safe, peaceful, prosperous, homogenous state that suddenly brought in a flood of newcomers. All this happened in a very short period of time so we can easily see the changes and the causes.

Economic growth can come through better productivity. Better productivity can come through innovation and improvements in technology. These are areas where Canada lags far behind others in no small part due to the reliance of business to a continuous stream of cheap foreign labour.

 

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. I'm not going to say that because the far right doesn't like immigration then immigration is a problem. That seems to be where you're going. 

No. I don't have a problem with immigration. I have a problem with too much immigration. I have a problem with immigration without proper screening for the adaptability of the prospective immigrants. I have a problem with not imposing high standards for prospective immigrants, and setting out responsibilities for those immigrants to integrate, as some others do.

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

4. The evidence is that they're assimilating.

What evidence? The last time anyone dared to take a survey of Muslim attitudes in Canada, it showed second-generation Muslims were more rigid in their adherence to Islam and its values than their immigrant parents. They take such surveys with more regularity in the UK, and the results are not helpful if you are one hoping Muslims will integrate. This would be the reason for Keir Starmer's warning that without integration Britain risked becoming an island of strangers.

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. Cultural relativism. Yes, I understand the theory that you can't properly judge another culture given your mind is operating within the dictates of your own.

2. By this it's clear that Muslim culture and values are not as good as Western cultural values.

3. Multiculturalism is the opposite of that. It's newcomers retaining their cultures and values.

4. I'm not sure what this means. A people's council? Of leaders and media? Conservatives embraced democracy, but media don't govern. At least, they shouldn't.

5. But it didn't abandon its core philosophy of protecting the existing order, and the culture, values, and traditions on which it was founded. And I do not see how inviting in the world's most intolerant people and then telling them they don't have to adapt and integrate into OUR culture and values is going to lead to anything good.

 

1. If you can frame your opinion that way, at it's foundation, I can't disagree with that.

2. I agree, but only as much as it's my opinion.  There are a lot of things about such cultures that are valuable too.

3. Too a degree, but the clash of rights exists in all groups.  This is why you had hardcore Muslims and Christians fighting with the government over sex education.

4. Govern in terms of helping lead, to light the way.  Without open media we're going to be held back.

5. Maybe you don't believe Western values are strong enough?  I do.  I think that openness is superior, only my opinion.

 

[I am Groot]

19 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

Your opinions are just that. Opinions.

I am learned and wise, so my opinions have more value than yours.

[I am Groot]

21 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

That sounds more like immigration, not multiculturalism.  They're different.

The USA forged many different peoples together quite well overall.

They created their own new values, and it worked because they made a land of opportunity.

e pluribus unum

What Canada has is e pluribus pluribus. 

[I am Groot]

Speaking of one of the dangers of multiculturalism being when ethnic groups vote as a bloc for their own as mentioned earlier. I'd add when they vote as a bloc for causes external to Canada but important to them. Muslims pretty much vote as a bloc. They don't vote conservative because conservatives won't give them what they want: more immigration of Muslims, more tolerance for their separateness, more accommodation, and more agreement with their desire for how Canada should treat the Muslim world.

Thus, we have Canada joining Australia and the UK in rewarding Hamas for its savage attack on Israel by recognizing a Palestinian state. All three of these leaders speak in high-minded ways as though they expect this will help anything over there. But the truth is all three are led by weak, leftist leaders whose parties rely on Muslim votes, and whose base, progressives, increasingly feel empowered to express their disdain and dislike for Jews. The reason for recognition of Palestine has nothing to do with any interest they have for Palestine and everything to do with catering to Muslim and anti-israel/jewish voters at home.

Edited September 21, 2025 by I am Groot

[Michael Hardner]

15 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

  progressives, increasingly feel empowered to express their disdain and dislike for Jews. 

This is complete nonsense. 

 

[CITIZEN_2015]

30 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Speaking of one of the dangers of multiculturalism being when ethnic groups vote as a bloc for their own as mentioned earlier. I'd add when they vote as a bloc for causes external to Canada but important to them. Muslims pretty much vote as a bloc. They don't vote conservative because conservatives won't give them what they want: more immigration of Muslims, more tolerance for their separateness, more accommodation, and more agreement with their desire for how Canada should treat the Muslim world.

 

This is very true, I witnessed that. There was a Liberal gathering two decades ago to elect a Liberal Candidate, one being a muslim. A lot of people there to vote and I noticed a large number of middle eastern looks speaking the rough language (Arabic). They all had come to elect muslim candidate likely some without knowing anything about him other than he was muslim. Fortunately this did not happen.

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

Fortunately this did not happen.

Go back home, foreigner... 😂😂😂

This is what you're saying.

Is there a word for irony in your language?

[paxamericana]

I don't think multiculturalism in of itself is a problem for Canada. The problem for Canada is the rugged geography. It limits regional unification, hence the Confederation. Unification requires infrastructure or geography that encourages trade between regions. Canada is more unified with America in terms of trade than between provinces. Consequentially, Canadian are more American than actual Canadian. As I have surmised, Canada is just a make believe bedtime story Canucks fabricated to explain a unincorporated territory of America. God literally forces Canadian to become American. 

Edited September 21, 2025 by paxamericana