Quebecers intolerant of immigrants

[bk59]

If the feds have any integrity they would offer all English minorities who are unable to leave Quebec for financial reasons a job in the federal public service and pay all cost pertaining to setting up in another more civilized English province.

Just in case that wasn't sarcasm... what a waste of tax payers' money. Would you be willing to let the government waste money by moving French populations around the country in the same way?

I know in Ottawa many people are going to be in for one hell of a problem a few years down the road.

We have tons of francophone's pouring into Ottawa every morning from Quebec taking all the jobs that 'artificial bilingualism' has created, courtesy of 'a la federal government'.

Ottawa's English kids, many have no jobs or unskilled minimum wage jobs and are living with their parents who provide cheap or no charge room and board.

But what's going to happen Gerry, when their parents pass on and they will be in the average age bracket of 35-50 and totally unemployable.

What kind of unrectifiable social situation will this create?

Who will pay for the high cost of welfare coupled with a possible high suicide rate? Society will say 'what has caused this horrible situation and who is responsible? To late though ...isn't it.

Many Liberal supporters don't think of these things when they go out to vote ....with their wallet in mind.

Well all I have to say is English society better think twice before voting Liberal if they don't want their children dying in the streets of English Canada.

Wow. Talk about empty rhetoric. "Vote Liberal and you're voting to kill children." Let's say you do have a valid point somewhere in there. Saying stuff like that just destroys any credibility that you might have had.

Let's take a look at your scenario though. Going to this Statistic's Canada site shows some unemployment rate information. This is from the 2001 Census, but it gives a breakdown by language which makes this relevant to our discussion. (If anyone has equivalent data that is more recent please post it.)

Changing the geographic area to "Ottawa - Ontario part" shows that the English unemployment rate was 5.1%. This is hardly massive unemployment. Not only that, but unemployment rates such as this have never led to the type of mass welfare and/or mass suicides that you seem to think is right around the corner for Ottawa. In fact, Alberta as a province also had a 5.1% unemployment rate among its English labour force. Vancouver's was higher at 6.2%. Watch out Vancouver... massive social unrest might be just around the corner...

My point is, there seems to be little proof that the situation you are talking about even exists. And no proof whatsoever that would indicate children will be dying in the street anytime soon. Or ever. To show that the official status of the French language is causing the types of problems in Ottawa that you claim exist, you would have to (at a minimum) show that the unemployment rate amongst the English labour force in Ottawa is substantially higher than the rates in other English labour forces in any other city in Canada.

I won't be holding my breath for that data.

[Leafless]

Just in case that wasn't sarcasm... what a waste of tax payers' money. Would you be willing to let the government waste money by moving French populations around the country in the same way?

If the same type of third world oppressive discriminatory language Charters and use of the 'Notwithstanding Clause' to enforce language legislation existed in other provinces, yes.

But you know for a fact all other provinces in Canada don't care what language you speak. For commercial purposes the provinces use the universal language of the world English, the majority de facto language of Canada.

[Leafless]

My point is, there seems to be little proof that the situation you are talking about even exists. And no proof whatsoever that would indicate children will be dying in the street anytime soon. Or ever. To show that the official status of the French language is causing the types of problems in Ottawa that you claim exist, you would have to (at a minimum) show that the unemployment rate amongst the English labour force in Ottawa is substantially higher than the rates in other English labour forces in any other city in Canada.

I won't be holding my breath for that data.

It's not children that will be dying in the streets, it's the children that have turned into adults and many are now or soon will be anywhere from 35-55 yrs. old, when their parents pass on who had been providing an artificial lifestyle by subsidizing their existence. Mostly these people who have been denied substantial employment and have been perpetually handicapped by artificial bilingualism requirements, have been working ALL ALONG in minimum wage jobs, so they don't reflect in any statistics.

These people will be left with no experience outside of unskilled minimum wage jobs and will not even be able to find a minimum wage job due to their age factor and the artificial bilingualism factor.

The artificial bilingualism factor which has been going on for a long time in Ottawa and is the main factor why many of Ottawa's young people have been trapped in minimum wage jobs from the start right into their older unemployable age bracket.

Politicians have failed Ottawa's majority unilingual English speaking taxpayers by failing to provide or protect the employment base for their majority tax paying English residents who were and are still presently continued to be attacked by unofficial artificial bilingualism.

The data you won't be holding your breath for doesn't presently exist and like I said has nothing to do with real employment numbers.

The type of data reflecting to the situation I am talking about would incriminate political bodies and for that reason you will probably never see this type of data.

[Argus]

To whom? Ernst Zundel? Let me know if he's in any condition to defend the white christian values you parade around.....

Is it acceptable to promote Black Muslim values? How about Arab Muslim values? What about Indian Hindu values?

I'm betting that you wouldn't even consider attacking an ethnic person who spoke proudly of his Indian Hindu roots.

[Argus]

Ok, then how does mutliculturalism "fan the flames of bigotry and racism" as you put it earlier?

And how does 'Official Multiculturalism Policy' lead to intolerance? How does it encourage bigotry and racism?

All cultures are insular to a certain extent, and all are suspicious of those who are different. ALL. Now if you suddenly introduce swarms of newcomers into a previously homogeous culture you're going to have resentment, suspicion, and societal confrontations based on different beliefs and cultures. It's unavoidable.

Official Multiculralism is a component of the same stream of thought which brought us mass immigration from different cultures. And it encourages newcomers to NOT blend in, to be proud of their ethnicity and foreign cultures, and to perpetuate them in Canada. This means that instead of a melting pot you get different cultures trying to live side by side, sometimes with irreconcilable differences in their social beliefs. Year after year, you bring in more and more foreign cultures, and continue to encourage them to retain those cultural value sets, and you increase societal fracturing, upheaval and thus anger, bigotry and racism between groups.

Familiarity does indeed breed contempt. As has been noted before, racism towards Natives is predominent in areas where there are lots of natives, but virtually absent where there are few natives. Racism towards Blacks is heaviest where there is a substantial Black minority. Racism towards east indians is virtually unknown in areas where thare are few of them.

So you keep bringing in more and more ethnic cultural groups, encouraging them to stay as they are, raising their numbers - of course you're going to breed anger and racism.

[Argus]

So, do you think that this intolerance on the part of Quebecers (the topic post) is a result of immigrants having "elevated recognition" above (or "having the same benefits" as) native quebecers? I don't think it's so much the fact the quebecers don't like the fact that immigrants have the same rights as they do, I think it's more that they just don't like those who are different from them (if in fact quebecers are actually intolerant of immigrants).

I think Quebec's culture has revolved around this paranoid belief in a danger of cultural and demographic destruction for several generations now. Pride in being "Quebecois" is emphasised at all cultural levels, and inherently, "Quebecois" means French, means someone who not only embraces the historical idea and value set of a French nation but whose ancestry harkens back to the voyageurs.

Clearly newcomers fail that on many levels. And if there is more intolerance towards immigrants than elsewhere in Canada - and there probalby is - you can blame the cultural chauvenism which has become so great there.

[Argus]

The Charter is not a piece of garbage. Its purpose is to ensure that all Canadians are treated equally. Could this discriminate against a decision supported by the majority of Canadians? Yes, actually. As an example, if 51% of Canadians all of a sudden decided that everyone who speaks English as their first language should no longer be allowed to vote, the Charter would put a stop to that discrimination.

Laws are only of value when supported by the population. The Charter is of value only in that it makes discrimination more complicated. But if the people don't support the Charter, and the government doesn't support it, it's very easy to ignore. And you can, of course, change the Charter simply by changing the judges who interpret it. Replace the current SC, which is made of of nine liberals, with nine conservatives and you'll get entirely different rulings on a whole host of issues.

A look at Germany in the 1930's should, I hope, show enough of a rationale for this principle.

Indeed. Germany also had a constitution, and protection against attacks, both verbal and physical, on minorities. It prevented nothing. All the Nazis had to do was change the judges, and presto!, the interpretation of laws changed. In fact, the very same laws which had once imprisoned Nazis for calling for attacks on Jews were used against opponents of the govermment.

Laws are without value unless the people support them. And if the people are against discrimination they don't need laws written in stone. We had our freedom before the Charter. The Charter has done nothing to increase that freedom. It has merely made a lot of money for a lot of lawyers, and made it considerably harder to put criminals in prison.

[Argus]

3.- The problem is that the federal government actively promotes bilingualism in Canadian provinces especially 'Ottawa' Ontario. Like I mentioned previously it now hard for a majority English resident of Ottawa to find employment in English only, in their own majority English city because of federal government interference that promotes bilingualism within that city with various incentives. This has resulted in forcing the majority English in Ottawa to become fluently bilingual in order to gain employment.

Like I mentioned before, private businesses are going to hire the best person for the job, period. In the federal government a person must be bilingual, but that means it works both ways and a french speaker must learn english.

This old cliche. It's like saying we don't discriminate against left handers. They just need to learn how to be right handers.

Most of the French in Canada, being minorities, learn English as a matter of course. They are surrounded by the culture, on the internet on television, radio, the movies, esp due to the influence of the Americans and Brits. English is all around them, and so they learn it, not by studying it, but simply by assimilating the language as they grow up. There are no such cultural influences which cause English kids to learn French as they grow up except in Quebec.

This means there are hardly any Anglos who are really bilingual, but many, many Francophones who are. Nor is it really possible to easily learn French as an adult, not to the extent you can pass the government's severe language tests.

This means that any job which is "bilingual" is likely to be filled by a Francophone. And who is deciding which jobs must be bilingual? Well, Francophones, of course!

People outside Ottawa - even those outside the government, might not notice, but I have been watching a sea change in linguistic management here in Ottawa. Due to the increasing crack-downs on bilingualism, the removal of the process which allowed a qualified applicant to be trained in the second language AFTER getting a job, and the steady raising of the bar for dual language standards, virtually all senior management and executive positions in the federal public service are being staffed by Francophones. This process is really beginning to accelerate now because most of the senior managers who are Anglos got in before Official Bilingualism was really expanded, and are boomers getting ready to retire. Ten years from now you'll probably see 90% or more of all senior positions in Ottawa filled by Francophones.

[Argus]

Changing the geographic area to "Ottawa - Ontario part" shows that the English unemployment rate was 5.1%.

There is employment, and then there is good employment. The best jobs in Ottawa are in the government - or, if you have a masters, in high tech. And more than 2/3rds of government jobs require bilingualism.

[jbg]

What's all this intolerant stuff in Quebec.

I know Quebec society are intolerant of the Anglos but now we learn they are also intolerant of their own chosen immigrants.

Reap the wind; sew the whirlwind.

[Leafless]

What's all this intolerant stuff in Quebec.

I know Quebec society are intolerant of the Anglos but now we learn they are also intolerant of their own chosen immigrants.

Reap the wind; sew the whirlwind.

If you care to be more explicit or I would interpret what you say as B.S.

[jbg]

What's all this intolerant stuff in Quebec.

I know Quebec society are intolerant of the Anglos but now we learn they are also intolerant of their own chosen immigrants.

Reap the wind; sew the whirlwind.

If you care to be more explicit or I would interpret what you say as B.S.

Sorry for my brevity. My poin tis that they wanted the host of people from Cameroon, Mali, Senegal, Algeria and similar venues. Now, if they don't like their Francophone imports, tough luck.

[Leafless]

What's all this intolerant stuff in Quebec.

I know Quebec society are intolerant of the Anglos but now we learn they are also intolerant of their own chosen immigrants.

Reap the wind; sew the whirlwind.

If you care to be more explicit or I would interpret what you say as B.S.

Sorry for my brevity. My poin tis that they wanted the host of people from Cameroon, Mali, Senegal, Algeria and similar venues. Now, if they don't like their Francophone imports, tough luck.

Yes, this sounds reasonable, but it is also to bad all other Canadian provinces don't have the same legal privileges to pick and choose immigrants from countries their provinces consider compatible with the MAJORITY of it's provincial residents.

[gc1765]

All cultures are insular to a certain extent, and all are suspicious of those who are different. ALL. Now if you suddenly introduce swarms of newcomers into a previously homogeous culture you're going to have resentment, suspicion, and societal confrontations based on different beliefs and cultures. It's unavoidable.

Official Multiculralism is a component of the same stream of thought which brought us mass immigration from different cultures. And it encourages newcomers to NOT blend in, to be proud of their ethnicity and foreign cultures, and to perpetuate them in Canada. This means that instead of a melting pot you get different cultures trying to live side by side, sometimes with irreconcilable differences in their social beliefs. Year after year, you bring in more and more foreign cultures, and continue to encourage them to retain those cultural value sets, and you increase societal fracturing, upheaval and thus anger, bigotry and racism between groups.

Those who are intolerant of people who are different than them are the same people who want immigrants to assimilate (since then they won't be as different). Those who tolerate differences in culture are the ones who don't care if an immigrant retains their old culture, and therefore support multiculturalism. So you see, the problem isn't multiculturalism, it's people who are opposed to multiculturalsim because they don't like people who are different.

Familiarity does indeed breed contempt. As has been noted before, racism towards Natives is predominent in areas where there are lots of natives, but virtually absent where there are few natives. Racism towards Blacks is heaviest where there is a substantial Black minority. Racism towards east indians is virtually unknown in areas where thare are few of them.

So you keep bringing in more and more ethnic cultural groups, encouraging them to stay as they are, raising their numbers - of course you're going to breed anger and racism.

Are you saying that hudreds of years ago, Natives should not have allowed immigrants (ie european immigrants) into this country because it would foster racism? Or is it ok for your ancestors (assuming you are non-native) to immigrate into this country and have a different culture than natives, but not ok for another culture to immigrate here and retain their culture?

[Argus]

Official Multiculralism is a component of the same stream of thought which brought us mass immigration from different cultures. And it encourages newcomers to NOT blend in, to be proud of their ethnicity and foreign cultures, and to perpetuate them in Canada. This means that instead of a melting pot you get different cultures trying to live side by side, sometimes with irreconcilable differences in their social beliefs. Year after year, you bring in more and more foreign cultures, and continue to encourage them to retain those cultural value sets, and you increase societal fracturing, upheaval and thus anger, bigotry and racism between groups.

Those who are intolerant of people who are different than them are the same people who want immigrants to assimilate (since then they won't be as different). Those who tolerate differences in culture are the ones who don't care if an immigrant retains their old culture, and therefore support multiculturalism. So you see, the problem isn't multiculturalism, it's people who are opposed to multiculturalsim because they don't like people who are different.

Build a graph. On the Y access, put the numbers of those who are "uncomfortable", as you put it, with different cultures. Now on the X access, put the number of "others" who are coming into a given area. You will unquestionably find a diagonal line running up the graph.

In other words, discomfort with the otherness of foreigners rises with the number of foreigners around you. Many people are okay with a few people of different cultures. Far fewer are comfortable with large numbers of foreigners among them. The more you bring in, the more anger, resentment, and racism and bigotry you will find. This is basic human nature. You can dismiss them all as bigots, if you like. That is an old tactic of the Left, who are, after all, morally superior to mere mortals, but it doesn't change reality.

So you keep bringing in more and more ethnic cultural groups, encouraging them to stay as they are, raising their numbers - of course you're going to breed anger and racism.

Are you saying that hudreds of years ago, Natives should not have allowed immigrants (ie european immigrants) into this country because it would foster racism?

Another hoary old cliché. OF COURSE it was dumb of them not to oppose European settlement! Is there any question in anyone's mind about that!? It destroyed them.

Or is it ok for your ancestors (assuming you are non-native) to immigrate into this country and have a different culture than natives, but not ok for another culture to immigrate here and retain their culture?

Let me see if I get your position. We know from history that the aborigines were utterly destreoyed as a people, losing all control of the country they lived in due to uncontrolled settlement. And you think we have some kind of moral imperative that we emulate them and let our culture be destroyed, as well?

How about we instead learn from their stupidity and do something to protect our own culture before the numbers overwhelm us?

[gc1765]

Those who are intolerant of people who are different than them are the same people who want immigrants to assimilate (since then they won't be as different). Those who tolerate differences in culture are the ones who don't care if an immigrant retains their old culture, and therefore support multiculturalism. So you see, the problem isn't multiculturalism, it's people who are opposed to multiculturalsim because they don't like people who are different.

Build a graph. On the Y access, put the numbers of those who are "uncomfortable", as you put it, with different cultures. Now on the X access, put the number of "others" who are coming into a given area. You will unquestionably find a diagonal line running up the graph.

In other words, discomfort with the otherness of foreigners rises with the number of foreigners around you. Many people are okay with a few people of different cultures. Far fewer are comfortable with large numbers of foreigners among them. The more you bring in, the more anger, resentment, and racism and bigotry you will find. This is basic human nature. You can dismiss them all as bigots, if you like. That is an old tactic of the Left, who are, after all, morally superior to mere mortals, but it doesn't change reality.

You didn't really address my argument. You could easily build a graph, but put intolerance on the y-axis, and put 'how much do you believe that others should not be allowed to have their own culture' (ie opposed to multiculturalism) and you'll see that the people opposed to multiculturalism are opposed to it because they are intolerant.

Or better yet, take a group of people who believe that others should be entitled to their culture, and then plot your graph, you will find that the number of people "uncomfortable" with different cultures is zero no matter how many "others" are in the area. Take a group of people opposed to multiculturalism, and plot the same graph, you will get a slope as you described. Our society is a mixture of those two types of people, so average out those two plots and yes you will see a diagonal line but that has nothing to do with multiculturalism. Once again, it's not multiculturalism that is the problem, it is people opposed to (ie intolerant of) multiculturalism.

[bk59]

Let me see if I get your position. We know from history that the aborigines were utterly destreoyed as a people, losing all control of the country they lived in due to uncontrolled settlement. And you think we have some kind of moral imperative that we emulate them and let our culture be destroyed, as well?

How about we instead learn from their stupidity and do something to protect our own culture before the numbers overwhelm us?

The analogy between Canada's immigration policy and the settlement of North America by the first European settlers is a poor one. Those settlers came here with the explicit goal of setting up colonies in the image of their motherlands. Of course they destroyed the Native American cultures that existed here. Today, most people immigrate to Canada to live in Canadian society, not to re-create their previous society here. This does not mean that they give up their entire cultural heritage, it just means that they keep their culture within a larger, Canadian, context. For example, celebrating different religious holidays, other than the traditional (i.e. European / Christian) holidays, does not in any way hurt the pre-existing Canadian culture.

Before anyone jumps the gun here, I will say that there are some people who come to North America, Canada and the U.S., with the explicit goal of destroying our society. Anyone who denies this simply isn't paying attention to world events over the last five or so years. But the number of people who enter this country with that goal in mind is extremely small. And anyone who claims that these types of people somehow make up a significant portion of immigrants is also ignoring reality.

In other words, discomfort with the otherness of foreigners rises with the number of foreigners around you. Many people are okay with a few people of different cultures. Far fewer are comfortable with large numbers of foreigners among them. The more you bring in, the more anger, resentment, and racism and bigotry you will find. This is basic human nature. You can dismiss them all as bigots, if you like. That is an old tactic of the Left, who are, after all, morally superior to mere mortals, but it doesn't change reality.

Another tactic that I find tiring is that of over-exaggeration. Toronto is arguably one of the most multicultural cities in the world, and every day people interact with others of different cultures without any problems or issues. These interactions range from people simply being tolerant of one another to people actively embracing other cultures. Is there some racism? Undoubtedly. But it is overshadowed by far by the number of people who embrace those differences, or at the very least tolerate them. The reality is that the widespread anger and racism you claim is a natural consequence of having enough immigrants simply does not exist.

[jbg]

Yes, this sounds reasonable, but it is also to bad all other Canadian provinces don't have the same legal privileges to pick and choose immigrants from countries their provinces consider compatible with the MAJORITY of it's provincial residents.

I am not Canadian, and I was not aware that Quebec had special treatment in that area too. My bad.

[M.Dancer]

Couple of answers for that. The first is demography. English Montrealers are very old now. Their children left. A lot of them are in their 70's, 80's. They are not as active as they once were.

Source Rue?

Might be anecdotal but it is reasonable. My brother is still in MTL, he's 60. the schools we went to have closed and have become French. Just about everyone that I know has moved outside of quebec. At the reunion of my high school (which is no longer) it seemed about 75% have moved outside of quebec.

[Leafless]

Those who are intolerant of people who are different than them are the same people who want immigrants to assimilate (since then they won't be as different). Those who tolerate differences in culture are the ones who don't care if an immigrant retains their old culture, and therefore support multiculturalism. So you see, the problem isn't multiculturalism, it's people who are opposed to multiculturalsim because they don't like people who are different.

Build a graph. On the Y access, put the numbers of those who are "uncomfortable", as you put it, with different cultures. Now on the X access, put the number of "others" who are coming into a given area. You will unquestionably find a diagonal line running up the graph.

In other words, discomfort with the otherness of foreigners rises with the number of foreigners around you. Many people are okay with a few people of different cultures. Far fewer are comfortable with large numbers of foreigners among them. The more you bring in, the more anger, resentment, and racism and bigotry you will find. This is basic human nature. You can dismiss them all as bigots, if you like. That is an old tactic of the Left, who are, after all, morally superior to mere mortals, but it doesn't change reality.

You didn't really address my argument. You could easily build a graph, but put intolerance on the y-axis, and put 'how much do you believe that others should not be allowed to have their own culture' (ie opposed to multiculturalism) and you'll see that the people opposed to multiculturalism are opposed to it because they are intolerant.

Or better yet, take a group of people who believe that others should be entitled to their culture, and then plot your graph, you will find that the number of people "uncomfortable" with different cultures is zero no matter how many "others" are in the area. Take a group of people opposed to multiculturalism, and plot the same graph, you will get a slope as you described. Our society is a mixture of those two types of people, so average out those two plots and yes you will see a diagonal line but that has nothing to do with multiculturalism. Once again, it's not multiculturalism that is the problem, it is people opposed to (ie intolerant of) multiculturalism.

Canada is a multicultural country and I don't believe anyone would argue that fact.

Show me a link or proof that the federal government doest NOT want immigrants to assimilate?

But the problem appears to be to what DEGREE are immigrants and even Quebec permitted to drive or steer the country away from the lifestyles and associated cultural aspects of the majority of Canadians.

This is what the problem is and this is where the federal government to date has failed, by providing little or NO leadership in this area. This federal lack of multicultural leadership has contributed to promoting bigotry and racism among Canadians.

[Argus]

You didn't really address my argument. You could easily build a graph, but put intolerance on the y-axis, and put 'how much do you believe that others should not be allowed to have their own culture' (ie opposed to multiculturalism) and you'll see that the people opposed to multiculturalism are opposed to it because they are intolerant.

You are simply missing the point. People are not intollerent towards the idea that others can live their own cultures, for the most part, UNTIL those people living their own culture begin to intrude on them living THEIR culture. Most people don't mind hearing an odd language spoken, but when they're constantly surrounded by other people speaking other languages they begin to get resentful. They begin to feel threatened, and to feel as if suddenly THEY are the outsiders in their own land. In many parts of Canada that is becoming the norm.

And this is still extremely tolerent. If you poured hundreds of thousands of foreigners into most other nations cities, esp Muslim, Asian, African, wherever in the third world, you'd have blood in the streets, revolution, and daily bombings and killings of the foreigners by local nationalist groups.

[Argus]

Another tactic that I find tiring is that of over-exaggeration. Toronto is arguably one of the most multicultural cities in the world, and every day people interact with others of different cultures without any problems or issues. These interactions range from people simply being tolerant of one another to people actively embracing other cultures. Is there some racism? Undoubtedly. But it is overshadowed by far by the number of people who embrace those differences, or at the very least tolerate them. The reality is that the widespread anger and racism you claim is a natural consequence of having enough immigrants simply does not exist.

Just because the media doesn't report it, doesn't mean it isn't there, in a huge, surging undercurrent. I see it here in Ottawa constantly. You see large groups of kids going by on buses - all Asian, or all black, or all white. Rarely do you find them mixing. I've been to a lot of bars, taverns and restaurants over the last year. Rarely do I see anyone not White. The Blacks, the Asians, the Arabs, they have their own restaurants, their own bars and clubs. Is there some mixing? A bit. You can see some Blacks, Asians and Arabs in some nightclubs. Not in restaurants, unless you mean Macdonalds.

Somalians. Every single person hates them. Everyone. Every. Single. One. You never see any mention of this in the media - ever. But everyone I've ever met, whenever the topic comes up, be they Quebecois who vote BQ, or Eco loving NDP supporter, wishy-washy Liberal or conservative, young blue collar, educated social science grad, middle aged soccer mom, older French professionals, whoever, wherever. They all have contempt for Somalians and want them all gone. In Toronto it's Jamaicans. In Montreal it's Haitians.

But you won't hear about it in the press, and people aren't about to go and beat people up in the streets. We're too civilized for that. But to think we have love and respect for each other is simply silly.

[gc1765]

You are simply missing the point. People are not intollerent towards the idea that others can live their own cultures, for the most part, UNTIL those people living their own culture begin to intrude on them living THEIR culture. Most people don't mind hearing an odd language spoken, but when they're constantly surrounded by other people speaking other languages they begin to get resentful. They begin to feel threatened, and to feel as if suddenly THEY are the outsiders in their own land. In many parts of Canada that is becoming the norm.

Aside from language (which I believe that immigrants should learn at least one of our official languages), how are immigrants having their own culture "intruding" on other cultures?

And this is still extremely tolerent. If you poured hundreds of thousands of foreigners into most other nations cities, esp Muslim, Asian, African, wherever in the third world, you'd have blood in the streets, revolution, and daily bombings and killings of the foreigners by local nationalist groups.

That has nothing to do with multiculturalism. Violence is already illegal. Of course immigrants must obey the law of the country they are emigrating to, no one is arguing that they shouldn't.

[gc1765]

Canada is a multicultural country and I don't believe anyone would argue that fact.

Show me a link or proof that the federal government doest NOT want immigrants to assimilate?

I never said that. Why should I provide you with a link to prove something that I never claimed to be true?

But the problem appears to be to what DEGREE are immigrants and even Quebec permitted to drive or steer the country away from the lifestyles and associated cultural aspects of the majority of Canadians.

And how are immigrants "steering" the majority of Canadians away from their culture? I live in a city with a lot of immigrants with many different cultures, but never has anyone forced me away from my own culture.

This is what the problem is and this is where the federal government to date has failed, by providing little or NO leadership in this area. This federal lack of multicultural leadership has contributed to promoting bigotry and racism among Canadians.

Yet another bold statement from Leafless without a single argument/example to back it up.

[bk59]

Just because the media doesn't report it, doesn't mean it isn't there, in a huge, surging undercurrent. I see it here in Ottawa constantly. You see large groups of kids going by on buses - all Asian, or all black, or all white. Rarely do you find them mixing. I've been to a lot of bars, taverns and restaurants over the last year. Rarely do I see anyone not White. The Blacks, the Asians, the Arabs, they have their own restaurants, their own bars and clubs. Is there some mixing? A bit. You can see some Blacks, Asians and Arabs in some nightclubs. Not in restaurants, unless you mean Macdonalds.

Somalians. Every single person hates them. Everyone. Every. Single. One. You never see any mention of this in the media - ever. But everyone I've ever met, whenever the topic comes up, be they Quebecois who vote BQ, or Eco loving NDP supporter, wishy-washy Liberal or conservative, young blue collar, educated social science grad, middle aged soccer mom, older French professionals, whoever, wherever. They all have contempt for Somalians and want them all gone. In Toronto it's Jamaicans. In Montreal it's Haitians.

But you won't hear about it in the press, and people aren't about to go and beat people up in the streets. We're too civilized for that. But to think we have love and respect for each other is simply silly.

I guess people just see what they want to see. Walking around Toronto you will see groups of people all from the same race. You will also see many groups of people of different racial, cultural and religious backgrounds. I have yet to see this hatred for Jamaicans that apparently exists everywhere in Toronto. If there really is this "huge, surging undercurrent" of racism I think somebody from at least one media source would have picked up on it. Yes, it's true, that just because the media doesn't report on something that doesn't mean it isn't there. Then again, a lack of any objective information seems to indicate that maybe, just maybe, it really isn't as large a problem as you make it out to be. Normally a lack of evidence indicates that the problem does not exist.