The new face of hate

[mikedavid00]

I understand that immigrants are expected to adapt. They do adapt, and will continue to do so. A 2nd generation immigrant is more "Canadian" than the parent. But as was posted in another thread - the devil is in the details.

A 2nd generation is more Canadian, but how much more?

Let me dig up one of my old posts.

Here's how much:

Survey conducted on immigrants and second generation Canadians. This is truly jaw dropping.:

Do you identify as Canadian?

Immigrant ___Recent* ___Earlier** __Second Generation

Whites ______21.9% ____53.8% _____78.2%

Chinese _____30.6 ______42.0 _______59.5

South Asian __19.1 ______32.7 _______53.6

Black _______13.9 ______27.2 _______49.6

Other _______17.4 ______32.8 _______60.6

* Arrived in Canada between 1991and 2001 ** Arrived in Canada before 1991

SOURCE: JERRREY G. REITZ AND RUPA BANERJEE

So basically, this shows that the MAJORITY of Immigrants and SECOND GEN don't even consider themselves Canadian.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....cond+generation

[mikedavid00]

Argus,

Every culture that comes to North America eventually melts in. The Muslim woman I had drinks with after my night class last fall was no different. I suspect you think they're different because you don't know any of them like my friend...

Sorry that is what you think, but it's not a modern reality. See my post.

I used to back all my claimes with numbers and cites. It consumed too much time so I don't bother anymore but everythign I say I can back with numbers and cites.

[Argus]

Argus,

Every culture that comes to North America eventually melts in. The Muslim woman I had drinks with after my night class last fall was no different. I suspect you think they're different because you don't know any of them like my friend...

You have no basis to make the above statement about integration. It is based on our history, but our history is one of absorbing European immigrants who, for the most part, had to make a great journey to get here. And could rarely return home. Today's immigrants are mostly not Christian or European, and their cultural value set is vastly more divergent from ours than the Europeans who came before them. They also are in constant contact with their homeland through television, the internet, telephones, and repeated journeys home. And, of course, in the larger communities, tens of thousands more come across every year to strengthen their old world cultural value set. All of this makes it impossible to compare the likelihood of their integration to that of previous immigrant groups.

And recall, I do not say that immigrants never integrate, or that no immigrants integrate. I know quite well that some do. Irshad Manji certainly has. But many, many do not.

[Michael Hardner]

Argus,

What in blazes are you talking about ?

Did any immigrants to America have a cultural context that included the freedom the new land had to offer ? Of course not. That's why they came and that's why they're still coming.

The basis I have for making that statement is the people that I have known and met. What's your basis for thinking otherwise.

By the way mikedavid is doing better, in that he's now sourcing his ideas.

SOURCE: JERRREY G. REITZ AND RUPA BANERJEE

Next question: who are these people ?

[jennie]

A 2nd generation is more Canadian, but how much more?

Let me dig up one of my old posts.

Here's how much:

Survey conducted on immigrants and second generation Canadians. This is truly jaw dropping.:

Do you identify as Canadian?

Immigrant ___Recent* ___Earlier** __Second Generation

Whites ______21.9% ____53.8% _____78.2%

Chinese _____30.6 ______42.0 _______59.5

South Asian __19.1 ______32.7 _______53.6

Black _______13.9 ______27.2 _______49.6

Other _______17.4 ______32.8 _______60.6

* Arrived in Canada between 1991and 2001 ** Arrived in Canada before 1991

SOURCE: JERRREY G. REITZ AND RUPA BANERJEE

So basically, this shows that the MAJORITY of Immigrants and SECOND GEN don't even consider themselves Canadian.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....cond+generation

... OR don't feel 'Canadian' ... all depends on how your interpret that.

[Leafless]

... OR don't feel 'Canadian' ... all depends on how your interpret that.

Your bias is showing.

Is that the way natives think?

[jennie]

Your bias is showing.

Is that the way natives think?

I don't know. I was commenting on possible interpretations of "do not identify as Canadian".

Is that because they don't want to (as implied by mikedavid) or because they don't feel they are seen by others as Canadian. It isn't as clear as mikedavid suggests.

[xul]

Of course law rules in a country. But because law is not perfect it should only deal in the more important matters. The speech of individuals should never come under the power of the government. Who has the right to be such a teacher?

I agree law is not perfect. It just a rule for the game of big girls and boys elder than a certain age. Such as the rule of basketball, it makes for those taller guys but against those shorter guys. Its function is just to keep everything in order. Laws are not writen by government. In your country, laws are writen by legislature, a legal representative of your people.

In the past, several hundreds years ago, laws did not rule trivial things such as insult. Instead of suing in a court, people usually useing swords or a handgun shoot each other to solve such problem. Using law to rule such problem is a modern way.

I think the divarication between us is: you interpret "free speech" as "a person have the right to express his opinion with saying anything by anyway except advocating voilence.", but I interpret "free speech" as " a person have the right to express his opinion by the way without insulating others".

If the speech is a threat or a call to violence against a particular person or group, then it is already a crime--perhaps this would cover the destroy Israel case. Saying "Jews are Satan", while I would think it is not a very nice thing to say, should never be punishable by law. It is an insult.

This principle does not suit all cases. At least there was one guy said Israel needs a conclusive victory by War and treats Arabian as immigrants. Obviously war is a kind of violence, but do you think he was commiting crime? I don't think so. I just think he was just expressing his opinion, from his view or Israeli view. So the judgement of a expression whether commits insult is not depend on what it was said but by which way it was said.

You make the comparison to what happened in Germany. But insulting someone and actually doing something are two different things. I do not agree with insulting someone, on a personal level. But there is not one of us here who has not been guilty of that.

They are different, just as a driver neglects a traffic sign than a terrorist knocks down a skyscraper. But laws rule both of them.

And if you take away all the meaningless crap about race and protected groups....why should it be any different if it is a race or a group which is insulted, or even an individual human being. There is no one who is free from this. And I cannot speak on behalf of Jewish people, but I know a few (and I am sure there are quite a few) who agree with me on the free speech issue. In fact I think there are a few who would say they would rather have free speech so that people's racism does not get whitewashed over, and in this way they can figure out who is a Nazi or not and allow them to make an ass of themselves.

I have said as a individual, I aggree with you. But if I was a lawmaker, I had to make those anti-hatred laws because it is not everyone thought as us. Those guys having no torlerance to insult also have their rights. If we allow hatred to be led to a race or a group people, it may poison whole country or nation. Iraq is a sample.

Anti-hatred law does not merely act against the white or majority racists, it can also act against minority racism. Just suppose, those MilkDavid said was truth. There was a company, in a department the manager and most menbers are "minority" and coincidentally those guys all are anti-white racist. So they bond together to boycott MilkDavid. Why wouldn't he have the right to use law against these guys without resign for a new job?

[jefferiah]

Those guys having no torlerance to insult also have their rights. If we allow hatred to be led to a race or a group people, it may poison whole country or nation. Iraq is a sample.

Anti-hatred law does not merely act against the white or majority racists, it can also act against minority racism.

Yes people who do not like being insulted have the same rights as everyone else. But that does not mean it is their right to censor someone else's speech because it insults them. It is no one's right to demand that everyone else say things that they like. But they have the right to say what they like in return. If someone insults me, Xul, it does not infringe upon any of rights. My rights are still intact.

And no, you are wrong there, anti-hatred laws are only in place for certain protected groups. Mike would not have the right to charge them with a hate crime unless he belongs to a protected group.

Now, Xul, do you think it was right that verses from the Bible referring to homosexuality as sin were deemed hate literature by courts?

You say that free speech should end when it comes to insulting others. The problem with that Xul, is that then hatred becomes guaged by how offended a person is. You can argue that this is not exactly what you mean, but you are not handling every case. You allow the argument to be made. The reality is that people sue over minor insults all the time claiming that their feelings were hurt etc. Perhaps you don't understand how bad this is sometimes.

Even though you said you were not offended by what Mike David said to you, you would support the right of someone else to sue him for large amounts of cash over the same thing (if they were insulted by it). Do you think that is realistic, Xul? I am not praising insults. But there is no one here who has not insulted someone. No one. Do you think we should all be subject to legal punishment for it?

Edited September 28, 2007 by jefferiah

[jennie]

Yes people who do not like being insulted have the same rights as everyone else. But that does not mean it is their right to censor someone else's speech because it insults them. It is no one's right to demand that everyone else say things that they like. But they have the right to say what they like in return. If someone insults me, Xul, it does not infringe upon any of rights. My rights are still intact.

And no, you are wrong there, anti-hatred laws are only in place for certain protected groups.

Now, Xul, do you think it was right that verses from the Bible referring to homosexuality as sin were deemed hate literature by courts?

It is not just about any "insults". It is specifically about "promoting" or "inciting" hatred.

[xul]

It is the moral and proper thing to do for the parent of the child who broke the window to offer to pay for the broken glass.

And replacing a window in Canada is very expensive.

If one of your friend visited your home and his 2 years old kid broke a teacup or something but his didn't know(perhaps he was in the bathroom) , might you ask him to pay it?

But if there is a guy, he ask his friend pay the teacup, do we have right to deny his right because the teacup was bought from a one dollar strore?

[jefferiah]

It is not just about any "insults". It is specifically about "promoting" or "inciting" hatred.

Inciting violence is already a crime. But the man whose case I referred to you did not incite violence. He said gays are the people like everyone else and they should be able to have jobs like everyone else, etc, but personally I am a catholic and I believe it is a sin.

Now he did not make a call to violence against homosexuals. He was quite respectful and mild about delivering this opinion. And yet you still say you support this case against him. He was asked his opinion in an interview and he gave it.

Oh and by the way, a question just rose in my mind:

If a white man were exposed to an offensive comment about white people, would you support him in a lawsuit against the person who made the offense?

Edited September 28, 2007 by jefferiah

[xul]

I'm not sure what you are talking about. I am speaking about present day laws in the UK and France, and present day violence among ethnic groups, principally Muslims and Blacks, towards the rest of their country.

I mean if Jews are not the cause of the rousing of hatred at that time, immigrants are also not the cause of rousing modern hatred.

Hatred usually are caused by economic frustration. Naturally the numbers of skinheads in a country always proportion with its economic condition. But if we allow those politician or clergy useing hatred or racism as their weapon to gain their political interests, I don't think history will not repeat again.

The anti-hatred laws have been in place for many, many years. What good have they done? Ethnic and racial hatred are far worse now than in the past, and far worse than in north America.

Really? In old time, Jews did nothing but was genocided in concentration camps. Now there did have AQ make some attacks and killed thousands of civilian in a lot of country,but have you seen there are any governments genociding innocent Muslim?

Yes, but he was also under a gag order issued by the Bavarian government after a 1925 speech threatening Jews, Marxists, etc. He was not allowed to give any public speeches or writings for 2 years. It did nothing to stop him from organizing and increasing his popularity. Bans like that simply do not work.

This part of history I did not know. But I think if they had the law as we have today, they might stop him.

[mikedavid00]

If one of your friend visited your home and his 2 years old kid broke a teacup or something but his didn't know(perhaps he was in the bathroom) , might you ask him to pay it?

But if there is a guy, he ask his friend pay the teacup, do we have right to deny his right because the teacup was bought from a one dollar strore?

No one ever has the right to deny.

But a window and tea cup is different. Window costs possibly $1000 to replace with labor.

A tea cup is only a dollar.

[mikedavid00]

Next question: who are these people ?

Their from the University of Toronto I believe that did the survey.

I have sources and cites for everything I state. I'm just too lazy.

I have cites from reports in Edmonton looking at the usage of Immigrants in hospitals. Refugee usage of hospitals in Quebec. They actually counted the race of people who used health services. These were mid 90's surveys so things like this couldn't happen these days.

And they proved that people from eastern european countries used actually LESS healthcare than canadians as to where people from Asia used MUCH MORE health service than the average Canadian.

These are buried very deep under the pile called the Internet and are very hard to find.

I have cites showing how over 90% of Samolies in Ottawa were on welfare.

Now we don't track that stuff anymore becuase it's considered racist. It's too bad because all we are doing is shooting ourselves in the foot.

[M.Dancer]

I'm just too lazy.

I have cites from reports in Edmonton ..........I have cites showing how over 90% of Samolies in Ottawa ..........

What you don't have is credibility.

[mikedavid00]

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index....st&p=252940

Perhaps you missed it.

Sorry.

You cannot cherry pick studies from 1980-1995. At that time refugees were our welfare problem.

[guyser]

Sorry.

You cannot cherry pick studies from 1980-1995. At that time refugees were our welfare problem.

Really , I suppose you mean whern it doesnt suit you, correct?

Before you answer , you might want to read your post from 4 minutes earlier ....

These were mid 90's surveys so things like this couldn't happen these days.

[guyser]

And no, you are wrong there, anti-hatred laws are only in place for certain protected groups. Mike would not have the right to charge them with a hate crime unless he belongs to a protected group.

Who are the protected groups?

[mikedavid00]

That would be because Canadians are finished school well before this age, and immigrants come here, realize their poor education gets them nowhere, and need to go back to school.

Student services will also pay your 'living expenses' so it's also like a welfare while you go to school. They give you $3000 every 4 months.

You should see how many Canadians tested to get into my program. Alsmost all of them were screened out and immigrants/international students were chosen over our own Canadians becuase the immigrants had better math testing from what I was told. People I went to highschool with said they failed testing. Instead, what I got was old, ailing, wives of immigrants and islamic/chinese/indian immigrants and sikh international students as my class mates. Some classes I was in, i would count 2 ppl including myself that could speak native English.

This one guy, i swear he took notes in Korean. He wrote Korean with his pen and paper. That's how alien he was. And to think he got prefered into OUR f*cking schools over our own Canadians. Those schools are subsidized for Canadians - NOT FORIEGN nationals.

Those kids who got screened out? Who knows what happened to them. I'm sure they tried again and never got in and fealt they weren't good enough and now are underemployed or never realized their dreams becuase we GAVE THEM TO FOREIGN NATIONALS.

And people like Guyser and self hating Libs LOVE IT!

I feel sorry for Jennie. She's clearly underemployed, brainwashed, living below standards etc. etc. And she doens't realize that part of the reason she's stuck where she is, IS becuase of her beloved immigrants.

I live in Toronto and have to drive by an 'Islamic Mission' of some sort. An old house converted into some dive. An Islamic schoolbus with a lady in a hijab picks the kids up there and drives them to their private shcool. There are several women that live in that house. ALL WEARING RAGS. looking like they live in Afganistan. Right here near Oakville. People who use our services and don't work! Islamic women don't work. It's that simple. Women who wear burkas don't work. They are human slaves. They contribute NOTHING.

And they need to leave NOW.

Do you not see the contradiction between this quote and your first one? Why do you think older immigrants are in school anyway? A great thirst for knowledge?

What I feel they need to do is get their ass in gear and get into a factory or field where they are needed. Stop being lazy and f*cking around Canada and writing in newspapers and joining organizations. That's for us to do. They need to focus on paying taxes and working our small jobs in rural where they are needed. Then they can get out of Canada.

IMO, their extrememly poor English ensures that they will never be taken seriosly at work. (there are many exceptoins of course. There are many sucker employers that will hire only paper qualifications. They are in our gov't jobs, RBC, CIBC, Scotia Bank, and any other gov't protected institution. Oh they love hiriing the immigrants and paying them $70,000 to sit around and speak their language around the office. That happens quite a bit. But most immigrants will not get this. It simply wont happen).

[mikedavid00]

What is bothersome about Canada's point system is that it credits people for education and skills that cannot be used in Canada without requalifying in English or French.

Jennie we're not pulling these opinions out of the sky. We have thorughly, thorughly researched these issues in the past and cited almost every study and report available. (Same with Arar. No one on any forum has exhausted the discussoin more than we have here.)

All the reports say the same thing; Immigrants are doing poorly in Canada, killing our welfare state, and ruining the quality of life for Candians.

[mikedavid00]

Is that because they don't want to (as implied by mikedavid) or because they don't feel they are seen by others as Canadian. It isn't as clear as mikedavid suggests.

If you lived in the city, you would meet some of them and see that they love talking all night about how 'Punjabi' or 'Azn' they are.

They could care less to be Canadian and find shame in saying that.

Sometimes in clubs these brown chicks would ask 'do you consider yourself Canadian' and I would always say 'yes'. Then i would get 'why', and I would say that if I didn't consider myself Canadian, I'd be grasping to something that wasn't there or living some lie becuae I am Canadian.

I never thought much of it at the time and it only happened a few times out of all those years.. but I still think bank and wonder why they asked me that? What importance was it to them? I guess I"ll never know.

[mikedavid00]

Now, Xul, do you think it was right that verses from the Bible referring to homosexuality as sin were deemed hate literature by courts?

Give it time.

That will eventually happen.

[jefferiah]

Give it time.

That will eventually happen.

It happened a few years ago.

[Argus]

Argus,

What in blazes are you talking about ?

That would be much easier to answer if you had quoted the post you were referring to.

Did any immigrants to America have a cultural context that included the freedom the new land had to offer ? Of course not.

Now what are you talking about?

That's why they came and that's why they're still coming.

The basis I have for making that statement is the people that I have known and met. What's your basis for thinking otherwise.

Huh? What statement? About immigrants integrating? Sorry, but "cause I know a couple of immigrants" doesn't qualify as an adequate rebuttal.