Posted by Matra on Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:16 | #

The headline stopped me in my tracks yesterday. I read the article which in the dead tree addition started on the front page and was continued near the back. At the end of the article near the back was another about race and schools. The Separate School Board (private, though, government subsidised Catholic schools) had ordered its teachers to undertake new diversity training in the Dufferin-Peel (two counties north of Toronto) school board area. Apparently there’d been some “discrimination” against blacks involved in some disciplinary matter and now all teachers must be re-educated.

Incidentally, we don’t know if 90% of the gun attacks involved blacks (it might be understated) because a few years back the police were barred from collecting and reporting racial data when it came to crime following protests by black activists. The media also does its best to cover up such info.

Posted by Kubilai on Mon, 10 Oct 2005 00:54 | #

Hey, I have an idea!  Instead of all this hand wringing, why don’t we ask Philippe Rushton what he thinks is the problem.  He’s a Canadian afterall.

God, how I hate Canada, especially the liberal cesspool known as Toronto.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 10 Oct 2005 01:00 | #

Versions of all those programs listed have been tried exhaustively in the U.S. for fifty years at the cost of trillions, without result whatsoever except higher rates of crime because of the mollycoddling mentality that goes along with that stuff, the creation of vast new bureaucracies at stupendous cost, and the confiscation of enormous amounts of hard-earned money from whites via taxation to pay for these utterly ineffective programs and bureaucracies.  Canadian politicians, living as they do just across the border, know full-well that exactly those programs have been tried to the hilt here and failed miserably, but likely will vote for them to be “tried” in Canada anyway because—well, because politicians are politicians, and let’s just say that “honesty,” “integrity,” and “intelligence” are not exactly the bywords of politics.

Posted by Kubilai on Mon, 10 Oct 2005 01:25 | #

Soren, your analysis is correct for one little problem.  Canada is NOT the US, Australia, nor the countries of Europe that still cling to ethnic pride.  This will NOT end well for white Canadians and will definitely not lead any Ontarian to think separation.  That’s a curse word in view of what Quebec has tried in the past.  Not to mention, the Black groups do not want TOTAL and COMPLETE separation because they still want the money and White support.  They just want to be rid of White intermingling in their affairs.  Akin to a child riding a bicycle with training wheels.  He doesn’t want his father holding him but wants to “ride on his own”. 

Though upon further rumination, it may start the separation talks again in Quebec if this becomes an ugly monstrosity.  Maybe THAT is the silver lining to all this.  Maybe.

Posted by Absolutely on Mon, 10 Oct 2005 06:25 | #

Canada is actually in a next-to-ideal situation regarding ethnic politics, as every precedent for ‘separateness’ and ethno-cultural autonomy has been laid both at the state level and in common discourse - all that’s left is for anglo-Canadians to become motivated, assert themselves, and everything shall fall into place within a very short period of time.

This is one example of how different a society Canada appears to be when contrasted with that of other more unified nations (the examples of the US and Australia are good ones). Unity within a economically bonded geographic region is NOT ethnic pride, though; it is artifical, statist, assimilative nationalism; it is absolute poison to the ends of ethnic sovereignty. It is very apt to point out that this is not Canada. Canada is a polity of what essentially amounts to imperial allegiance - it does not represent a full social compact.

To be short where I may continue indefinitely, I’ll say quite specifically that multiculturalism is not your enemy. Multiculturalism is a larger worldview and powerfully promotes communal integrity; it does not necessarily engage in any fallacies regarding valuation of diversity for the community itself (as distinct from the state). It also does not serve as an impetus for migration in itself (this problem predates multiculturalism significantly), it simply confronts the reality of coexisting ethnicities and deals with them in the least destructive manner.

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 10 Oct 2005 07:39 | #

Soren,

Segregation should be discussed, yes.  But genuinely.  No black financial dependency, no guilt for the white man.

Absolutely,

I don’t think you are allowing for the liberalism and self-interest of the delightful power elite which controls our fate.  Its action is not merely managerial in terms of resolving existing community tensions, as you describe.  It is revolutionising the West, race-replacing in the name of social justice, good business and Jewish permanency.

By validating alien cultures as equals to western culture, Multiculturalism greatly enhances immigration.  In its action upon Western Man it is, in fact, inextricable from the process of immigration itself.

Yes, insomuch as Multiculturalism is only the pursuit of the cultural destruction of Western Man it leaves him some continuing racial integrity.  Assimilation, by contrast, is the direct pursuit of his racial destruction and would leave him little or none over time.  Assimilation has a genocidial intent, especially when you consider that the clear alternative for the liberal elite, if Multiculturalism fails (as it is doing), is repatriation in the Old World, white ethnostates in the New.

In other words, the political and economic and racial interests of the elite outweigh their loyalty to Western Man himself.  It is as simple as that.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:45 | #

Somewhat à propos of ideas touched on in this thread, Lawrence Auster writes at FrontPageMag.com:

”<u>Whites’ belief in</u> white America’s inherent badness, their compulsion to abase themselves before ‘oppressed’ and ‘disadvantaged’ minorities of all kinds, became an organizing principle of American politics—a principle that was soon extended to every conceivable ‘victim’ group. Hispanics, Asians, American Indians, women, homosexuals, the physically and mentally handicapped, the elderly, juveniles—all now became recipients of an ever-expanding system of official group recognition, government entitlements, and relief from normal societal standards. This relief included the license to attack whites and America for all possible social ills and even to side openly with America’s enemies in time of war.

“Sadly, even President Bush has climbed on the blame-whitey bandwagon, declaring at the National Cathedral that the poverty that left so many New Orleans blacks vulnerable to the Katrina disaster ‘has roots in generations of segregation and discrimination that closed many doors of opportunity. As we clear away the debris of a hurricane, let us also clear away the legacy of inequality.’ As though it were 1962 all over again, as though Harrington’s The Other America had just been published, as though we had not already lived through four decades of prodigiously expensive and wasteful efforts to alleviate poverty which had only encouraged the very behaviors that create poverty and the attendant social disorder, as though none of these lessons had already been so painfully learned, President Bush, to the applause of more than a few benighted conservatives, declares that he wants to start up the Great Society all over again. Such is the enduring power of white guilt, and the compulsion on the part of many whites to attempt to clear themselves personally of the racism charge by indicting white America as a whole.

“While liberal guilt and leftist anti-Americanism have many causes, it was black inequality above all other factors that sparked the explosion in America’s conscience that made America turn against itself. For the same reason, Americans, particularly whites, will be unable to turn back the forces that are weakening our nation unless they first uproot their false racial guilt, their undeserved sense of their moral illegitimacy as a people, that arises from their mistaken belief in their responsibility for black inequality. If whites finally dropped the liberal expectation that all groups be fully integrated and perform equally in all walks of life, if they accepted Booker T. Washington’s sensible notion of encouraging each group to develop in its own way according to its own talents and qualities, they would stop attributing to their own imaginary racism every failure of blacks to achieve economic parity or social integration with themselves. The entire structure of thought by which whites and America have been demonized would collapse. But if whites continue to believe that there are no differences between groups in their abilities and qualities, and that the black achievement gap can only be explained by white racism or white indifference, then the blaming of white America, and the resulting diminishment of our culture and civilization, will continue. More than any other factor, facing the truth about race and race differences could help re-moralize our society.”

Posted by Igor Alexander on Wed, 02 May 2007 19:48 | #

“# Police to keep race-based statistics.”

Interesting that this racial minority is now *demanding* that police keep race-based statistics, when you consider that a likely reason the police haven’t been doing so is to avoid being called “racist.”

Personally, I find it unforgiveable that Canada hasn’t been keeping these kinds of statistics, and suspect it’s because such statistics would clash strongly with the vision of a multiracial utopia that Canada’s social planners have been promoting.

“# An independent civilian review of police misconduct.”

By this they probably mean “an independent _black_ civilian review of police misconduct.”

“# The coalition also supports calls for a black-focused school and envisions a vibrant African-Canadian cultural centre.”

I wouldn’t mind seeing the former happen, even if white taxpayers get saddled with the bill. It would be worth it to get this troublesome, violent, intellectually sub-par minority out of our schools and away from our children.

“‘It comes down to money,’ Fynn said.  ‘Government will have to find resources to put back into these agencies…. You have worsening gun violence.  How much of a priority is that?’”

Almost sounds like extortion, doesn’t it?