[Newsbot]

Title: Canadians aren't as accepting as we think � and we can't ignore it, writes Angus Reid
Category: Political
Posted By: uwish
Date: 2016-10-04 09:01:57
Canadian

[uwish]

of course we are not as accepting, for some reason we like to say one thing yet do or think another. We have a right to put rules, boundaries as a nation on the people we want here. I see NOTHING wrong with Kellie Leitch's comments on screening for Canadian values, and I won't feel the slightest bit badly for it!

[BeaverFever]

Its one thing to ask people abstract questions devoid of any real-world application, but where the rubber meets the road is when we're faced with an actual policy decision.

"Should immigrants do more to fit in?" Sure, whatever that question may mean to you. Why would any majority say no?

But ask Canadians if turbans or hijabs be banned, and they resoundingly say No.

I think things would be better for everyone if "immigrants did more to fit in". But I'm not saying that they should be FORCED to fit in, or that should be banned if they refuse to "fit in" (and what does 'fit in' mean anyways?)

[Thanos]

Not plotting to destroy a commuter train or to kidnap then decapitate the PM would probably be considered as fitting in.

[peck420]

Thanos Thanos:

Not plotting to destroy a commuter train or to kidnap then decapitate the PM would probably be considered as fitting in.

After the current carbon tax debacle...are you sure about that?

Yes, I am joking.

[Thanos]

The only direction the arc goes is down. Might as well enjoy the fall, man.

[JaredMilne]

What this really illustrates is how multiculturalism needs a retooling, and even moreso how we should be able to discuss this without people who raise these kinds of concerns being accused of being racists.

The article talks about how we're generally quite comfortable with certain kinds of diversity, citing the examples of Sikh police officers wearing turbans. Not to mention that immigrants themselves are far more likely to feel they're treated as fellow Canadians by native-born residents than their counterparts in places like France.

That suggests to me that, for the most part, people aren't bothered by things like new kinds of music, religious faith, cuisine, to the extent that they're individual choices and actions. The real problem comes when people demand specific accommodations that spill over onto others whether they want it or not-Tasha Kheriddin talks about Quebec sugar shacks that stop serving pork, or a parent asks for segregated swimming in a community pool.

That's what really drives most Canadians up the wall, I think, suspicions that some people have about Islam and Middle Eastern immigrants aside.

That's why we need to discuss the limits of multiculturalism along with the accommodations. So far as I've seen, Quebec is the only place that's even tried to have a discussion on what constitutes "reasonable accommodation", whereas there's a sense in other parts of Canada that doing so means you're implicitly racist.

[BeaverFever]

JaredMilne JaredMilne:

That's why we need to discuss the limits of multiculturalism along with the accommodations. So far as I've seen, Quebec is the only place that's even tried to have a discussion on what constitutes "reasonable accommodation", whereas there's a sense in other parts of Canada that doing so means you're implicitly racist.

Politcians can't make these kinds decisions in the abstract. We have courts and tribunals to adrresythe limits as they may reasonably apply in a particular individual's situation. A person requests a specific accommodation be it for religion or disability or gender etc. and the relevant parties work it out between themselves or go to a third party tribunal where the particulars of the situation are reviewed and considered. I don't know why anyone think there's some kind of sweeping general law that can be passed that would adequately address any kind of situation that could possibly arise.

[Thanos]

You know there's a massive disconnect between the elites in Canada and the average citizen if someone like Angus Reid barely bothers to disguise his contempt, or his accusation of racism in his subtext, when Canadians think that immigrants should be making a better effort to assimilate. That's how far things have fallen. The apprehension over immigrants, and only one group of immigrants in the Muslims ones, is bad and wrong. The immigrants themselves are pure hearted and innocent, no matter the mayhem they've committed on a large scale elsewhere like in the US or France. Only the people who are worried are wrong. When the debates starts with that kind of elitist ivory-tower presumption then there is no debate and it's just another insult slinging session as usual.

[Caelon]

At different times in our history we have been discriminatory or more accepting. Go back to the building of the railroads and the Chinese workers that were one step above slavery. Move forward and see China towns, but general acceptance. Some are first generation and some are third or more. Overall the Chinese community have protected their culture while assimulating into the mainstream. In today's society that seems acceptable.

Where intolerance is coming to the fore is where recent imigrants are expecting Canada to change to accomodate the customs and beliefs they bring with them. When you are overt bad reactions follow.

We can look at exceptions like the Japanese during the second world war. A lot of productive citizens lost everything when they were placed in internment camps. When released they rebuilt themselves from scratch again. The second world war created discrimination through fear and media propoganda that was not borne out in reality.

Overall we need immigrants. As a society we are not having eneough children to take care of the tax burden of an aging population. We are not going to get great influxes of people from Briton and other English speaking countries. They are going to come from someplace else. We cannot even expect the Ukraine or other European nations to provide the masses they did 100 years ago. So other cultures will be our tax salvation.

If I had to pick one visible minority that have grown with Canada it would be the Chinese. Maybe that is because they have been here over 100 years and are now considered part of the norm. Even if new people are arriving yearly the community infrastructure and general acceptance means they will fit in.

New immigrants come with the expectation of our own youth. They push for what they consider is their right and feelings get ruffled. Still there are differences between cultures. I see distinct differences in Hindus, Sikhs and Moslems.

Canadians have biases and I see the Hindus as using a softer approach and having an easier time being accepted. Sikhs are in the middle and Moslems are at the other side. Things change and you can see the second generation looking at themselves as Canadian and having conflicts with the first generation. By the third and fourth generation assimilation will be almost complete.

Time will cure the 'racial' prejudice of today, but in the meantime the new immigrants are today's Chinks, Polacks and Ukes.

[BeaverFever]

I wish immigrants and "old stock" Canadians alike would just accept that the whole idea of "preserving culture" is a stupid idea anyway. Anywhere you go in the world, culture is always changing.

For most people on this planet, the language,religion and traditions of our most recent ancestors were very different from the ancestors that preceded them. People think they're preserving some ancient culture from the dawn of mankind, in reality they're just doing their own interpretation of something that's sometimes only a few generations old and changes slightly from generation to generation. If you could travel back in time you wouldn't have to go very far for your ancestors to seem very foreign to you. And guess what? Despite anyone's best efforts, future generations will evolve their own culture that will be foreign to us.

Personally I don't give a damn about any of my ancestors' superstitions or fertility dances or whatever rituals they did to win the favour of some non-existent magical being. I don't understand why anyone would.

[Thanos]

No, it's about preserving secularism against rule via religion. That's all it's ever been about. I could give a damn about preserving bogus cultural astroturf like the highland games. I care a hell of a lot though about having and maintaining legal and education systems that aren't dominated by religion, or seek to hand out special privileges for religion. In other words I'm against everyone from evangelicals to sharia followers from imposing their will on me and mine, or them deciding who is and who isn't second-class dependent on whether or not their "holy" texts love or hate them. Would be nice if you were against it too.

[raydan]

Who the f**k does Angus Reid think they are, doing this kind of study and then telling me I'm not that f**king accepting. Then the have the f**king nerve to tell me I can't ignore it. They can take their stupid, f**king study and stick it up their s**t-stained ass.


F**k!!!







...See, I can be accepting as the next guy.

[Thanos]

Damn straight, skippy.

[BeaverFever]

Thanos Thanos:

No, it's about preserving secularism against rule via religion. That's all it's ever been about. I could give a damn about preserving bogus cultural astroturf like the highland games. I care a hell of a lot though about having and maintaining legal and education systems that aren't dominated by religion, or seek to hand out special privileges for religion. In other words I'm against everyone from evangelicals to sharia followers from imposing their will on me and mine, or them deciding who is and who isn't second-class dependent on whether or not their "holy" texts love or hate them. Would be nice if you were against it too.

Of course I'm against that, as I've said REPEATEDLY since the dawn of time. Why do you refuse to listen?