Someone near and dear to me sent me some photos of southern Ontario forest with the leaves changing. So beautiful.
When I moved to Canada in 2003, its population was 32 million. Today, it is 40 million, an increase of 25%.
Had immigration not occurred, the Canadian population would have fallen, given its fertility rate of 1.47, which itself would have been lower had immigration not occurred…For those who don’t have a sense of numbers, more than one out of every four people in Canada arrived after my arrival twenty years back. As it stands today, 26% of Canadians are first-generation immigrants. 18% are second-generation. 32% of children under fifteen in 2021 were second-generation immigrants.
My interest is not to get into statistical nuances but to show that nearly 50% of Canadians are first or second-generation immigrants. And immigration continues to ramp up, most of whom come from the Third World.
Before the early 1970s, most immigrants came from Europe. Today, only 10% of the total immigrants come from Europe….
India is by far the most significant source of immigration, accounting for 27% of total immigrants. A distant second is China, with 7%. Third is Afghanistan, with 5.4%. Fourth is Nigeria, with 5%….
Western political correctness has metastasized into a puerile understanding of cultures. Even those who can see prefer to make money and maintain their lifestyles, their country houses, the size of their kitchen cabinets, and the schools their kids attend rather than speak up.
Canadians have put Canada on a path to inevitable destruction.
There is no history in human affairs when a society willingly gave itself away to foreigners. There is no history of a society maintaining any values once foreigners overtook it. Indeed, there is no history in human affairs where muti-culturalism and ethnic diversity have not led to massive civil conflicts, but Canadians love romanticizing these anti-values.
What are the consequences of these policies?
Canada now has massive ghettoes. Visit and soak in the Indian ghettos of Surrey, Brampton, or Richmond to get a sense of proportion and perspective. I mention the Indian ghettos, for I know them better, but you should also visit the Afghani, Syrian, Somalian, etc. ghettoes. If you do, you will realize that Canada is like a train constantly changing its passengers. For most Canadians, the passengers aren’t what they started with.
Recently, Eritrean immigrants fought a pitched battle in Calgary. Khalistan’s posters can now be seen in many places. These don’t leave a lasting impression on native Canadians, but they must.
How does Canada choose its immigrants?
India provides 27% of Canada’s new immigrants….
Every Indian city today has at least one high-rise building devoted to housing agencies that help people immigrate to Canada, most offering help creating fake documents or getting admission to colleges structured not for education but for assisting people to stay in Canada long enough to become citizens.
Crazy, isn’t it, that Canada has given itself away to those who faked documents? So much for the much-touted skilled-class immigrants!
This essay is written from the perspective of an Indian Canadian. Bhandari knows what he is talking about. Here’s another perspective.
I was born in Canada and live in it now, product of immigrant Slavic parents. I can tell you that the biggest enemy of Canada are the Old Stock Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Irish population. This population was always the most brainwashed into worshipping the system and any dogma the system put(s) out. The second thing they did was to (exploit) rely, at first on continental European Immigrants to build up their infrustucture and know-how, and then later on affuent Chinese immigrants that they could sell their houses to at huge premiums as well as services, with the goal being to be as least productive as possible. Still other immigrants at first Europeans, and then later replaced by Indians and Filipinos, were building the homes and working in the service sector, serving these Anglos.
What has been the downfall of the Old Stock Anglo-Canadians is the way they treat their offspring and family. Their families do not stick together and they look at their children as a burden, as opposed to an investment. As a result the chidren of the Old Stock Anglo Canadians have been and are at disadavantage, kicked out of the home at 18 years, while Italians, later Vietnamese, Indians, Chinese supported by their families receive the higher education and top class jobs. The period I describe here is from the late 60’s to the 2000s.”
That sounds like the Canada I know and where I grew up. So few heirs of the WASP elite truly wanted to build a greater Canada. Canadian WASP culture celebrates inebriation, hedonism, selfishness and at best shallow materialism. As a child of that culture, I’ve not been exempt from its failings. It’s a long way from the world of my great aunts and uncles who toiled decades to improve education in British Columbia, or grandparents who helped build one of the greatest retail empires in the world or Polish count Peter Mielzynski who arrived after the second world war and built a successful import business in the seventies. That generation was dedicated to building Canada and making space for Canadian life and as an inevitable consequence Canadian culture1.
How did we plunge so quickly, so far? The siren call of Jane Fonda and the drop-out generation. It’s hard to have ideals when your society’s idea of positive contribution is to head two thousand miles across an ocean into a jungle to commit war crimes. Of course Canada did not directly participate in Viet Nam but we don’t really exist on our own, we are a shadow of our larger neighbour to the south. And before that, to the centre of Empire, in London. If malaise infects those societies, it is reflected in Canada. Our country had lost its mission, having children and raising them properly was no longer fashionable. Turn on, tune in, drop out became the mantra of a generation.
For Canada, the seminal moment was the election of Brian Mulroney in 1984. When Mulroney pushed through NAFTA with Reagan, Canada’s status as a colony of the United States effectively moved from geography to law. Those of us who felt strongly patriotic had been set adrift by our own government. On the economic side, NAFTA gave up control of our water and our resources (if we sold any resources, US companies had equal rights to any Canadian enterprises) and our culture. Canadian broadcast rules were to be phased out, US magazines were to be given near peer rights on the newsstands as our Canadian magazines. Canadian cultural protectionism mattered as our cultural market was 10% the size of the neighbour with a shared language. Without protection, Canadian culture would just be subsumed within the US culturesphere within decades. Which is exactly what happened. Canadianism is now more or less simple regionalism, not much more distinct than the Pacific Northwest or the US Southeast.
Immigration did nothing to hinder this process. Our Canadian immigrants as Bhandari points out live in their own culturesphere, mostly ignoring Canadian culture. Where they pursue or follow North American culture, it’s probably US popular culture. Divided between their home countries and the United States, they are the perfect globalist citizen, loyal to noone except brands and economic success. At the same time, these immigrants to Canada suffer from cultural disorientation and discomfort. Canadian culture is neither present enough or strong enough to give them renewed orientation in this world. We drift past one another, unable to interact in more than a functional way with one another. We are too different, we share nothing.
There’s a certain irony in our national anthem, as a commenter on Bhandari’s essay pointed out:
I have nothing but utter contempt for the stupid, white Canadian liberals who let demonic globalist elites deliberately destroy their country. “Oh Canada, we stand on guard for thee”. Bullshit. Change this f** song. It hasn’t been true for decades.
What’s worse is that in moving back to Europe, the birthplace of European culture I’d hoped to leave behind the self-destructive progressiveness of the New World. We couldn’t be that stupid in the Old World to allow the destruction of our cultures and cities, many of which we’ve built up over a thousand years. Over three thousand for those who trace their origins back to the Ancient Greeks. Could we?
It turns out that we could. Europe stood by and watched the United States destroy the Middle East (Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003, Libya 2011, Syria 2012. Yemen 2014) in wars of choice and aggression and then allowed Germany’s Chancellor to announce open season on Europe, opening our gates to many millions of economic migrants whom the US had created and sent our way to destroy our standard of life. What continues to astonish me is how citizens stand by to observe the destruction of everything for which their parents, their grandparents, great-grandparents and their grandparents before them had worked so hard.
We stood by in Canada and for now it looks like we’ll stand by in Europe. Without adequate leadership and an altruistically patriotic ruling class, any society is doomed. Where adequate leadership appears in any single country, the EU immediately takes measures to suppress local outbreaks of good sense and prudent administration.
What is to be done? Novel and visionary Leo Tolstoi argued that individuals matter not in history and are only the jetsam on surface of the tide. I’d disagree. Only a strong individual can lead us out of the fog of moral and ethical confusion which has sent our societies into a slow whirlpool of self-destruction. Some argue that such an individual would not be allowed to raise his2 head3.
The dangers of doing the right thing will not prevent the brave from acting on the courage of their convictions. Napoleon Bonaparte could have died in battle many days before leading France to rule Europe. Most of us in Continental Europe still live by his legal code. Many crowned heads of England fell in battle, even while leading their armies to success.
Life is dangerous but it always ends in death. To accept servility to linger a decade or two more on our earth is to accept ignominy. Conformity is no guarantee of prosperity and long life. Our governments have damned enough of its most loyal henchmen to an early death. Life will be a struggle whichever side you take, make sure you fight for right.
In fairness, at least one of my grandparents was against culture and cultural activities in general on principle. Culture to him represented decadence and sloth. He was wrong of course, but not far wrong. ↩
Such against-the-current leaders are almost exclusively men, particularly the successful ones. Among women, in the West we have the Sabine women and Joan of Arc as counter examples. One can argue long and hard why it’s the case, but mostly it’s related to the male relationship to abstract ideas. More men are prepared to sacrifice their lives for abstract ideas and to defend a worldview. This may not be a strength – dying for an idea sounds much better in print than in real life. Dead is dead, heroic death or not. ↩
It’s true that there has been a long string of assassinations of such leaders. Whether one consider J.F. Kennedy a revolutionary leader (history suggests Kennedy was more of a standard American imperialist than we credit in retrospect), his brother R.F. Kennedy was a charismatic firebrand with a clear and alternative vision for the United States. On the short list of the famous removed while in power, there are Salvador Allende in Chile, Patrice Lumumba in Congo, UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjöld. Sometimes the assassination is not physical but political, as in the case of two-time Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam who was removed from power by the Queen of England with the connivance of the CIA, MI6 and the Australian DSD. ↩