Who says there`s a decline in Canada`s manufacturing sector? There is a burgeoning racism industry thriving in the halls of Canadian universities where racism, even when non-existent, is manufactured by professors and their eager students to justify otherwise lacklustre fields of study. Ironically some of these spurious charges of racism originate from people who themselves practiced confirmed bigotry against minorities.
The latest example comes from a University of Toronto Sociology professor who was at the center of a storm of controversy after she oversaw a classroom "Jew count" and made anti-Semitic remarks. She now is making a dubious accusation against the Canadian government of engaging in racist policies by requiring immigrants to have Canadian experience.
Rupaleem Bhuyan, an Assistant Professor at the University of Toronto`s School of Social Work had, according to former PhD Programs Director Adrienne Chambon, endorsed some of her visible minority students' refusal to attend a field trip to a Jewish geriatric center by saying, `‘racialized’ students come from underprivileged backgrounds and were justified in not wanting to be around old Jews because they are rich and would make them uneasy . ` Bhuyan, along with Izumi Sakamoto, the new acting PhD Programs Director at the university`s Factor-Inwentash School of Social Work, has produced a report claiming that federal immigration policies are a form of, as they term it, `democratic racism.``
The smiling faces of the authors of the document "Democratic Racism: The Case of Canadian Experience" look like a generic advertisement for a union promoting its multicultural values, but the content is somewhat more insidious. It alleges that the Federal Skilled Worker Program, which is designed to facilitate admission of the most proficient and adept immigrants who are able to make economic contributions to Canada is in their words, " a particular form of racist exclusion of immigrants of colour that dismisses the reality of racism and immigrant experience while simultaneously maintaining Canada as a tolerant white society."
And how, you may well ask, is this white supremacy being enforced by the Canadian government? By giving preference to immigrants who speak one of Canada's two official languages and having work experience which would enable them to quickly adapt to Canadian economic culture. If you think those are reasonable factors in determining who would make a good immigrant, a coven of crackpot academics maintains it is part of a secret agenda to enforce "a particular form of racial discourse in a multicultural society that signals Canadian ambiguity and ambivalence towards ‘visible minorities’ (the Canadian polite term for people of colour) who are maintained as outsiders."
Absent from their brilliant analysis are facts such as India, which is rapidly becoming the most populous country on Earth and one that is primarily non-white, has English as one of its official languages and immigrants from that country qualify more readily under Canada's admissibility criteria. Haiti is a French speaking country and its immigrants have an advantage in applications for Quebec residency that white, non-francophone Eastern Europeans would not have. Of course, we're discussing the profound postulations of Social Science academics, so we shouldn't allow ourselves to get hung up on minutiae like relevant facts and details.
Rather than being convincing about their outlandish position, which lines up with radical, fanatical organizations like No One Is Illegal, which advocate that Canada should have no immigration restrictions whatsoever, our group of sophomoric professors devalue the meaning of racism by corrupting its meaning and applying it for their own distorted purposes.
Along those lines, it is noteworthy that the Community Partner for the research on their study was the Chinese Canadian National Council Toronto Chapter. That organization's current Executive Director, May Lui, is a former comment moderator for the ultra-left wing website rabble.ca who has actually claimed she was the victim of sexist oppression because she didn't receive prompt service at a downtown Toronto hardware store.
In fact, even the authors of Democratic Racism: The case for Canadian Experience suggest a modicum of self-awareness and appear to realize how ridiculous their position is, even as they try to make it, when they wrote about the government's policy being that , "Its power lies in its commonsensical and elusive nature, further mystifying it and making antiracist critique more difficult." Yes, mystifying indeed are the ways of those who operate outside the bubble of academic self-indulgence. One almost feels sympathy for these silly people. It must be so hard to be an anti-racist agitator when you have to concede that the positions you so vehemently oppose are based on common sense!
Study co-author Bhuyan is a non-white immigrant who, as she makes the point of mentioning in n the first paragraph of her University of Toronto biography "is a second-generation immigrant of Assamese/Indian heritage" who was born and raised in the USA. Along with the all co-authors of her paper, she seems to have slipped through the cracks of our immigration system they believe is designed to maintain white hegemony and have somehow evidently managed to benefit from the "Canadian experience". One of the paradoxes multiculturalism is that the second generation tends to romanticize their parents' culture while ignoring the reasons they abandoned it for a better life in the west. In striving to attack the foundations of our culture to ostensibly better it, they would transform it into one to which their parents would never have wanted to come