EYE ON A CRAZY PLANET
Showing posts with label multiculturalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label multiculturalism. Show all posts
Thursday, April 4, 2013
Is London, Ontario becoming Canada's Mecca for terrorists?
al Starzeera's resident Islamist apologist wants police to stop "hounding" the breeding grounds for terrorism. Haroon Siddiqui is correct that most tips police and CSIS receive about terrorist plots do come from fellow Muslims. Most Canadian Muslims are appalled by terrorism. But Siddiqui seems to have cognitive dissonance in recognizing that the reason those tips come from Muslims is because terrorism is being planned by other Muslims.
And it is in the Mosques, with the hateful preaching that goes on in many of them, where the seeds of that murderous violence is planted.
Friday, March 15, 2013
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
Bully Bloggers are heroes in the War of Ideas
The history of mankind is really a chronicle of the conflict of ideas.
In the end, the hope is that good ideas will triumph over bad ones and that truth will unseat lies and deception.
The belief that truth will prevail explains in large measure why those societies we look back on as being the most repressive, cruel and unjust were the most censorious. It has been and is fear that their support would crumble when confronted by ideas and facts challenging theirs that inspired guardians of the likes of Communism, Nazism and The Inquisition to the prohibition of dissenting speech and publications.
The right of Free Speech was the founding principle in that culmination of The Enlightenment, the American Revolution, and is something most of us in Canada take for granted. But we shouldn't.
As the recent Supreme Court of Canada's Whatcott decision highlighted, there is an ongoing battle about just which ideas are permissible in a country that is supposedly based on principles of freedom and fairness.
That any idea other than those that specifically incite violence or commit libel should be banned is something many Canadians find not only offensive, but a dangerous indication that more rights may be usurped in the slide to the crushing of individual liberty.
An unlikely group of Canadians are at the forefront of the fight for the principle that ideas should be allowed to be freely expressed while exposing the hypocrisy of the would-be censors. They are a collection of activists and writers who have been disparagingly described by Bernie Farber, the former Canadian Jewish Congress head and rumored successor to Ontario Human Rights Commissioner Barbara Hall, as "Bully Bloggers."
These so-called Bully Bloggers are characterized, in certain cases incorrectly, as "right-wing." What they do share is a belief that there are hypocritical, dishonest public figures in politics, unions and the media who are trying to shape opinion and influence culture and legislation, while attempting to suppress the free expression of ideas that dissent from theirs.
Lacking the resources of big media, government grants, wealth and powerful institutions possessed by those they criticize, the Bully Bloggers' tools are the Internet, cameras, computers and knowledge, operating in the idealistic hope that exposing hypocrisy and dishonesty can shift the flow of public opinion.
Sometimes that hope is in vain, but sometimes it is not. The mainstream media, despite publicly eschewing the Bully Bloggers, monitors their blogs closely and frequently steal stories from them when a tipping point is reached.
That happened when Bully Blogger Blazing Cat Fur brought to light information such as the practice of a Toronto public school using its facilities as a mosque during school hours, how the Toronto District School Board was promoting a group that advocated using vegetables as sex toys, and a Canadian Islamic School which had anti-Jewish slander as part of its curriculum.
It's not that all of the mainstream media or all public officials don't oppose such things, but they have conflicting interests and the safety of politically correct appeasement is often the expedient choice they make.
Fortunately, Bully Bloggers, who use their own time and resources to expose matters of public interest, have no such constraints. And their shedding the initial light on such matters can be the excuse that sympathetic members of corporate media use to give them wider exposure.
There are costs to putting oneself on the line for one's principles. The Bully Bloggers are exposing people who have powerful and wealthy connections in politics and the media. Frequently subject to hatred and threats, but sustained by the belief that getting the truth out is worth sacrifice, these dedicated citizen journalists soldier on.
Among the particular characteristics Bernie Farber attributed to Bully Bloggers were :
Jack Layton and the NDP decried the nickname "Taliban Jack" as a smear, but in our YouTube and Internet era of short attention spans, people tend to think in shorthand. In two words, Taliban Jack conveyed the idea of a leader and a political party that was soft on Islamic extremism and Canada's commitment to fighting terror. It stuck - and not only because it was catchy, but because it was truthful. And in the end, that reflects the Bully Bloggers' hope that the truth will get a hearing.
In some cases, name-calling is a very important tool. The people Bully Bloggers insult are those that would like to have authority or influence over the rest of us. As a general principle, the ones who seek out such power are the ones who deserve it least. Exposing and insulting them when they behave stupidly, viciously or hypocritically helps diminish the undeserving in the eyes of the public and keeps them away from the power they covet and all-too-often abuse.
So when Loony Libby Davies makes statements that effectively deny Israel's right to exist, or when she promotes 9-11 conspiracy theories in the House of Commons, it is in the public's interest to have a reminder that she may not deserve their respect.
When Crazy Muslim Mohammed Elmassry says that all Jews in Israel over the age of 18 are legitimate targets for murder, then it's useful for the public to have a mental trigger that he and the terrorist-supporting Canadian Islamic Congress he founded are contemptible.
When Sideshow Sarah Thomson makes implausible, self-serving accusations against Rob Ford, or Captain eHealth George Smitherman tries to regain public attention, it's relevant that both of those two people want to attain significant political power. That relevance is all the greater when considering that their records show how little they deserve such authority.
Critics of the Bully Bloggers accuse them of being racists and Islamophobes. These are two distinct and significant accusations that are often conflated and intentionally deceptive. To examine and refute those accusations, they need to be addressed one-by-one.
Racists are stupid people who believe individuals can be summed up and dismissed based on their race or ethnic origin. Racism is a belief system rooted in ignorance and hate and those that hold it are self-discrediting and can be easily dismissed. But race is different than culture. Culture is a system of ideas and practices and Bully Bloggers are not adherents to the fatuous leftist devotion to cultural relevance that considers all such beliefs and behaviors to have equal merit.
Confusing race with culture is a traditional facet of self-described progressives, who as a group are not very deep thinkers, so most of them have great difficulty differentiating between criticism of cultural practices and racism.
As far as being Islamophobes, some of the Bully Bloggers would plead guilty to that charge. But before the Farbers of this world put on a smug smile and twinkle with what they might see as a damning confession by adversarial iconoclasts, they might consider that criticism of Islamic practices is a far cry from discrimination or prejudice against Muslims.
In fact, some of the people closest to the Bully Bloggers are Muslim critics of Islamism, like Salim Mansur, Tarek Fatah, and Irshad Manji.
While the politically correct are afraid to call out Islamic terrorism as anything but extremism and an aberration, Bully Bloggers note how the promotion of violence is often a routine facet in the practice of Islam and the facts bear them out.
Much of Islamic practice is devoted to teaching fairness and integrity, particularly as the religion is manifested in North America. Naturally, the vast majority of Muslims abhor violence, are kind to their wives and daughters and are disgusted with terrorism. But there is a minority of Muslims who do not, and that minority is not insignificant in number. And how can those hateful, murderous ideologies be dealt with when they are denied by their perpetrators and swept under the rug by multiculturalist apologists?
Like Islamism's Muslim critics, Bully Bloggers are keenly aware that it is Muslims who are the most frequent victims of Islamist terrorism, totalitarianism and intolerance.
Islam, as it is preached and conducted in places like Saudi Arabia, The Palestinian Territories, Iran, Pakistan, and many other countries includes practices which are homophobic, brutally violent, racist, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic. As Canada's Muslim population increases through immigration from those countries, in too many cases, those hateful ideas have immigrated with them.
In Canada, we have seen Islamic conferences which featured Imams who preached such hatred. And it took the Bully Bloggers to first draw that to public attention before anyone noticed.
Bully Bloggers led the charge that ended with Parliament voting to scrap the thought-crime laws of Section 13 of Canada's Human Rights Act. The removal of that blunt, totalitarian tool is something that sticks hard in the craw the professional Human Rights Industry. More so that the battle proved those people who claim to concern themselves with human rights are hypocrites with little regard for the most basic human right of free expression.
Maybe the next time Bernie Farber is schmoozing at a cocktail party, writing a mushy-minded op-ed for the Globe and Mail, or being a twittavist, he might consider that the Bully Bloggers are on the front lines, at demonstrations, chronicling and exposing and sometimes being assaulted by the real hatemongers in Canada.
Bully Bloggers get called names and worse, but they can take it. Anyone seeking to shape public policy should be able to handle a few insults, and if they can't, they have no place in the public sphere. But in the end, assuming thoughts and beliefs and most importantly, genuine facts can be expressed freely, then we should have faith that the best ideas and people will prevail.
When they do, you might take time to consider the Bully Bloggers out there doing hard, often thankless groundwork for those victories. And unlike being a Human Rights Commissioner, the work Bully Bloggers do actually requires backbone.
In the end, the hope is that good ideas will triumph over bad ones and that truth will unseat lies and deception.
The belief that truth will prevail explains in large measure why those societies we look back on as being the most repressive, cruel and unjust were the most censorious. It has been and is fear that their support would crumble when confronted by ideas and facts challenging theirs that inspired guardians of the likes of Communism, Nazism and The Inquisition to the prohibition of dissenting speech and publications.
The right of Free Speech was the founding principle in that culmination of The Enlightenment, the American Revolution, and is something most of us in Canada take for granted. But we shouldn't.
As the recent Supreme Court of Canada's Whatcott decision highlighted, there is an ongoing battle about just which ideas are permissible in a country that is supposedly based on principles of freedom and fairness.
That any idea other than those that specifically incite violence or commit libel should be banned is something many Canadians find not only offensive, but a dangerous indication that more rights may be usurped in the slide to the crushing of individual liberty.
An unlikely group of Canadians are at the forefront of the fight for the principle that ideas should be allowed to be freely expressed while exposing the hypocrisy of the would-be censors. They are a collection of activists and writers who have been disparagingly described by Bernie Farber, the former Canadian Jewish Congress head and rumored successor to Ontario Human Rights Commissioner Barbara Hall, as "Bully Bloggers."
These so-called Bully Bloggers are characterized, in certain cases incorrectly, as "right-wing." What they do share is a belief that there are hypocritical, dishonest public figures in politics, unions and the media who are trying to shape opinion and influence culture and legislation, while attempting to suppress the free expression of ideas that dissent from theirs.
Lacking the resources of big media, government grants, wealth and powerful institutions possessed by those they criticize, the Bully Bloggers' tools are the Internet, cameras, computers and knowledge, operating in the idealistic hope that exposing hypocrisy and dishonesty can shift the flow of public opinion.
Sometimes that hope is in vain, but sometimes it is not. The mainstream media, despite publicly eschewing the Bully Bloggers, monitors their blogs closely and frequently steal stories from them when a tipping point is reached.
That happened when Bully Blogger Blazing Cat Fur brought to light information such as the practice of a Toronto public school using its facilities as a mosque during school hours, how the Toronto District School Board was promoting a group that advocated using vegetables as sex toys, and a Canadian Islamic School which had anti-Jewish slander as part of its curriculum.
It's not that all of the mainstream media or all public officials don't oppose such things, but they have conflicting interests and the safety of politically correct appeasement is often the expedient choice they make.
Fortunately, Bully Bloggers, who use their own time and resources to expose matters of public interest, have no such constraints. And their shedding the initial light on such matters can be the excuse that sympathetic members of corporate media use to give them wider exposure.
There are costs to putting oneself on the line for one's principles. The Bully Bloggers are exposing people who have powerful and wealthy connections in politics and the media. Frequently subject to hatred and threats, but sustained by the belief that getting the truth out is worth sacrifice, these dedicated citizen journalists soldier on.
Among the particular characteristics Bernie Farber attributed to Bully Bloggers were :
Targeting minorities, namecalling & attempts at intimidating r bully-bloggers stock & trade.While one could easily dispute some of Farber's assertions about his Bully Bloggers (whom he never identifies by name), he fails to recognize the value of such things as name-calling in public discourse.
Jack Layton and the NDP decried the nickname "Taliban Jack" as a smear, but in our YouTube and Internet era of short attention spans, people tend to think in shorthand. In two words, Taliban Jack conveyed the idea of a leader and a political party that was soft on Islamic extremism and Canada's commitment to fighting terror. It stuck - and not only because it was catchy, but because it was truthful. And in the end, that reflects the Bully Bloggers' hope that the truth will get a hearing.
In some cases, name-calling is a very important tool. The people Bully Bloggers insult are those that would like to have authority or influence over the rest of us. As a general principle, the ones who seek out such power are the ones who deserve it least. Exposing and insulting them when they behave stupidly, viciously or hypocritically helps diminish the undeserving in the eyes of the public and keeps them away from the power they covet and all-too-often abuse.
So when Loony Libby Davies makes statements that effectively deny Israel's right to exist, or when she promotes 9-11 conspiracy theories in the House of Commons, it is in the public's interest to have a reminder that she may not deserve their respect.
When Crazy Muslim Mohammed Elmassry says that all Jews in Israel over the age of 18 are legitimate targets for murder, then it's useful for the public to have a mental trigger that he and the terrorist-supporting Canadian Islamic Congress he founded are contemptible.
When Sideshow Sarah Thomson makes implausible, self-serving accusations against Rob Ford, or Captain eHealth George Smitherman tries to regain public attention, it's relevant that both of those two people want to attain significant political power. That relevance is all the greater when considering that their records show how little they deserve such authority.
Critics of the Bully Bloggers accuse them of being racists and Islamophobes. These are two distinct and significant accusations that are often conflated and intentionally deceptive. To examine and refute those accusations, they need to be addressed one-by-one.
Racists are stupid people who believe individuals can be summed up and dismissed based on their race or ethnic origin. Racism is a belief system rooted in ignorance and hate and those that hold it are self-discrediting and can be easily dismissed. But race is different than culture. Culture is a system of ideas and practices and Bully Bloggers are not adherents to the fatuous leftist devotion to cultural relevance that considers all such beliefs and behaviors to have equal merit.
Confusing race with culture is a traditional facet of self-described progressives, who as a group are not very deep thinkers, so most of them have great difficulty differentiating between criticism of cultural practices and racism.
As far as being Islamophobes, some of the Bully Bloggers would plead guilty to that charge. But before the Farbers of this world put on a smug smile and twinkle with what they might see as a damning confession by adversarial iconoclasts, they might consider that criticism of Islamic practices is a far cry from discrimination or prejudice against Muslims.
In fact, some of the people closest to the Bully Bloggers are Muslim critics of Islamism, like Salim Mansur, Tarek Fatah, and Irshad Manji.
While the politically correct are afraid to call out Islamic terrorism as anything but extremism and an aberration, Bully Bloggers note how the promotion of violence is often a routine facet in the practice of Islam and the facts bear them out.
Much of Islamic practice is devoted to teaching fairness and integrity, particularly as the religion is manifested in North America. Naturally, the vast majority of Muslims abhor violence, are kind to their wives and daughters and are disgusted with terrorism. But there is a minority of Muslims who do not, and that minority is not insignificant in number. And how can those hateful, murderous ideologies be dealt with when they are denied by their perpetrators and swept under the rug by multiculturalist apologists?
Like Islamism's Muslim critics, Bully Bloggers are keenly aware that it is Muslims who are the most frequent victims of Islamist terrorism, totalitarianism and intolerance.
Islam, as it is preached and conducted in places like Saudi Arabia, The Palestinian Territories, Iran, Pakistan, and many other countries includes practices which are homophobic, brutally violent, racist, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic. As Canada's Muslim population increases through immigration from those countries, in too many cases, those hateful ideas have immigrated with them.
In Canada, we have seen Islamic conferences which featured Imams who preached such hatred. And it took the Bully Bloggers to first draw that to public attention before anyone noticed.
Bully Bloggers led the charge that ended with Parliament voting to scrap the thought-crime laws of Section 13 of Canada's Human Rights Act. The removal of that blunt, totalitarian tool is something that sticks hard in the craw the professional Human Rights Industry. More so that the battle proved those people who claim to concern themselves with human rights are hypocrites with little regard for the most basic human right of free expression.
Maybe the next time Bernie Farber is schmoozing at a cocktail party, writing a mushy-minded op-ed for the Globe and Mail, or being a twittavist, he might consider that the Bully Bloggers are on the front lines, at demonstrations, chronicling and exposing and sometimes being assaulted by the real hatemongers in Canada.
Bully Bloggers get called names and worse, but they can take it. Anyone seeking to shape public policy should be able to handle a few insults, and if they can't, they have no place in the public sphere. But in the end, assuming thoughts and beliefs and most importantly, genuine facts can be expressed freely, then we should have faith that the best ideas and people will prevail.
When they do, you might take time to consider the Bully Bloggers out there doing hard, often thankless groundwork for those victories. And unlike being a Human Rights Commissioner, the work Bully Bloggers do actually requires backbone.
Bigot bully bloggers target the vulnerable-comments that follow are racist garbage.Fact-they just talk amongst themselves shower & move on
— Bernie M. Farber (@BernieFarber) March 9, 2013
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Jason Kenney's Lame Explanation for Consorting With the Jaffari Khomeinists
Jason Kenney has been an exceptional Cabinet Minister, so I would be inclined to chalk this up to a lack of diligence on the part of his staff..
Sunday, January 13, 2013
Isn't multiculturalism grand? Local Muslims blame internecine violence in Pakistan on a "Zionist Plot"
As we bring more Muslims into Canada from backwards counties dominated by hateful ideologies, we're going to see more of this.
This type of insane, conspiracy-laden hate is routinely promoted by deplorable hatemongers like Zafar Bangash, the Imam of the York Region Islamic Centre and various local Shia Muslim groups with links to Iran.
h/t Blazing Cat Fur
Friday, October 26, 2012
University of Toronto professor who facilitated classroom anti-Semitism accuses government of practicing "democratic racism"
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
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
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Multiculturalism bites back - Muslim Council of Calgary advocates hatred of Canadian culture
The Muslim Council of
Calgary (MCC) is behind the website Muslims of Calgary.
Its "Ask the Imam" section had a lengthy response on how to raise children in western countries like Canada.
The response included such helpful tips as:
Its "Ask the Imam" section had a lengthy response on how to raise children in western countries like Canada.
The response included such helpful tips as:
"You should instill a hatred for this culture and its ways in the hearts of your children"
"No matter how great the corruption in Muslim countries, it cannot compare to the kufr and permissiveness that exists in the west, except in a few rare cases."
"It is haraam for you to give your children free rein in forming friendships with the children of the kuffaar."
"It is not permissible for you to look forward to dilute the rulings of Islam and to make compromises in order to please the west and its people ... You see how the followers of deviant ideas and perversions feel proud of their principles and ideas and proclaim them openly with no embarrassment. "
Muslims of Calgary have deleted the post from the website today but fortunately, the blogger Blazing Cat Fur who exposed this, has a screen shot up for posterity.
Combined with the exposure of Toronto's East End Madrassa teaching hatred of Jews as part of its curriculum, and the Toronto District School Board's embrace of race-huckster Tim Wise's racialist garbage, highlight the need of a review of the hate and idiocy being taught in schools across Canada.
Combined with the exposure of Toronto's East End Madrassa teaching hatred of Jews as part of its curriculum, and the Toronto District School Board's embrace of race-huckster Tim Wise's racialist garbage, highlight the need of a review of the hate and idiocy being taught in schools across Canada.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Sharia Law in Canada: Something to Fear and The Pitfalls of Diversity
This documentary in two parts was produced by the National Film Board of Canada in 2006
Part 1 is caled Sharia in Canada, Something to Fear? and Part 2 is The Pitfalls of Diversity
Part 1 is caled Sharia in Canada, Something to Fear? and Part 2 is The Pitfalls of Diversity
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Declarations condemning Honor Killings don't deserve praise
The past two weeks have been particularly eventful ones regarding the problematic subject of the integration of Muslim immigrants and Islamic culture into Canadian society.
The ongoing Shafia trial in Ontario has been taking up a lot of ink and appears to have been the catalyst for a declaration by about 60 Canadian Muslim groups denouncing Honor Killings. Meanwhile in Belgium, Canadian Muslim reformer Irshad Manji was violently accosted during a book tour by about twenty Islamist fanatics who spat on her and threatened to kill her.
Now before any of us get on a high horse about how much better western religions are than Islam, we should keep in mind that we too all had our centuries-long episodes of religiously-inspired violence. Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity, and when Catholicism was as old as Islam is now, the Church was torturing and burning heretics. As recently as 300 years ago, Protestant "reformers" were burning witches. Judaism too has a well-detailed history of violence that is extolled in biblical lore.
However there are many religions younger than Islam, such as Mormonism, Scientology, Baha'i, Sikhism, etc, whose practitioners are not bent on mass murder, terrorism, or the elimination of anyone who would dare to utter a word of criticism or mockery of their beliefs.
Even in Canada, up until the imposition of the multicultural, non-assimilating Trudeaupia, we had an extremely well-integrated Ismaili Muslim population that exhibited virtually none of the extremism that has become a somewhat factually-based caricature of contemporary Islam.
What has happened to the west in the last 40 years or so is the mass immigration of Muslims from what, in non-cultural relativist terms, one might refer to as backwards Muslim countries. The problem the west faces is not really Islam so much as it is the culture of these third world countries which happen to be predominantly Islamic. And the challenge we face is that the narrative of contemporary Islam has increasingly been dominated by those who hold on to those cultures' regressive interpretation of that religion.
Where we are failing miserably is by allowing that narrative to continue.
If a group were to make a grand announcement declaring that they believed it was wrong to rape cats, and tried to organize a campaign to denounce cat rape, people would, quite rightly, view them as crazy. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence and moral sense knows it's wrong to rape cats and no sane person would do such a monstrous thing. It shouldn't require anyone to speak out against it.
Yet when Canadian Islamists declare that it's wrong for Muslims to murder their wives and daughters, they are embraced by the mainstream media as being progressive.
This truly is a sign of the soft bigotry of low expectations. When a community feels the need to make a pronouncement opposing infanticide and domestic violence, and the addled minds of an enabling media behave as if this is some significant achievement, it bespeaks a disgusting rot in our entire culture.
What's worse is that the trend to try to accommodate the troglodytes in the Islamist community tacitly undermines genuine Canadian Muslim reformers like Manji, Tarek Fatah, Salim Mansur, and many others. Most Canadian Muslims are not extremists, but when we engage and praise extremists, merely for meeting the minimal standards of civilized behaviour, it sends out a message that is not only condescending, but implies that the extremists are the mainstream. That message allows the real reformers to be marginalized as radicals within the Muslim community.
We should not be engaging extremist groups who have been denounced by the government for anti-Semitism and support for terror, like the Canadian Arab Federation or the Canadian Islamic Congress, whose president recently spoke at a multi-faith conference at the University of Toronto. Engaging them merely allows reformers like Irshad Manji to be tagged with the description "controversial." What should be controversial is that the president of a group that expresses support for terrorist organizations was welcomed at Canada's most prestigious university.
This whole matter points to the challenges facing and the many failures of Canadian multiculturalism whose guiding philosophical moral relativism is poorly adapted to responding to inherently bad cultural practices.
When Canadian Islamists feel the need to condemn the murder of women in their community, our response should not be, "aren't you wonderfully progressive!," it should be: "What the hell is wrong with a culture that needs to say that in the first place?"
The ongoing Shafia trial in Ontario has been taking up a lot of ink and appears to have been the catalyst for a declaration by about 60 Canadian Muslim groups denouncing Honor Killings. Meanwhile in Belgium, Canadian Muslim reformer Irshad Manji was violently accosted during a book tour by about twenty Islamist fanatics who spat on her and threatened to kill her.
Now before any of us get on a high horse about how much better western religions are than Islam, we should keep in mind that we too all had our centuries-long episodes of religiously-inspired violence. Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity, and when Catholicism was as old as Islam is now, the Church was torturing and burning heretics. As recently as 300 years ago, Protestant "reformers" were burning witches. Judaism too has a well-detailed history of violence that is extolled in biblical lore.
However there are many religions younger than Islam, such as Mormonism, Scientology, Baha'i, Sikhism, etc, whose practitioners are not bent on mass murder, terrorism, or the elimination of anyone who would dare to utter a word of criticism or mockery of their beliefs.
Even in Canada, up until the imposition of the multicultural, non-assimilating Trudeaupia, we had an extremely well-integrated Ismaili Muslim population that exhibited virtually none of the extremism that has become a somewhat factually-based caricature of contemporary Islam.
What has happened to the west in the last 40 years or so is the mass immigration of Muslims from what, in non-cultural relativist terms, one might refer to as backwards Muslim countries. The problem the west faces is not really Islam so much as it is the culture of these third world countries which happen to be predominantly Islamic. And the challenge we face is that the narrative of contemporary Islam has increasingly been dominated by those who hold on to those cultures' regressive interpretation of that religion.
Where we are failing miserably is by allowing that narrative to continue.
If a group were to make a grand announcement declaring that they believed it was wrong to rape cats, and tried to organize a campaign to denounce cat rape, people would, quite rightly, view them as crazy. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence and moral sense knows it's wrong to rape cats and no sane person would do such a monstrous thing. It shouldn't require anyone to speak out against it.
Yet when Canadian Islamists declare that it's wrong for Muslims to murder their wives and daughters, they are embraced by the mainstream media as being progressive.
This truly is a sign of the soft bigotry of low expectations. When a community feels the need to make a pronouncement opposing infanticide and domestic violence, and the addled minds of an enabling media behave as if this is some significant achievement, it bespeaks a disgusting rot in our entire culture.
What's worse is that the trend to try to accommodate the troglodytes in the Islamist community tacitly undermines genuine Canadian Muslim reformers like Manji, Tarek Fatah, Salim Mansur, and many others. Most Canadian Muslims are not extremists, but when we engage and praise extremists, merely for meeting the minimal standards of civilized behaviour, it sends out a message that is not only condescending, but implies that the extremists are the mainstream. That message allows the real reformers to be marginalized as radicals within the Muslim community.
We should not be engaging extremist groups who have been denounced by the government for anti-Semitism and support for terror, like the Canadian Arab Federation or the Canadian Islamic Congress, whose president recently spoke at a multi-faith conference at the University of Toronto. Engaging them merely allows reformers like Irshad Manji to be tagged with the description "controversial." What should be controversial is that the president of a group that expresses support for terrorist organizations was welcomed at Canada's most prestigious university.
This whole matter points to the challenges facing and the many failures of Canadian multiculturalism whose guiding philosophical moral relativism is poorly adapted to responding to inherently bad cultural practices.
When Canadian Islamists feel the need to condemn the murder of women in their community, our response should not be, "aren't you wonderfully progressive!," it should be: "What the hell is wrong with a culture that needs to say that in the first place?"
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Salman Rushdie: Multiculturalism "has decayed to something much less than multiculturalism; which is cultural relativism"
A fascinating discussion between Salman Rushdie and Irshad Manji:
Monday, November 14, 2011
Why is the Toronto District School Board promoting a fixation on race?
In contrast to prevalent attitudes of just a couple of generations ago, no one now could express the idea that a person should be judged on the basis of their skin color or ethnicity without annihilating their credibility. While racism continues to be a pernicious blight in some quarters, most of us understand that viewing people within the framework as members of a racial group rather than simply as individuals is an unintelligent misconception that has been responsible for some of the worst crimes and tragedies of the last 200 years.
Sadly, that kind of destructive, irrational methodology is completely in line with the type of thinking that saturates educational approaches in Ontario.
Wise is right about one thing. He has pointed out that there’s no such thing as a “White race” or for that matter a “Black race”; a concept that is merely a construct and outgrowth of colonial slavery. But rather than refute discrimination on the basis of pigmentation, which should have no more importance than hair or eye color, Wise makes a good living as an apostle in the anti-racism industry, which requires the perpetuation of racism and race-based policies for Equity Studies teachers and consultants to continue to rake in cash. And they make easy prey of the gullible, obtuse leadership at the TDSB which appears willing to try out any faddish social experiment, using your children as its lab rats.
Unfortunately, that lesson appears to be lost on the Toronto District School Board (TDSB), which, at great taxpayer expense, is importing an American author who believes we do not focus enough on race, to be the keynote speaker at an upcoming teachers’ conference.
Tim Wise is one of the confirmed speakers at the TDSB’s Equity in Education conference to be held in May, who in his book Color Blind, argues that in order to combat racism, we need ..more racism!
Wise and his followers apparently believe that it is completely acceptable to discriminate against one group of people based on nothing other than their skin color. He is a purveyor of “white privilege” and whiteness theories that infect Equity programs and do nothing but perpetuate racism. Because it follows to reason that as long as you can stigmatize one group because of their pigmentation, regardless of the motive, racism is an acceptable value.
Wise is right about one thing. He has pointed out that there’s no such thing as a “White race” or for that matter a “Black race”; a concept that is merely a construct and outgrowth of colonial slavery. But rather than refute discrimination on the basis of pigmentation, which should have no more importance than hair or eye color, Wise makes a good living as an apostle in the anti-racism industry, which requires the perpetuation of racism and race-based policies for Equity Studies teachers and consultants to continue to rake in cash. And they make easy prey of the gullible, obtuse leadership at the TDSB which appears willing to try out any faddish social experiment, using your children as its lab rats.
Racists are idiots and when racism manifests itself, those who practice it should be identified, ostracised and ridiculed. Skin color and ethnicity have nothing to do with a person’s intellectual abilities or moral behaviour. Culture however does affect people’s behaviour and judgement. Skin color doesn’t make a person violent, but the culture of a certain tropical island, for example, may implicitly teach violence and perpetuate it among adherents to that culture. Ethnicity doesn’t make a person misogynistic, but the culture of certain Middle Eastern countries teach that women are of a lesser value than men, and as long as that culture is allowed to be revered, the subjugation of women will continue among many who are raised with such beliefs.
In multicultural Canada, which has enshrined a facile cultural relativism that says that all cultures are equally valid, it’s forbidden to condemn another culture or say that Canadian values are superior. That sort of shallow thinking paradoxically leads to racism, because when we see differences in people’s behaviour, and we are forbidden from attributing it to culture, other answers are sought. And when operating from the false premise that discounts culture, consciously or not, race is sometimes the erroneous conclusion that some people draw.
How else to explain the reasoning behind Toronto’s Afro-centric schools, which sees students' problems in skin color rather than culture? Geoffrey Canada, who was featured in the documentary Waiting for Superman (and who, despite his name, is unfortunately not Canadian), was able to accomplish improved performance for underprivileged students in urban African American neighbourhoods with Charter Schools that emphasized discipline and performance in core subjects, not segregation by pigmentation.
Despite preposterous TDSB edicts that say only white people can be racist, racism is not the sole province of any one group. When looking at the make-up of Equity Studies programs, or as is more strikingly evidenced by the like minded characters in the “Occupy Wall Street” movement, their homogeneous racial composition suggests that people who believe in such things don’t know many people who aren’t Caucasian, and are easy victims for the myths that the “white privilege” snake oil salesmen are selling.
US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” The sooner the TDSB absorbs that simple lesson instead of spreading Tim Wise’s, the sooner we can move to being a society that recognizes individuals as individuals instead of stereotypes.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Islamic conference featuring anti-Semitic, anti-Gay speakers to relocate to Islamic Society of North America Canadian Headquarters
A conference of anti-Semitic, anti-Gay Muslim extremist speakers held by the Islamic Education and Research Academy (IERA) lost its venue at Toronto's Sheraton Centre, after the nature of the conference was publicized. The hate conference will relocate to the Canadian headquarters of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) at 2200 South Sheridan Way, Mississauga, according to the group's facebook page.
The ISNA is the organization that provides Halal certification for food that religious Muslims are allowed to consume. They charge for that type of certification, so in a sense, purchasing Halal food certified by ISNA supports hate-mongering.
By giving a venue to a conference of speakers who have called Jews cursed and Christians filth, and have called for the murder of homosexuals, the Islamic Society of North America is showing its true face. This development shows some of the failures of a multicultural society that calls for diversity, yet seems unable to deal with hatred and intolerance expressed by a major organization representing an ethnic minority.
This presents a major challenge for Canadian multiculturalism and the cowardice and inadequacy of political leaders who have embraced massive immigration, yet have ignored the dangers of importing people from cultures where hatred of "the other" is a cultural norm.
Did our politicians think that Canadian multiculturalism is a magical spell that would metamorphose massive numbers of immigrants from backwards countries into tolerant, reasonable people who would abandon the bigotry that was a basic component of their former homes' cultural and educational foundations?
This short-sightedness on the part of our politicians has created a situation in Canada that has the danger of Balkanizing this country. The extremest IERA is already boasting that, "We are an ummah alhamdulillah that is much larger than Jewish and LGBT activists andas an ummah both in Canada and Globally we are already contributing immensely to the social welfare of our society and so our voices cannot be drowned out and the truth will not be silenced with the permission of Allah."
If the speakers they promote are any indication, their version of "the truth" that "will not be silenced with the permission of Allah" is that Christians and Jews and Gays should be the object of hate. The issue that this highlights for Canadians is the necessity of immigration reform and that Canada's multicultural experiment ushered in by Pierre Trudeau is beginning to collapse. Unless it is rectified soon, Canadian values of tolerance and freedom may crumble along with it.
The ISNA is the organization that provides Halal certification for food that religious Muslims are allowed to consume. They charge for that type of certification, so in a sense, purchasing Halal food certified by ISNA supports hate-mongering.By giving a venue to a conference of speakers who have called Jews cursed and Christians filth, and have called for the murder of homosexuals, the Islamic Society of North America is showing its true face. This development shows some of the failures of a multicultural society that calls for diversity, yet seems unable to deal with hatred and intolerance expressed by a major organization representing an ethnic minority.
This presents a major challenge for Canadian multiculturalism and the cowardice and inadequacy of political leaders who have embraced massive immigration, yet have ignored the dangers of importing people from cultures where hatred of "the other" is a cultural norm.
Did our politicians think that Canadian multiculturalism is a magical spell that would metamorphose massive numbers of immigrants from backwards countries into tolerant, reasonable people who would abandon the bigotry that was a basic component of their former homes' cultural and educational foundations?
This short-sightedness on the part of our politicians has created a situation in Canada that has the danger of Balkanizing this country. The extremest IERA is already boasting that, "We are an ummah alhamdulillah that is much larger than Jewish and LGBT activists andas an ummah both in Canada and Globally we are already contributing immensely to the social welfare of our society and so our voices cannot be drowned out and the truth will not be silenced with the permission of Allah."
If the speakers they promote are any indication, their version of "the truth" that "will not be silenced with the permission of Allah" is that Christians and Jews and Gays should be the object of hate. The issue that this highlights for Canadians is the necessity of immigration reform and that Canada's multicultural experiment ushered in by Pierre Trudeau is beginning to collapse. Unless it is rectified soon, Canadian values of tolerance and freedom may crumble along with it.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
"Rape is one of the lowest of crimes because it deprives others of their personal choices in order to satisfy your own craving for power - it`s like being a Democrat"
How to find God, understand multiculturalism, and other instructional videos from Andrew Klaven:
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Canadian Muslim Organization loves multiculturalism and promotes Imam who says Hitler was a divine messenger Allah used to punish the Jews
The headline pretty much tells you why Canadian multiculturalism needs to be re-examined.
Blazing Cat Fur has more details.
Blazing Cat Fur has more details.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Multiculturalism didn't work out so well for these folks...
Check out a comic that makes proponents of multiculturalism very angry
Sort of related: The thought police at rabble.ca want to ban a t-shirt
Sort of related: The thought police at rabble.ca want to ban a t-shirt
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Time for our government to start an open dialogue about Multiculturalism
First Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel and now Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron has spoken out against the failure of multiculturalism as a state policy.
As the fractious nature of groups which resist integration into the mainstream has shown, state-sponsored multiculturalism has been a divisive force rather than strengthening for those societies which employ it.
America's Melting Pot does not seek to rub out immigrants' ethnic and cultural identities. As the world's top destination for immigrants, The Unites States has vibrant communities reflecting cultures from all over the world. The difference is that they come to America to be Americans, rather than immigrants who come to Canada to be, for example, Venezuelans in Canada.
Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau made Canada the first country to adopt multiculturalism as official policy. As Liberal member of federal parliament John McKay observed:
Many Canadians now agree that what began as a strategy to diminish separatism has backfired. The Quebec separatist movement is still strong. In some measure, it remains so as a backlash against the idea of Quebecois culture being further diluted by multiculturalism.
For English Canada, what was intended to be a policy to promote inclusiveness has deteriorated into a tyranny imposing minority values on the majority.
Within schools, where history is now a subject barely addressed, multiculturalism is taught as an enshrined characteristic of Canadian identity. In a nation that defines itself by the ways in which "it is not American", multiculturalism, by virtue of not being the American Melting Pot, has become a religion whose dogma cannot be questioned.
But the apparent failings of multiculturalism have raised questions that cannot be avoided.
It's the responsibility of the government to have an open discussion about policies that affect everyone in this country. If we are on the wrong course, it is our duty to correct it, not continue simply because it's the way things have been done for the last two generations. If, as a nation, we can't adapt to contemporary realities, we will be destined to get swept away by them.
Canadians who want to see our government seriously examine whether we should enact changes to official multiculturalism should let Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca) and Jason Kenney, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism (kennej@parl.gc.ca) know how they feel.
As the fractious nature of groups which resist integration into the mainstream has shown, state-sponsored multiculturalism has been a divisive force rather than strengthening for those societies which employ it.
America's Melting Pot does not seek to rub out immigrants' ethnic and cultural identities. As the world's top destination for immigrants, The Unites States has vibrant communities reflecting cultures from all over the world. The difference is that they come to America to be Americans, rather than immigrants who come to Canada to be, for example, Venezuelans in Canada.
Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau made Canada the first country to adopt multiculturalism as official policy. As Liberal member of federal parliament John McKay observed:
"Mr. Trudeau’s vision of official multiculturalism was largely a bi-product of his constant struggle against Quebec separatism...Trudeau .. saw official multiculturalism as a useful tool in his ongoing battle to diminish the threat of Quebec separatism, because in disentangling culture from language, he hoped there would be less emphasis on the notion of Canada being composed of ‘two nations/deux nations’, and more focus on Canadians as individuals whose first languages may be English and French, but had various different ethnic origins. In effect, he used immigration and multiculturalism to further his own political agenda for the country."
Many Canadians now agree that what began as a strategy to diminish separatism has backfired. The Quebec separatist movement is still strong. In some measure, it remains so as a backlash against the idea of Quebecois culture being further diluted by multiculturalism.
For English Canada, what was intended to be a policy to promote inclusiveness has deteriorated into a tyranny imposing minority values on the majority.
Within schools, where history is now a subject barely addressed, multiculturalism is taught as an enshrined characteristic of Canadian identity. In a nation that defines itself by the ways in which "it is not American", multiculturalism, by virtue of not being the American Melting Pot, has become a religion whose dogma cannot be questioned.
But the apparent failings of multiculturalism have raised questions that cannot be avoided.
It's the responsibility of the government to have an open discussion about policies that affect everyone in this country. If we are on the wrong course, it is our duty to correct it, not continue simply because it's the way things have been done for the last two generations. If, as a nation, we can't adapt to contemporary realities, we will be destined to get swept away by them.
Canadians who want to see our government seriously examine whether we should enact changes to official multiculturalism should let Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca) and Jason Kenney, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism (kennej@parl.gc.ca) know how they feel.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Multiculturalism has failed in Britain, PM Cameron says
Will Canada's officialdom wake up to the failure of multiculturalism before it turns into a mirror of the European catastrophe?
From the Globe and Mail:
From the Globe and Mail:
State multiculturalism has failed and left young Muslims vulnerable to radicalization, British Prime Minister David Cameron will say on Saturday, arguing for a more active policy to heal divisions and promote Western values.
Mr. Cameron, in a speech to a security conference in Munich, will argue that Britain and other European nations need to “wake up to what is happening in our countries” as well as tackling terrorism through military operations overseas.
“It is time to turn the page on the failed policies of the past,” he will say, according to extracts from his speech released by his office.
“So first, instead of ignoring this extremist ideology, we – as governments and societies – have got to confront it, in all its forms.”
His comments echo those made by German leader Angela Merkel last year and reflect a push by European governments to better integrate immigrants, given persistent domestic tensions between different cultures.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Tony Blair on Making Muslim Integration Work
We have to nail down the definition of the problem. There is no general failure to integrate. In the U.K., for example, we are not talking about Chinese or Indians. We are not talking about blacks and Asians. This is a particular problem. It is about the failure of one part of the Muslim community to resolve and create an identity that is both British and Muslim. And I stress part of it. Most Muslims are as much at ease with their citizenship in the U.K. as I am. I dare say that is true in other European nations too.
However, some don't integrate. But when we talk about this in general terms, without precision, for fear of "stigmatizing" Muslims, we alienate public opinion and isolate the majority of Muslims who are integrating and want to be as much part of our society as any other group. Then, because we won't identify the problem as it is, a subterranean debate takes the place of an open one, and that debate lumps all Muslims together. So in the interest of "defending" the Muslim community, we actually segregate it by refusing to have an honest debate about what is happening.
Full piece here
However, some don't integrate. But when we talk about this in general terms, without precision, for fear of "stigmatizing" Muslims, we alienate public opinion and isolate the majority of Muslims who are integrating and want to be as much part of our society as any other group. Then, because we won't identify the problem as it is, a subterranean debate takes the place of an open one, and that debate lumps all Muslims together. So in the interest of "defending" the Muslim community, we actually segregate it by refusing to have an honest debate about what is happening.
Full piece here
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)