The HRCs and Immigration: A Dual Problem

I just read Ezra Levant’s Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights. It is a clear, concise and very readable book, which any layman can pick up and learn from. It has a mixture of HRC case studies, factual and statistical information about the HRCs, and Levant’s suggestion for how to deal with this problem, which in his assessment is the complete dismantling of the Commissions.

Levant sees Canada as a society which has evolved from its racist past to what is now a tolerant, multicultural society, with many safeguards against racism, and which consequently doesn’t need the HRCs any longer.

These points deserve more attention, but suffice to say that the Canada of yonder years wasn’t nearly as racist as Levant paints it to be, and the Canada of recent years is far less harmoniously multicultural than he makes out. The recent Tamil protestors (by the thousands), the Lebanese dual citizens who are being shipped to Lebanon to vote in their elections, and Muslims filing HRC cases against MacLeans and Levant himself, expose the reality behind the harmonious multicultural Canada.

There is also a March 31, 2009 Globe and Mail article, where second generation visible minority immigrants feel less Canadian than even their parents, all this despite the country’s overwhelming attempt to accommodate them and their parents.

And a recent report by Ryerson University’s Diversity Institute showed the lack of leadership positions held by visible minority immigrants both in public and private institutions, implicitly indicating systemic discrimination in these institutions.

In the first one hundred pages of Shakedown, the majority of cases Levant gave as examples were filed by visible minorities, who felt they were not getting equal treatment because of their ethnic, racial or religious background.

In my preliminarily calculations of HRC cases filed, I’ve pointed out that the largest number came from visible minorities, not homosexuals, or women or even the disabled (except in Alberta). I’ve also shown that there is a correlation between the cases filed at the provincial HRCs by visible minorities, and the number of immigrants in that particular province.

This has led me to conclude that with increases in immigration, there is an increase in visible minorities, and a consequent increase in HRC cases filed by visible minorities.

Part of the problem of the HRCs is thus immigration.

So, what happens if Levant is successful in dismantling the HRCs? Will that reduce perceived discrimination against visible minorities? How will these minorities resolve these cases of (perceived) discrimination? How much will the government be involved in resolving these cases?

As long as there are large numbers of visible minorities, and as long as their largest source – a high immigration rate – is in place, I predict (although it is not hard to do because it has been happening for decades now) there will be endless governmental attempts, backed by special interest immigrant and visible minority groups, to make everyone "equal", and to remove "discrimination." One such example is the one I cited above, where visible minority groups are demanding that more visible minorities be placed in leadership position in both the public and corporate realms. How will this be achieved except through governmental coercion of a type of affirmative action?

Therefore, dismantling the HRCs without doing something about the biggest replenishing source of HRC applicants – immigrants - won't make the problem go away.

Levant's short-term goal of dismantling the HRCs should also include long-term solutions of immigration reform.

This will not be a popular position to take. But, to get a better understanding of the problem (and solutions), I strongly recommend that Levant read Lawrence Auster’s The Path to National Suicide: An Essay on Immigration and Multiculturalism.

To give Levant a glimpse of what this book contains, here is an excerpt:

Radical pluralism raises to a new level this threat to our liberty, since now the state will be called upon to overcome, not just the inequality of individuals, but the inequality of cultures. The inherent vastness and endlessness of such an enterprise matches the intrusiveness of the state power that must be exercised to achieve it. The signs of this new despotism are all around us:

• the de jure and de facto repression of speech dealing with racially sensitive subjects;

• the official classification and extension of privileges to people according to ethnic affiliation;

• the expansion of judicial and bureaucratic power to enforce racial quotas in more and more areas of society;

• the subjection of the American people to an unceasing barrage of propaganda telling us we are all brothers, that we must “respect all cultures,” etc., even while government policies are unleashing a wave of cultural diversity and ethnic chauvinism that is making spontaneous brotherly feeling a receding dream. In other words, the “family” that Governor Mario Cuomo keeps telling us we all belong to is really—the state.

In the Canadian context, Levant may dismantle the thoroughly disqualified, fraudulent, state-controlled HRCs, but as long as there is this “radical pluralism” of peoples maintained through immigration, we are still at the mercy of a coercive government to right the wrongs of inequality.

Duplicity Through Design

A very Arab looking crowd holding Keith Ellison signs

Blogger Creeping Sharia  comments that Congressman Keith Ellison's website has the "Hamas green and yellow colors" rather than the customary red, white and blue.

I started Our Changing Landscape because of visual influences. "Landscape" is after all a visual term. As I was looking around me, both in the real and virtual landscape, I started to notice that what was around us was slowly changing from the familiar to the unfamiliar. There are many contributors to this change (which I think stems from the cultural mix that has become our cities and towns), but the biggest culprits are Muslims.

What Creeping Sharia was referring to was Ellison’s campaign website, not his official congressional one. It does indeed have green as the predominant color, with pale yellow as a secondary color. The main photo is of a group of people holding green signs with Ellison’s name. Most of these people look non-white, some look Arab, and one man is wearing a small white Islamic cap (taqiyah) while a woman is wearing a hijab. This could be a scene somewhere in the Middle East.

There is no American flag, no seal of the House of Representatives, no map of America, on Ellison’s campaign website. There is nothing to indicate that this is an American website other than the script under his name (written in smaller yellow script and therefore less noticeable) which says, "for U.S. Congress." There are two yellow stars framing this yellow script. The yellow stars don’t necessarily indicate that they are symbols from the American flag. The star (with the crescent) is featured regularly in Islam. Over ten Islamic countries use the star, with the crescent, on their flags.

Green is the color most associated with Islam. Here is a wikipedia reference for the significance of green in Islam:

Green is considered the traditional color of Islam, likewise because of its association with nature. This is for several reasons. First, Muhammad is reliably quoted in a hadith as saying that “water, greenery, and a beautiful face” were three universally good things. In the Quran, sura Al-Insan, believers in God in Paradise wear fine green silk. Also, Al-Khidr ("The Green One"), is a Qur’anic figure who met and traveled with Moses. The flag of Hamas, as well as the flag of Iran, is green, symbolizing their Islamist ideology.

Just to give Congressman Ellison the benefit of the doubt, I went to his official congressional website listed under "United States House of Representatives" to see how he represents himself officially.

Once again, there is nothing to indicate that this is the website of a U.S. congressman. It does indeed have the requisite red, white and blue, but dark green conspicuously fills the background.

Here is the image that appears on top of his official website:

Left: High rises and bridge from Ellison's official website
Right: High rises in Dubai

These high rises could be from any country.  

To compare how his fellow-congressmen represented themselves, I clicked randomly on names from the list of representatives (three or four names from each alphabetical category). The majority of these websites had red or blue as the predominant color. They had an American flag, the seal of the House of Representatives, or a distinct American architectural structure, usually a state capitol cupola, visible at the top.

Jim Jordan, congressman from Ohio, had none of those images, but his large red barn is of a distinctly American rural scene. Carolyn Maloney from New York had typical, recognizable New York photos of the Statue of Liberty and the Chrysler building amongst others. Many others who didn’t put clearly identifiable American governmental icons on their websites nonetheless showed American sceneries such as light houses, snow-covered mountains and desert rock formations (which we all know from beloved Westerns).

This very subtle, and certainly quite legal, representation (or misrepresentation) of Ellison's office is how Muslims in the West slowly and determinedly enter and overwhelm our societies. Without realizing it, we become subjected to unaccustomed colors, undecipherable script and foreign faces.

As Creeping Sharia's blog post shows, even the substance of Ellison's official congressional website is suspect. He has posted a map of Iraq with possible information about troop deployment from Iraq for all to see. 

How to Run for Office

Ryerson University's The Eye advertisement for Student Union officers

[Pay attention to the group highlighted in green]

Muslims rally together to have an airtight, all-Muslim executive team to run for the 2009 Ryerson University Student Union.

Now, this is clearly a perfect model for the real world of politics. Surely, with a little more time, such boldness will not be noticed, or be considered out of the norm. After all, we will have had ample practice at our universities and high schools.

This is how it's done. When running for office, make sure that your team is composed 100%, and 100% unequivocally, of people like you. Then call it "change" or some such thing to convince your voting block that you're serious about changing things - i.e. making things look more like them. Then, just keep on going. Of course, make sure that you're elected. This may cost you a bit of leg work and rallying of forces, but you might well do it.

This is Ryerson University's Student Union elections for 2009. I go to the library (less regularly now because it gets too crowded and noisy) and at times pick up the school papers to skim through what's going on. In this same issue, there is news that the university could snag $70 million of federal and provincial funds towards "sprucing up the campus". This validates my posts on the university's plans for expansion, which I say are dictated by immigration numbers.

Now, the student union is preparing for elections. The Muslim contingency is well-organized, keeping itself airtight to prevent anyone else from getting in.