Mayday! Mayday!. Lowell Psy.D. Green
alt="Screen shot 2011-03-23 at 4.05.38 PM.png"/>
With the scars of the Air India bombing still fresh, the BC premier and most other politicians boycott the April 17, 2010, Vaisakhi parade in Surrey after organizers warn politicians they might not be safe if they attend.
One of those threatened, Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh, says the Surrey Vaisakhi parade, marking the birth of Sikhism, contains extremist rhetoric, violent portraits and separatist slogans. In 2008, the Indian government formally complained to Canada that the parade depicted the assassins of Indira Gandhi as martyrs. The Surrey parade is the largest of its kind outside India with some 120,000 lining the streets and this year featuring a float honouring Sikh martyrs—including members of separatist groups in India that the Canadian government has branded as terrorist organizations.
Vaisakhi parade risky for MP Ujjal Dosanjh and MLA Dave Hayer: organizer. Pair told to avoid Surrey Sikh festival.
(Lori Culbert and Jonathan Fowlie, Vancouver Sun, April 16, 2010)
Multiculturalism teaches that all cultures and religions are equally worthy of respect, except Christianity and whiteness.
(Columnist Barbara Kay, “It’s not all good,” National Post, April 28, 2010)
More than 100 Sikhs engage in a bloody fight inside the Sri Guru Nanak Sikh Temple in Brampton on the quiet Sunday afternoon of April 18, 2010. Hammers, knives and machetes slash and hack. Five are hospitalized. It’s a fight over who controls the temple, say police. Two weeks earlier, only about a kilometre away, Manjit Mangat, a prominent Brampton lawyer, was stabbed outside the Sikh Lehar Temple by two men brandishing kirpans, the ceremonial dagger worn by baptized Sikhs.
The bloody melee that consumed a Toronto-area Sikh temple this past weekend is evidence of a bitter control struggle consuming its leadership, observers say—and the trouble is not unique.
Jagdish Grewal, editor of the Canadian Punjabi Post, says separatists—those who back an independent Sikh state called Khalistan— maintain control of many large temples in Canada and bring with them a legacy of “muscle power.”
Late last year, Mr. Grewal was held at gunpoint and attacked by three masked men outside the newspaper offices in Brampton.
(Megan O’Toole, “Tensions at Sikh temple not unique,” National Post, April 20, 2010)
Surely by now we have received enough signals that something is seriously wrong with the way we are going about the integration of newcomers to Canada. And surely the time has come when Canadians should put aside the political correctness that has inhibited us from taking a close look at extremism that is incubating right under our noses.
(Immigration expert Martin Collacott, personal interview, March 2010)
“In Vancouver and Toronto, the Asian influence is very evident. That will put us in a unique position compared to other world cities. As we look towards the ‘Pacific Century’… Vancouver is the first Asian city outside of Asia.” [says] Tung Chan, CEO of S.U.C.C.E.S.S., an organization helping immigrants to Canada.
(Joe Friesen, “The changing face of Canada: As minority population booms, a visible majority emerges,” The Globe and Mail, March 10, 2010)
Heading for Disaster
If you listen carefully, you can hear the waves crashing on the nearby reef. Disaster looms ever closer. As a nation, we’re still afloat, the spirit is still alive, all is not yet lost. But, if we don’t get this ship of state turned around, we will surely run aground and tear ourselves apart on the jagged rocks of mass immigration and multiculturalism, lured ever closer to the lurking danger of cultural suicide by the siren call of political correctness.
I don’t believe most Canadians really understand the dangerous situation we are placing ourselves in. But it’s not too late. Before we talk about solutions, we’ve got to fully comprehend the problems we face. Until I began to thoroughly research our immigration and multiculturalism policies and their ramifications, I had no idea of the extent of the damage we are doing to ourselves and to our country and no idea of the disaster that lies just ahead if we don’t swiftly change course.
It’s not as though there are no warnings. Events in the Netherlands, Britain, Denmark, France, and elsewhere in Europe stand like modern-day lighthouses signalling danger.
Do not come this way. Stay away from these rocks. Drop anchor. Steer clear. Just off your bow are uncharted shoals you may not successfully navigate.
Incredibly, many of those on watch can’t see the reef or don’t recognize it for the peril it presents. They cannot or will not hear the crashing sounds of furious waters dead ahead. “We’re headed for a new country,” they tell us. “A new Canada. Oh, happy day!”
New Canada
Since 1945, Canada has received about ten million immigrants of diverse origins. I believe this ongoing mass immigration is causing Canada to evolve into a diasporatic society. Canada is becoming a home away from home for a range of peoples whose identities are rooted not in Canada, but in countries and regions of origin. In other words, Canada is evolving into a global suburb.
Although Canada’s policy of mass immigration raises many important issues there is a strange absence of national political or public debate on the subject. Debate should normally be expected to arise on such issues as the number of immigrants allowed into Canada annually, their real impact on Canada’s society and economy, the identity and meaning of Canada in a situation of growing diversity and potentially lessening social cohesion. In fact, however, these questions have not been the subject of major public discussion and little effort has been made to consider what Canada will look like 20, 50 or 100 years in the future.
(Dr. Stephen Gallagher, The Effects of Mass Immigration on Canadian Living Standards and Society, published by the Fraser Institute, August 2009. Dr. Gallagher is Program Director of the Montreal Branch of the Canadian International Council and a lecturer in Political Science. He has taught at McGill University, Carleton University and the University of Manitoba.)
The problem is, of course, in order to arrive at “New Canada” we must scrap “Old Canada” and is that really what we want to do? Is it really what we should do? And if so, why?
Those who espouse this glorious “New Canada” have never clearly explained exactly why “Old Canada” should be scuttled. What national faults are so grave as to justify a cultural death sentence? Nor has anyone explained to us what kind of improvements we can expect to see with this glorious “New Canada.”
Will “New Canada” have nicer, more generous people? Will our politicians be more honest? Will our taxes be lower? Will our hockey players stop taking head shots at their opponents? Will childbirth be less painful? Will our drivers stop tailgating? Will there be less crime? Fewer fires? Will kids stop talking back to their