Maxime Bernier is right – multiculturalism is a dead-end and should be dismantled. But first, let’s get the various shibboleths out of the way.
Critiquing multiculturalism is not racism. Those who invoke this term to silence opposition should realize that they’re simply admitting to failure. If racism is still something to be feared in Canada, then multiculturalism (legally enacted since 1988) has been a colossal fiasco, and we should move beyond it.
As for the state-approved motto, “diversity is our strength,” that is simply doublespeak. It’s like saying, “Balkanization is unity,” or “Atomization is strength.” Why people accept such mendacity speaks volumes about Canada’s eroded culture.
Further, the argument that criticism of multiculturalism creates divisiveness is an even bigger lie. But then Canada has long been under the jackboot of a kakistocracy (whereby political functionaries solely rely on the guidance of technocrats, or “experts,” to manage society).
How can a critique of multiculturalism, which is explicitly designed to divide people into racial groups – be divisive? To speak out against divisiveness is to be divisive? Only in Canada.
Now, here are five reasons (and there are others) why multiculturalism is a dead-end.
First, it will never produce the First World. Why? Because the West is uniquely the corollary of the Judeo-Christian matrix. This is the history of Canada, like it or not. No culture outside this matrix created the First World – there is only misery outside it.
Second, the First World is still a high-trust society. The cultures outside this matrix created low-, or no-trust societies, which is also why tribalism and clannish still hold sway in other parts of the world. In these places, only blood-kinship affords some semblance of trust, otherwise this virtue is entirely lacking in non-Western societies. Family loyalty is the only guarantee of security – whereas in the First World, trust is a given.
But as this non-Western mindset becomes further entrenched in Canada, high-trust will disappear, since multiculturalism offers no possibility of sustaining the Judeo-Christian matrix. In fact, it seeks to destroy it.
Third, because multiculturalism is a segregating system, it can only entrench tribalism, hence racism. If all cultures are good, then change is unnecessary. If there is no change, then cultures are traps from which none may escape.
In this way, multiculturalism establishes empowered monocultures that are racial enclaves which demand allegiance far more immediate than that owned to distant halls of power. As for people who might want to escape these ethnic prisons, they are labelled, “native informants” – i.e., betrayers of their race, and have little acceptance, either parochially or in the larger culturally neutral space.
Fourth, there is the problem of governance. Canada has unwittingly embraced the Ottoman millet-model, a patchwork of ethnicities, who mediate their relationship to the state by way of an ethnic elite, and which serves to manage and police racial borders. This system ultimately destroyed the Ottoman Empire because it was unmanageable.
Fifth, multiculturalism steamrolls any sort of difference (which is true diversity) into an artificial singularity, or unity – and thus, multiculturalism, which is ethnic particularism, reduces humanity into types (a state policy which produced much misery in the last century).
Canada has happily become a millet – but it is ill-prepared for the consequences of such a becoming. When tribal entrenchments and ethnic allegiances strengthen and the game for dominance begins in earnest (as it will soon enough), w(h)ither Canada?
Thus, multiculturalism is a dead-end, because it is a millet, which leaves only taxes and legalities as commonalities – and both of these are merely extensions of transnational progressivism, which is also a failed experiment, as it is an effete form of globalism.
So, Mr. Bernier is to be openly defended by the courageous and the clear-eyed, rather than attacked by the feeble-minded. And, his critique raises two important questions. Does Canada have a future? And, to whom will Canada belong?
The failed Ottoman model of tribe-management that now belongs to Canada can only lead to a predictable outcome – destruction. Canada’s future is fragmentation along ethnic divides, and Canada will belong to the dominant tribes. The supposed Canadian Mosaic is in reality a midden-heap of tesserae which no one knows what to do with, but which no one wants to decry. The emperor, indeed, has no clothes.
Those quick to criticize Mr. Bernier are not only naïve, but cowardly. Not only do they not have viable answers, foresight, or wisdom, let alone solutions – but they are the blind leading Canada nowhere. If Canada is actually interested in its future, then it will have to arise from the midden-heap and build its path to its true destiny.
The Conservative Party was looking for someone to fill in the shoes of Stephen Harper, who had just lost in…
According to the Globe and Mail, the Trudeau government’s plan to take away your guns has run into one major…
"Emergency Room wait times" should be an oxymoron, but they aren't. The contrast between the American system and the Canadian…
Eva Kiryakos was threatened with social media posts she wrote about Germany's migrant problem and gender neutral washrooms forcing her…
Many of the commenters on the YouTube video believe that the commercial is anti-semitic.
Grade 8 students in classrooms across Nova Scotia are being taught about transgender issues using a school book that is…