Opinion: Bernier and the Regressiveness of “Extreme Multiculturalism”

I believe that when the diversity of thought is not advocated on behalf of all free men and women, then no other forms of diversity should matter.


0
517 shares
Donate All donations go towards promoting independent journalism and this month's charity.

Following a series of controversial remarks from Maxime Bernier—the Conservative posterchild of political incorrectness—Andrew Scheer, leader of the federal party, has been faced with increased pressure to kick Bernier out of caucus for merely espousing views that were perceived as hateful, and whose ‘divisiveness’ was not ‘encompassing of Tory policy’.

While it is true that issues of integration and multiculturalism are not high on the current Tory agenda, should Bernier face disciplinary action for stating his mind, unfiltered and all, especially on an issue that is at the crux of the migrant crisis overseas? Not according to this reporter, who happens to be the product of a multicultural family.

There is a difference between espousing racist ideas, and showing concern over the potential effects of actual identity politics taking form.

In particular, the far left’s identitarian-desire to redefine what it means to be Canadian through a cultural Marxist perception of the world, where all aspects of all cultures are deemed equal in all aspects, irrespective of the consequences to the nation’s social fabric.

Again, this has nothing to do with race, and has everything to do with the efficacy of certain views in our society.

Along with this line of logic, Female Genital Mutilation, a culturally-accepted practice in parts of the developing world, particularly in parts of Northern and Eastern Africa, should be viewed as culturally acceptable here because it is there—a morally asinine proposition that no rational person could get behind.

Take the following for example; when it came to Iqra Khalid’s naming of a Winnipeg Park after Pakistan’s Founder—a movement that I’m neither politically indifferent to or supportive of—the overall lack of care for the tragedies that came out of that tumultuous era (i.e., the deaths of nearly 1 million people) have ironically garnered little concern from the MP.

However, when it came to our nation’s founder, Sir John A. Macdonald, the authoritarian demagogues of the Left virtue-signalled out the wazoo with their faux-progressivism, which was riddled with hypocrisy and had little to show for in implementing real, substantive change with regards to the haunting legacy of the Residential School System, to which Macdonald was, unfortunately a proponent of.

Moreover, in response to Bernier’s tweets, Arif Virani, the parliamentary secretary to the minister of heritage, came out in denouncement of Bernier’s “extremely troubling [backwardsviews]”, postinga letter on Twitter that called for Scheer to a) disassociate himself from Bernier and b) to subsequently call for his removal from caucus—the latter,which has yet to be obliged.

Putting things into perspective, the latter would require the majority of caucus to vote in favour of said exile, as per se Michael Chong’s Reform Act; however, moving forward with such a request would could ultimately lead to a potential splitting of the party—an irrevocable death blow to the CPC’s chances at forming government in 2019.

However, Scheer has since come out in condemning Bernier’s ‘identity politics,’ stating “He’s just poking us in the eye for no reason,” to which I humbly disagree.

For starters, Bernier was not questioning multiculturalism as an idea, nor was he advocating on behalf of right-wing identity politics; instead, he stated how problematic it was to let “more diversity” aka “extreme multiculturalism” manifest itself within mainstream Canadian culture.

To allow the Liberal’s mantra of “diversity is our strength” get twisted by the proponents of social justice, like that of MP Iqra Khalid, which will ultimately reduce Canadians to the very tribalism and ideological segregation that has diminished the very asinine members of the ethnic far-right to mere footnotes in Canadian politics.

While the far-left is hell-bent on doing away with ideological hierarchies that brings structure to society, which is determined through the free exchange of ideas, it is believed that the far-right does the same, but under the guise, that race, not ideals, defines one’s sense of superiority.

However, with the latest round of ‘controversial’ tweets by Bernier, it seems that those with a proclivity for social justice are hell-bent on conflating fact with fiction, with some going as far as perpetuating the degrading victimhood complex of intersectionality that services only to race-bait and make people feel guilty for their ascribed statuses (i.e., their race).

So in the end, how are the extremist segments on either side any different from one another, ideologically?

Take Faith Goldy, for example, a quasi-ethnic nationalist who has often been unable to differentiate between the racial composition of the West and the Judeo-Christian values that shape said societies. Holding said views has often landed her at the centre of much controversy, and rightfully so.

However, that is not what Bernier was promoting in his critique of Justin Trudeau’s “cult of diversity.” Merely questioning the rationale of a government who seems hell-bent on shunning diversity of thought, while placing racial and sexual diversity—an ascribed status—on a pedestal when that is neither needed nor empowering, is frankly, absurd.

As a son of a first-generation immigrant, I believe that when the diversity of thought is not advocated on behalf of all free men and women, then no other forms of diversity should matter.

Reducing the worth of a nation’s ideals to the premise of intersectionality and other identitarian-related stances (i.e., that pertain to ascribed statuses), is what procures tribalism, to begin with. Tribalism by religious, racial, or sexual affiliation is not that what we need. It’s as simple as that.

Now, it is vital that we do not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, religion and so forth—that’s a given—however, debating the importance of our nation’s core values and whether or not they coincide with all aspects of all cultures trying to integrate (or assimilate) into that of our own, is both valid and encompassing of the strong nationalistic sentiment to which I proudly wear on my shoulders, and wish we, as Canadians, saw more of.

What some view as hateful and bigoted, I see as the God’s honest truth—an opinion that is gaining steam in a nation at its wit’s end with political correctness and the Left’s ‘politics of division’.

 


0 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Alexander Singh Dhaliwal

A journalist with interests in identity politics and 19th-20th Century Western History, whose belief in putting family before government stands bar none. Alex is entering his fourth of five years as a political science-history major at the University of Calgary, where he advocates on behalf of free speech, as the mechanism by which we keep our society functioning.

Choose A Format
Story
Formatted Text with Embeds and Visuals
Video
Youtube, Vimeo or Vine Embeds