Multiculturalism And The Future Of Canadian Nationhood

Editor’s note: This is an expanded version of an article originally published in the journal Humanist Perspectives – Issue 210, autumn 2019.

“One of the most influential commissions in Canadian history, the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism (1963–69) brought about sweeping changes to federal and provincial language policy. The commission was a response to the growing unrest among French Canadians in Québec, who called for the protection of their language and culture, and opportunities to participate fully in political and economic decision making. The commission’s findings led to changes in French education across the country, and the creation of the federal department of multiculturalism and the Official Languages Act.” (Source: Canadian Encyclopedia)

These developments followed the “Quiet Revolution” that swept away the Catholic Church’s domination of Quebec’s social, political and religious life subsequent to the election of the Liberal government under Premier Jean Lesage in 1960 and the emergence to social prominence of a new, well-educated generation of mainly secular Quebecois.

These were all promising developments for the future of a strong and united Canada. What was not anticipated at the time was that the genesis of bilingualism and biculturalism would over several decades mutate into the multiculturalism of today, whereby every ethnic enclave would believe itself entitled to maintain the habits and customs of their countries of origin no matter how incompatible those habits and customs may be with life in a modern and democratic society such as Canada where equality of women and men, respect for individual rights, and commitment to the national community are the essential prerequisites for universal citizenship and national integration.

The problem of the tribalization of the nation has been aggravated by the corrosive ethnic politics of self-serving politicians who have often given priority to election victory and maintaining their positions of privilege over national interests, and promoted ethnic identity with the sole aim of winning votes.

“Of all the platitudinous slogans uttered by [the former] Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, he is undoubtedly best known for repeatedly invoking the mantra ‘Diversity Is Our Strength.’ He appears to believe that any problem is solved by simply repeating his slogan enough times that the problem disappears. Increasing diversity is the solution to all challenges—be they economic, social, political, environmental, or related to security. Simply double down on the cultural, ethnic, and religious diversity of the massive influx of immigrants into Canada and watch as we all eventually hold hands in brotherly unison while singing John Lennon’s “Imagine.” This is the type of Ostrich Parasitic Logic that is destroying the future of the West. There are many forms of cultural enrichment, including restaurants of varied cuisines, that come from living in a heterogeneous and pluralistic society, but the cultural and religious values that some immigrants bring with them to the West manifestly do not add to our strength.” (Source: The Parasitic Mind by Gad Saad, page 124)

“Using the political philosophy of multiculturalism, OPS [Ostrich Parasitic Syndrome] sufferers refrain from criticizing truly abhorrent cultural and religious practices such as female genital mutilation, child brides, and honor killings under the guise of moral and cultural relativism. It is apparently wrong to apply universal moral principles when judging the precepts of a given society. Thus, Western critics are silent if not supportive of cultural and religious practices that otherwise should be universally condemned, as it would be “racist and bigoted” to question the traditions of others. Indeed, before he became Canada’s prime minister, Justin Trudeau declared himself angrier that such practices could be declared barbaric than he was at the practices themselves.” (Source: The Parasitic Mind, Page 131)

This promotion of ethnic identity has often involved a rewriting of Canadian history to conform to the current ideology of “political correctness” and denigrating the achievements which have been of value in the history of Canada and thus creating a nation-wide feeling of guilt to make the people of Canada more receptive to the dismantling of their nation and history.

No modern nation state can survive for long if those living within its boundaries lack loyalty to the nation – not to be confused with loyalty to specific governments which come and go – but to the nation as a permanent entity.

The “genetic” mutation of the original dream of a bilingual and bicultural modern Canada based on equality of the two founding cultures and languages has been reduced to the egotistic belief that every ethnic enclave now considers itself an independent entity with little commitment to the national community. If Canada is to survive as a unified nation state, multiculturalism has to be replaced with a core culture for the nation as a whole.

It is important to emphasize at this point that we are not speaking of assimilation and creation of a bland universality from sea to sea to sea. The aim is integration which is the unification of multitudes into a new whole in order to establish a cohesive national community of citizenship and commitment.

A core culture serving the national community in its totality in both English and French Canada would include elements such as equal rights for all regardless of gender, race, or ethnicity; universal citizenship and equality before the law; secularity of the state; separation of the church (and all religion) from the state; equality of opportunity for all; freedom of conscience, thought, belief, opinion and expression; and democratic election of those who govern the nation at all levels. Needless to say, fluency in English or French would be an essential requirement for citizenship and integration into the national community.

Mass immigration has been the decisive factor in bringing about the tribalization of Canada. In every country where large groupings of distinct ethnicities are admitted, the sheer number of the new entrants creates a self-sustaining mass of humanity large enough to satisfy nearly all the needs of its members – everything from obtaining normal services for daily living, business interactions, and even finding marriage partners – thus removing the incentive for the new entrants to interact with the larger society. The ethnic community hence becomes solidified and walled in, a process that leads to permanent geographic and cultural segregation within the country.

The press now report that in certain political ridings in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia nearly forty languages are the local means of communication – and English language is not one of them. And, of course, in an era of “political correctness”, every potentially existing language group is entitled to have all the necessary information, from electoral literature to shopping brochures, in their own ethnic language. In the most recent British Columbia referendum on electoral reform, the referendum literatures were translated into 16 languages presumably at significant costs to the taxpayers of the province. Media reports from Britain are to the effect that tens of millions of pounds have been wasted on translating electoral information into languages so obscure that nobody bothers to read them.

There was a time when being fluent in English or French was a requirement for obtaining Canadian citizenship. So was the requirement to be informed about Canadian society and politics before being granted citizenship.

Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. (Genesis 11:7)

Obviously it did not take divine powers to confound our language; self-serving politicians did it by opening wide the floodgates of the nation and admitting vast numbers of immigrants with limited education and technical skills, let alone familiarity with or appreciation of Canadian culture and values, to enter Canada so they would provide employers with vast, cheap and docile pools of labour thus enabling the employers to enhance their profits on the back of the “low-cost” labourers to the detriment of the nation as a whole.

Such “low-cost” labourers and their families are obviously entitled to education and healthcare, housing and police protection, use of roads and public parks and so on – all of which must be provided and subsidized by the Canadian public since the meagre earnings of the low-wage workers hardly requires them to pay sufficient taxes to defray the costs of the public amenities they need to use.