|
Immigration in Canada. (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Dr Satan |
| quote: | Originally posted by AustralianGQ
i totally agree, it is retarded, one reason why im glad to say im gonna move out of this country soon. canada is no longer canada, when i walk down the street and see no white ppl, just blacks and indians and asians...am i racist? nope, do i dislike these kind of ppl everywhere i go to the point where i feel very uncomfortable in my own canada...yes! |
racialist imo. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dr Satan
racialist |
:stongue: |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| quote: | Originally posted by AustralianGQ
i totally agree, it is retarded, one reason why im glad to say im gonna move out of this country soon. canada is no longer canada, when i walk down the street and see no white ppl, just blacks and indians and asians...am i racist? nope, do i dislike these kind of ppl everywhere i go to the point where i feel very uncomfortable in my own canada...yes! |
 |
|
|
| Ania_xox |
| quote: | Originally posted by jennypie
|
I love this woman |
|
|
| Abercrombie |
| quote: | Originally posted by El K Dee
My dad |
I met Liam's dad, and he's da bomb! |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, Ania, but actually, white people do own this land. Canada was still a constitutional monarchy last time I checked (so says even your precious Wikipedia) and that means we answer to Queen Elizabeth II of England. That makes us - say it with me now - a white English colony that just recently became a truly independent nation, in 1982.
More to the point, the first people to occupy a land physically do not necessarily own it for all eternity. There is no "finders keepers" clause in either Canadian Law or U.N. statutes. I get tired of hearing people beat the long-dead horse of how the white man took the land from the "Natives" (or whatever the politically correct term is these days - Aboriginals?). Yes, we took their land, and now it's ours. Boo hoo. People don't just return after fighting a bloody war for it. We fought, we won, and now we own the ing place.
And then, out of the goodness of our pale white chalky caker hearts, we made those same "Natives" full citizens and decided that this was going to be a free and democratic nation with open borders, which is a hell of a lot more than the Ojibwe or Inuktitut ever did. The fact that there even was a war in the 1600s should tell you just how happy they were having immigrants around.
We may not be a "white" nation in the sense of having an exclusively white political cabinet, nor should we, but don't pretend that the Canada you know today exists for any other reason than a couple of whities who came here 400 years ago because they didn't think Europe was quite ball-snappingly freezing enough. |
you are absolutely right, what irritates me the most is when a just landed immigrant tells a french or english native that they're immigrants like him... where did he get this bull?
I am not gonna push this further because people get called racists for much less than this.:rolleyes: TOTA = PC nightmare |
|
|
| Abercrombie |
| Ouein, parles moé donc-ça. Les pur-laines sont toujours come ça derriere les dos des têtes carrées et les laines salles. |
|
|
| malek |
| quote: | Originally posted by Abercrombie
Ouein, parles moé donc-ça. Les pur-laines sont toujours come ça derriere les dos des têtes carrées et les laines salles. |
si t'as rien à dire ferme ta criss de gueule. |
|
|
| zoogla |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
...people of the same race (normally defined as skin colour) are superior to those who are different, and that anybody different is beneath them, then that person becomes a racist.
...
Racism is not slight discomfort at being surrounded by other races and cultures. |
Based on your definition, GQ is definitely a racist. By referring to Canada as "his" he is projecting a sense of superiority. If this kid has trouble meeting white people in Caledon (according to jennypie's image dated Aug/05), he needs more than an education of the principles upon which Canada evolved during each milestone dating back to Confederation in 1867; he needs his eyes examined. A discussion of these principles (which Shelley and Ania hit on) is a lot more relevant than your simple refutation of Ania's argument re: natives.
Also, I don't see the relevance of your comment re: "slight discomfort" when this kid wants to leave the country. That's not "slight discomfort" by any definition that I've heard of :rolleyes:
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'm sorry to burst your bubble, Ania, but actually, white people do own this land. Canada was still a constitutional monarchy last time I checked (so says even your precious Wikipedia) and that means we answer to Queen Elizabeth II of England. That makes us - say it with me now - a white English colony that just recently became a truly independent nation, in 1982. |
Your stance isn't clear here. Are you saying that Canada is truly an indpendent nation, so there is no line of ownership? or are you standing on an extremely weak argument that we actually answer to a Queen, following that she owns Canada?!! LOL!!!
What a load of horse . The British monarchy has -all to do with running the UK or any of the Commonwealth nations. They are simply a side freak-show whose isolated wealth should be repatriated as far as I'm concerned. In fact, the tolerance that the Commonwealth political systems show the royal family is indicative of the tolerance we have embedded in all facets of our economic/political/legal/social systems.
Obviously, I am arguing that the concept of ownership of a nation is not as simple as you are making it to be, and that one aspect of determining ownership is the activeness of said "owner" in maintaining the nation.
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
More to the point, the first people to occupy a land physically do not necessarily own it for all eternity. There is no "finders keepers" clause in either Canadian Law or U.N. statutes. I get tired of hearing people beat the long-dead horse of how the white man took the land from the "Natives" (or whatever the politically correct term is these days - Aboriginals?). Yes, we took their land, and now it's ours. Boo hoo. People don't just return after fighting a bloody war for it. We fought, we won, and now we own the ing place. |
I've never been a proponent of the "who was here first" theory, which is the reason why the Palestinian (and various other ethinic territorial) issues are failing so spectacularly. No one can argue against Canada's global reputation as a nation of tolerance and multicultural peaceful co-existence, which is much more relevant to the immigration issue than an over-simplified discussion of the British monarchy.
I'm seeing the pattern of your posts, Diginut: you spend a lot of time redefining concepts in an attempt to change the premise of the argument to favour your own over-simplified pespective. :rolleyes:
A more refined argument (which I can't be bothered to write up right now) would be to acknowledge the weakness of GQ's concept of "ownership" and then to point out how no such concept can exist in the liberal democratic system we have in Canada. The monarchy is irrelevant, but I agree with you that so are the Aboriginals (in isolation). |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| Digi knows everything dont you know?:o :rolleyes: |
|
|
| EvilTree |
| quote: | Originally posted by fayraree
Your stance isn't clear here. Are you saying that Canada is truly an indpendent nation, so there is no line of ownership? or are you standing on an extremely weak argument that we actually answer to a Queen, following that she owns Canada?!! LOL!!!
What a load of horse . The British monarchy has -all to do with running the UK or any of the Commonwealth nations. |
Actually, the Royal Family does have a function (well, the constitutional monarchy part)
As much as the whole entire process is more of a rubber stamp than anything else, the Queen (and Governor General her representative) exercise a check and balances function. As recently as 1970s IIRC, the GG stepped in to resolve a political deadlock in Australia.
The political consequences of the GG using her political powers is too great to be taken lightly, but it is there.
| quote: | | They are simply a side freak-show whose wealth should be repatriated as far as I'm concerned. |
The Royal Family now pays income tax.
The revenue the Royal Family generates from tourism income far outstrips any money the govt spends on them.
| quote: | | In fact, the tolerance that the Commonwealth political systems show the royal family is indicative of the tolerance we have embedded in all facets of our economic/political/legal/social systems. |
I don't understand.
| quote: |
I've never been a proponent of the "who was here first" theory, which is the reason why the Palestinian (and various other ethinic territorial) issues are failing so spectacularly. No one can argue against Canada's global reputation as a nation of tolerance and multicultural peaceful co-existence, which is much more relevant to the immigration issue than an over-simplified discussion of the British monarchy.
|
This is interesting, because as late as the 60s, Canada had one of the most restrictive and racist immigration policy, pretty much barring any non white people as immigrants.
Shows how far Canada has come in terms of multi culturalism.
Then again, I've ranted enough times on this forum about how multiculturalism is killing Canada :p |
|
|
| zoogla |
| quote: | Originally posted by jon jon
hah well played. |
On the contrary, I think it's a ridiculous comparison because the monarchy vis-a-vis the Governer General has no "real" executive powers in Canada, unlike the senior executives (that would represent the Board of Directors of a company). The middle management is completely the wrong level as a point of comparison.
Personally, I don't think you can even determine the "owner" of a country so the whole exchange was retarded.
Also, FYI Ted Rogers is the founder of Rogers Group; he does not have a majority position nor is he the largest single shareholder, and he is no longer the President/CEO. ;) |
|
|
|
|
