IT IS NOT “RACIST” TO BE WHO YOU ARE
If we equate “racial diversity” with multiculturalism, and I think we must, it’s not good for Canada.
The first and biggest problem is that it is the OPPOSITE of our quasi-legislative FEDERALISM. What is that?
Well, had there been a “legislative” union of the British North American colonies in 1867, we would have ONE Parliament and no provincial Legislatures. Instead, we had a quasi-legislative union in 1867. Acting as a WHOLE nation in federal elections, we send one set of elected representatives to the Parliament to make law for Canada.
Acting as LOCAL peoples, each in our “reserved” territory, also called a “section” or a Province, we EACH send another set of elected representatives to our respective Legislatures.
UNION would not have been agreed to by the Founding Peoples in 1867 had it NOT been Federal, with a unique Legislature for each colony to maintain and advance its own interests, LOCALLY.
Confederation is therefore about LEGAL SEPARATISM under which each founding people was expected to have majority control of its territory, and thus of its culture and its laws, along with joint control of immigration with the central Parliament.
Multiculturalism is NOT CANADIAN federalism and it’s NOT a harbinger of legislative union, because it’s not about oneness, it’s a buckshot immigration policy which scatters hundreds of other races and cultures all across Canada, giving them priority over Canadians. Multiculturalism shoots holes into the national fabric of the federal nation, as well as into the local fabric of every “section” or province.
French Canadians recently took to the streets to PROTEST against multiculturalism and all of its ideological and structural underpinnings, including forced public and private indoctrination in the ideology of normative pluralism, represented in the video description below by the Religion and Ethics course:
The video uploader wrote this description in French (English translation below):
Marche contre la dénationalisation 2011 à Montréal.
Qu’est-ce que la dénationalisation ?
La dénationalisation se décrit par la tentative de négation et de remplacement de l’identité historique du peuple canadien-francais au Québec. Elle représente les politiques gouvernementales du multiculturalisme fédéral et de l’interculturalisme provincial, ainsi que les moyens utilisés pour mettre celles-ci en application. Entre autres, l’immigration massive, le cours d’Éthique et Culture Religieuse (ECR), la carence délibérée de cours d’histoire nationale dans nos écoles et le non-respect de la loi 101 sont des agents de la dénationalisation de notre peuple.
March against de-nationalization in 2011 in Montreal.
What is de-nationalization?
De-nationalization is the attempt to negate and to replace the historic identity of the French Canadian people of Quebec. It represents the governmental policies of multiculturalism and provincial inter-culturalism, as well as the means employed to put these policies into application.
Amongst others, massive immigration, the public school course in “Ethics and Religious Culture” (ECR), the deliberate omission of a course in national history in our schools, and the non-respect of Law 101 [protecting the French language], which are agents of the de-nationalization of our (French Canadian) people.”
* * *
Should we be concerned about French Canadians referring to themselves as a people, as a “nation” being denationalized? Isn’t it “separatism”? Not at all. IT’S CONFEDERATION. And here’s why. Official, LEGAL “separation” of the Founding Peoples under distinct Legislatures is what Confederation was about for ALL Founding Canadians. It gave us a country to share, as ONE political nation, and PROVINCES as our home turf to govern ourselves on our own terms, and preserve and develop our respective Founding (French & English) cultures and racial nations.
Although there are racial minorities in each Province, which is inevitable, the whole purpose of the Provincial Legislatures in 1867 was to give LOCAL INDEPENDENCE to each Founding People. This is more clear from a quote from 1867.
On the very first “Canada Day”, July 1st, 1867, Le Minerve, the newspaper mouthpiece of George Etienne Cartier, wrote as follows to describe the new Confederation: [TRANSLATION]
“Such is the meaning that must be attached to this Constitution. In it, we see the recognition of the French-Canadian nationality; we form a State within the State, with full enjoyment of our rights, and the formal recognition of our independence.”
Source: Studies on the Canadian Constitution and Canadian Federalism, The Constitution Act, 1867, the Confederation Debates and Provincial Autonomy. Claude Bélanger, Department of History, Marianopolis College – Last revised: 26 February 2001
These same LEGAL recognitions apply to ALL Founding Canadians and their natural heirs to whom Confederation belongs. We need to learn from our French-Canadian allies in Canada, who thankfully are not too politically correct, too intimidated, or too shy to take to the streets with their LOCAL FLAG which represents THEIR Founding People, and STAND UP FOR THEMSELVES.
As Canadians, we must also stand up for EACH OTHER and our true Constitutional Alliance, which in 1867 gave birth to CANADA, not to Africa, not to India, not to China, not to Cuba; but to a new FEDERATION, unique in the world, and the intended home “for all time to come” of its own unique and distinct Founding Peoples.
HABEAS CORPUS CANADA
The Official Legal Challenge
To North American Union
“Little Guy” Battles Political Correctness
What Is STATISM?
Political Correctness Run Amok
Canada Is Too Accommodating
Canada – Land of Pandering Fools
Canada Open To Immigrant Abuse