the Thugs Prevented Jared Taylor from Delivering
Racial Diversity Good for Canada?
by Jared Taylor
Last November, Prof. David Divine of
Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada, agreed to meet Jared Taylor in a debate
on whether racial diversity is a strength or a weakness. Late in December, he
backed out of his agreement, claiming he had been unaware of Mr. Taylor's
background, and was now unwilling to let him speak. AR secured a venue in
Halifax, where Jared Taylor planned to give the following talk on Jan. 16, the
day after Prof. Divine gave his. On Jan. 16, before Mr. Taylor could even be
introduced, 20 or 30 demonstrators filed into the room, and began shouting and
beating on pots and pans. This went on for perhaps 20 minutes until a group of
perhaps six men surrounded Mr. Taylor at the podium and, linking arms, forced
him from the room. Demonstrators also destroyed copies of American Renaissance
that Mr. Taylor had prepared for distribution. These are the remarks Mr. Taylor
had planned to give. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. As I believe you all
know, this meeting became necessary after Professor David Divine of Dalhousie
University backed out of an agreement to have a public debate with me on the
question: "Racial Diversity: North America's Strength or Weakness." On December
21, he announced that after looking into my background, he decided to turn the
debate into a monologue, in other words, to have a discussion about diversity in
which diversity of opinions was not allowed. The place and time had been set.
The university had even designed a spiffy poster advertising the debate. But no,
a debate with me "would not be a useful way to explore the topic."
A poster that was never used. Prof.
Divine said that as part of his monologue he would be kind enough to summarize
my views for the audience - and then explain why they are wrong. How he proposed
to summarize my views without hearing them is a mystery to me, but that makes
his job a bit easier, doesn't it? Rather than face a real opponent, he wanted to
set up a straw man to knock down. I contacted him early this month to tell him I
was coming to Halifax anyway. I urged him to stick to his agreement and debate
me. I pointed out that if my ideas are wrong he should have no trouble refuting
them. He refused to meet me. Ladies and gentlemen, I believe Prof. Divine is a
coward. I think he is afraid to face a serious opponent in a serious debate on
the subject of what amounts to the state religion of Canada: the assertion that
multiculturalism and racial diversity are great strengths for a country. Ladies
and gentlemen, I believe Prof. Divine is a coward. I think he is afraid to face
a serious opponent.
And I submit to you, ladies and
gentlemen, that an assertion - a belief - is all it is. How, exactly, is racial
diversity a strength for Canada or any other country? Does it raise per capita
GNP? Does it improve crop yields? Does it lower crime rates? Does it reduce
green house gasses? Does it lower taxes? No, it doesn't do any of those things.
I'm not sure I have ever heard its boosters say specifically what it does. I
will tell you what racial diversity does: It results in conflict, tension, and
hostility. At its worst, racial diversity can lead to race riots,
racially-motivated murder and assault. At its best, when communities of
different races try to live together they simply leave each other alone. The
result is relatively peaceful voluntary segregation. Except for a few bohemians,
people of different races do not often mingle naturally and happily.
Prof. David Divine. Think honestly about
your own lives. How racially diverse are your dinner parties, your ski outings,
your church services, your backyard barbecues? If racial diversity were a
strength, people would be drawn to it naturally. They would mix spontaneously
with people unlike themselves. And yet, they do not. They do not because racial
diversity is not a strength. It is a source of tension and conflict. People may
submit to racial diversity in their public lives but turn their backs on it in
their private lives. Now, you probably think that every major Canadian
institution from the federal government on down takes the view that racial
diversity is a great strength for Canada. In fact, they all agree with me. They
all assert most emphatically that racial diversity is not a source of strength
but a source of conflict. The only difference is that instead of the word
"conflict," they use the word "racism." Whatever "racism" may be, they all agree
that it is a very bad thing, and that Canadian society is riddled with it. Now,
if there were no racial diversity in Canada, there could be no racial
discrimination, could there? So please remember this: Whenever people complain
about racism, bigotry, hatred, racial profiling, discrimination, they are not
talking about the joys and benefits of racial diversity. They are admitting that
it is a source of tension and suffering. To repeat, your government and
institutions agree with me, not with Prof. Divine. That is why every province
and territory has two major bureaucracies that fight racism: a Human Rights
Commission and a Human Rights Tribunal. Then there is the federal Human Rights
Commission - 200 people work for it full-time - the Canadian Race Relations
Foundation, the National Anti-Racism Council of Canada, and dozens more city and
local bureaucracies fighting racism. Every university has an office for fighting
racism. And that's not enough. The Canadian UNESCO Commission wants to establish
a Canadian Coalition of Municipalities Against Racism. Saint Paul University in
Ottawa wants what it calls a National Justice Initiative Against Racism and
Hate. In 2005, the federal government launched Canada's Action Plan Against
Racism, which was to spend $56 million over the next five years combating
racism. You have Parliamentary Committees on Visible Minorities and Standing
Committees on Multiculturalism. It's hard to keep up with all the bureaucrats
whose job it is to sniff out racism and eradicate it. None of this would be
necessary were there no racial diversity in Canada.
Dalhousie University. How bad is the
race problem? The Ontario Human Rights Commission says "Racial discrimination
and racism" are "pervasive and continuing." The Canadian Race Relations
Foundation says "racism is serious and pervasive." The Canadian Commission for
UNESCO says racism "imperils democracy." The federal Human Rights Commission
says "hate and, in particular, its manifestation on the Internet pose a serious
threat to the social fabric of Canadian society." How can racial diversity be a
strength if it gives rise to something that "imperils democracy" that "poses a
serious threat to the social fabric of Canadian society?" This question deserves
an answer, ladies and gentlemen, but because Prof. Divine is afraid to debate
me, I'm afraid it will not get one. In fact, I suspect Prof. Divine is afraid to
debate me because he knows this question has no answer. Let's go back to
Ontario, where there is the most racial diversity in Canada, and where we should
therefore find the most strength. Try a search on the web site for the
government of Ontario on the word "racism" and see how many hits you get. I got
4,852 when I tried it in December. And I didn't even try "discrimination,"
"bigotry," or "hatred," or any number of other promising terms. The Ontario
Human Rights Commission hears 700 to 800 racial discrimination cases every year.
Each case takes an average of a little over a year to finish, and the commission
is so overworked it has a backlog, despite its $13 million annual budget and
staff of 130. And remember: Although the Ontario commission may be the busiest,
every province and territory has one, and there is one for the federal
government, too. Right here in Nova Scotia, the Human Rights Commission sponsors
a forum every year that "examines the challenges being faced by different racial
groups in maintaining and defining their identities in an increasingly complex
world." It also sponsors a series of breakfasts called "Champions of the
Workplace," where employers "discuss successes and challenges related to
managing inclusion within their workforces." If diversity is such a strength I
wonder why it has to be "managed," why there are "challenges," and why it takes
"champions of the workplace" to make it work. The Nova Scotia commission also
offers "workshops on issues surrounding diversity, discrimination, race
relations, and harassment." Why does something that is a great strength require
workshops? In Nova Scotia you have an entire ministry devoted to blacks - whom
it calls African-Nova Scotians. Why do you need that ministry if racial
diversity is a strength? The city of Halifax itself is abuzz with worries about
racism. Just search the Dalhousie University web site for "racism" and you will
get hundreds and hundreds of hits. Here are some of the results I got: Racism
within the health care system; Racism in the criminal justice system; The racism
inherent in white civilization; Racism in Shakespeare's The Tempest; Everyday
racism in medical school; The systemic racism that is prevalent in Nova Scotia;
Contemporary Representations of Racism in Children's Books; Racism, Birth
Control and Reproductive Rights; Racism and Science Fiction; Thinking More
Creatively About Racism and How to Tackle It; Systemic racism affects every
aspect of our daily lives; Commission on Systemic Racism in the Ontario Criminal
Justice System. By golly, it's everywhere. And this is just a tiny sample of the
stuff that's on the Dalhousie site. Dahousie even has what's called a Black
Student Advising Center. It offers diversity and sensitivity training. It
sponsors a special graduation ceremony for black students. It issues a bi-weekly
paper called AfricVoice. The paper's motto is "Informing, Inspiring,
Empowering," and each issue starts with an African proverb. "Stop profiling our
young Black brothers as being drug dealers and pimps ..." says the Nov. 10 issue
from last year. The centre even gives black students something called "The Black
Student Advising Centre Survival Guide."
Survival guide? Why is all this special
hand-holding necessary if racial diversity is a strength? The city of Halifax
recently had a classic demonstration of the disadvantages of racial diversity.
The local paper, the Chronicle Herald, reports that Education Minister Karen
Casey just fired the entire Halifax School Board. Why? According to the paper's
Dec. 20th issue, "Ms. Casey's decision came after a recent shouting match among
about a half-dozen members that involved accusations of racism. 'Collectively,
they are not able to work together in the best interest of students,' she said."
So it appears that racism is a very considerable scourge in Canada, but it is
reassuring to know that commissions and tribunals and study groups and
associations and foundations are beavering away night and day fighting it.
They'll soon have it under control, right? Well, maybe not. A recent survey by
Statistics Canada found that, nearly 50 percent of blacks say they have suffered
from discrimination or unfair treatment, as have 33 percent of South Asians and
Chinese. (No report by StatCan on whether any Whites suffer from racism.) A 2003
report on immigrants living in West Central Toronto found that 68 percent had
suffered just from housing discrimination, let alone any other kind of
discrimination. In 2004 the Dominion Institute did a big poll and found that 65
percent of Canadians said that over the past five years there has been no change
in the level of racism in their communities. Thirteen percent said racism had
decreased but 17 percent said there was more of it than five years ago. Is
Canada losing the fight against racism? That would seem to be the message of
this survey, which was, ironically enough, taken to mark International Day for
the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.
Coming to a city near you? And then
there is the report York University wrote for the city of Toronto in 2000 about
race, housing, and poverty. "There are huge levels of inequality," explained the
author Michael Ornstein, "and they are very strongly correlated with ethnoracial
characteristics." Carol Tator, a Toronto-based academic seems to think you are
losing the fight, too. The Dec. 24 issue of your local paper, the Chronicle
Herald, quotes her as saying, "The problem of racial profiling in Canada both
historically and currently is a national crisis across this country." And it is
not as though the fight against racism only just got started. You have been
battling it longer than we have in America. The first modern anti-racist
legislation in Canada was Ontario's Racial Discrimination Act of 1944. We didn't
have anything like that at the state or federal level in 1944. Ontario banned
racial discrimination in employment in 1951, and by 1960 every province had
passed similar bans. We didn't get a national ban until 1964. You have
comprehensive anti-racism legislation at provincial and federal levels - you've
had it for decades. You even have a Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and
Canadian Identity, part of whose job is to fight discrimination. And yet the
battle still rages. Let us accept, for a moment, the lefty view of all this,
namely that racism - whatever that may be - is a moral failing that afflicts
only Whites. Non-Whites - every man, woman and child - are noble, unoffending
sufferers, whose sole aim is to be accepted as the loyal Canadians they are.
Parenthetically, this seems to be the view of all your human rights commissions,
too, but no matter. If this view is correct, it means Whites are a uniquely
defective people who break out in helpless spasms of racism whenever they
encounter non-Whites. But if that is true, why must Whites - and their non-White
victims - be put through the ordeal of racial diversity? If, after decades of
combating racism whites are still hopelessly racist, what is gained by an
immigration policy that brings in yet more non-Whites only to make them suffer
at the hands of Whites, and that degrades whites by bringing out the worst in
them? Toronto used to be virtually all-White. There couldn't have been much
racial discrimination. Now, all official sources agree that Toronto is a hive of
racial discrimination. How has racial diversity therefore been a strength for
Toronto or for Canada? This, therefore, is one problem with racial diversity.
The races don't seem to get along very well. Just look at all this agonizing and
hand-wringing over racism. You may choose to blame all the problems exclusively
on wicked White people, but why pretend racial diversity is a strength? There is
a second aspect of racial diversity on which Canada is strangely silent. Have
the non-Whites who are coming and who are increasing racial diversity improved
the country? I realize this is a taboo question, but let us ask it anyway. One
of the unpleasant consequences of racial diversity is that Whites, at any rate,
have to be very careful about how they talk. In 2005 the chief economist of CIBC
World Markets Jeff Rubin was spanked and sent for sensitivity training when he
wrote that oil prices would double by 2010 because "this time around there won't
be any tap that some appeased mullah or sheik can suddenly turn back on."
Writing about "sheiks" apparently upset the Islamic lobby.
'Kemosabe' means 'trusted friend.' But I
think the "Kemosabe" case was more interesting. As you will recall, that is what
Tonto called the Lone Ranger in the TV series. Well, right here in Nova Scotia,
your Human Rights Commission worked itself into a lather when a Mi'kmaq lady
named Dorothy Moore said her boss called her Kemosabe. He called everyone
Kemosabe, but she took offense. The commission appointed a board of inquiry to
look into the complaint. It watched a bunch of Lone Ranger reruns and concluded
in Feb. 2004, that first, Kemosabe is not an insult, and that Ms. Moore hadn't
clearly shown she was offended by being called Kemosabe. The Nova Scotia Human
Rights Commission was determined that "Kemosabe" be found racist and demeaning.
It appealed the board of inquiry's decision to the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal.
The court agreed with the board, namely that Miss Moore hadn't proven the word
was an insult, but the human rights commission still would not give up. It took
the case all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada! The Supreme Court had
better things to do than watch reruns of "The Lone Ranger," and refused to take
the case. "We're disappointed," said Mayann Francis, head of the Nova Scotia
Human Rights Commission. "We thought this case might help establish clearer
guidelines for dealing with discrimination and the cultural differences one
finds in a diverse workplace." Ladies and gentlemen. If this is the sort of
thing you get from a "diverse workplace" who needs it? The Supreme Court did,
however, take up the question of whether Sikh students can wear ceremonial
daggers to school. The Montreal school board didn't want students running around
with knives, but the Supreme Court said they could, as a matter of religious
freedom. The Supreme Court does not yet appear to be involved, but back in 2005
your federal Justice Department helped fund a year-long, $150,000 study of
polygamy. Last year it announced its recommendations. It said there are already
so many polygamous Muslims in the country that Canada should get rid of its laws
banning polygamy. Go with the flow. Make bigamy legal. Do bigamists and kids
with daggers make Canada a better place? Or are we even allowed to ask questions
like that? Without diversity, these questions would not arise.
Toronto now reaping all the benefits of
racial diversity. Let's return for a moment to the subject of speaking freely.
Let's talk abut White flight. There was a 2004 Toronto Star article about a new
Statistics Canada report on the appearance of visible minority neighborhoods in
Canada's big cities. Whites used to live in these places but they have moved
out. According to the Toronto Star, StatCan could not bring itself to use the
term "White flight," and wrote only about "rapid replacement." Well, someone
apparently wasn't told about how we are now supposed to talk. That same year,
2004, Toronto city councilman from Scarborough Mike Del Grande told his local
paper that "a lot of White people are moving out" of his ward. Another
councilman immediately jumped on Mr. Del Grande: "To hear someone say White
people are leaving and Chinese are coming in can be nothing other than a racist
comment," said Joe Mihevc. Poor Mr. Del Grande had to apologize: "I should have
said many older residents of the community (are moving out)," he said. "I didn't
say it in a politically correct way." Now, what is going on when a city
councilman says something that is obviously true, is accused of racism, and is
forced to say he should have spoken in code rather than speak clearly? You can't
even describe what is going on before your very eyes, much less talk about why
Whites are leaving and whether they might even be justified in leaving. This
doesn't sound like a strength to me. The vice principal of Queens University
unbosomed what strikes me as a significant truth about Canada. Recently he was
quoted as saying, "Our Canadian culture has been squeamish about gathering
race-based statistics because no one wants to see ethnic makeup reduced to
numbers on a page. But unless you get this kind of information, you don't really
know if you have a problem." Well, yes. How do you even begin to assess whether
racial diversity is a strength or a weakness unless you gather the information.
Do different groups have different rates of illegitimacy? School failure?
Poverty? If they do, does it make sense to add to those groups through
immigration? Take crime data. I understand Canada does not keep records of
racial differences in crime rates. Too squeamish, I suppose. And yet everyone
knows some groups commit more crime than others. Your newspapers talk about it
indirectly. This is from the Canadian Press of December 24, 2005: Cities like
Vancouver and Toronto have been rocked by a wave of gang violence in recent
years. Almost 100 men in rival Indo-Canadian gangs in Vancouver have been
murdered since 1994, often execution-style, over drug deals gone bad. Toronto's
gang violence, on the other hand, often involving gun-wielding young Black men,
has escalated to the point that a coalition of African-Canadians recently called
on Prime Minister Paul Martin to declare the issue a national crisis. Of the
more than 70 murders in the Toronto area so far this year, a large portion of
them have involved gang members - as many as 30 in the Black community and many
others among Asian, Latino and Tamil gangs, said Tony Warr, Toronto's deputy
police chief. Here's the Globe and Mail of Oct. 17, 2005, telling us that on a
per capita basis Winnipeg has become the murder capital of Canada. "Most of the
victims of violent crime are aboriginals, Third World immigrants, gang members,
homeless people or transients. Winnipeg's West End ... has long been in thrall
to a gang known as the Mad Cowz, made up mostly of young African immigrants,
many in their teens." In the Vancouver paper The Province, issue of Oct. 21,
2005, we read, "A violent ethnic war between Filipino and Vietnamese youths in
the Lower Mainland will likely escalate, Vancouver police said yesterday." Here
is a March 16, 2006 story in the Calgary Sun, with the headline: "Feared Gang
Hits Calgary." A gang of white people? No. It is MS 13 from El Salvador. In
2005, Black violence got so bad in Toronto that one councilman, Michael
Thompson, urged the police to pull over young Blacks randomly and see if they
were armed. Mr. Thompson said this wasn't racial profiling, but that "the police
now have got to take measures - drastic measures." There was criticism of this,
of course, but Mr. Thompson was not hounded out of polite society as you might
suspect. He is Black and thus enjoys the benefits of protective coloring. Now,
as we saw, Canada is too squeamish to collect crime statistics by race, but the
United States is not. We know, for example, that Blacks commit robbery and
murder at approximately eight to ten times the white rate, that Hispanics commit
these crimes at three to four times the white rate. Hispanics are 19 times more
likely than Whites to be in youth gangs, and Blacks are 18 times more likely. I
would suspect there are equally striking racial differences in Canada, but no
one knows because the government doesn't want to know.
We find yet another interesting
diversity issue in the case of Toronto's now-defunct zero-tolerance policy on
crimes in schools. Students were committing so much robbery, drug dealing,
sexual assault, and weapons violations that in 2000 the province passed the Safe
Schools Act, requiring that any student guilty of these offences be expelled or
suspended. Just four years later the province had to drop the policy. Why?
Non-Whites were being expelled and suspended all out of proportion to their
numbers. More than 1,000 children under the age of seven had been suspended -
for things like robbery, weapons possession and drug dealing - and the majority
were Black. So Toronto had to junk the zero-tolerance policy. This story
illuminates two things: First, we learn that non-Whites were the major source of
the problem; you did not have a rash of crimes like this when the schools were
overwhelmingly White. Second, a sensible, non-discriminatory solution had to be
ditched because non-Whites were getting more of their share of the punishment.
Here, racial diversity both caused the problem and made it impossible to apply
an obvious solution. While we're on the subject of Toronto schools, in 2005, a
Black school board member proposed setting up an all-black school. Lloyd McKell,
who had the title of executive officer of student and community equity, said
all-Black schools might be a necessary way to fight high dropout and expulsion
rates. Just last April right here in Halifax, a Black educator named Wade Smith
said integrated schools were doing such a poor job with Blacks that he thought
Halifax needs a school just for Blacks. I thought segregation was supposed to be
bad for Blacks. Now, it turns out integration is bad for Blacks. Racial
diversity seems to be very tricky business, indeed. Back to Toronto, in 2005, a
coalition of 22 Black community groups - but let's stop right there. A coalition
of 22 Black community groups? Twenty-two race based associations? What do they
all do? Why are they needed? Why are they racially exclusive? How many more are
there that are not part of this coalition? Are they all glorying in the
strengths of racial diversity? Anyway, a Toronto Star article begins like this:
"A Toronto coalition of 22 Black community groups disgusted by gun murders in
the city wants a separate set of rules and institutions for Blacks - from a
government department to a diversion program for minor crimes."
Zanana Akande. The article then quotes
Zanana Akande, a former principal and an Ontario cabinet minister in Bob Rae's
NDP government. She says: "Blacks have now reached the point of such disgust,
such frustration, such a feeling of rejection ... that well-trained,
well-qualified, capable people have given up and said, 'You know what? Maybe we
should have our own [institutions]'." The article continues: "Margaret Parsons,
executive director of the African Canadian Legal Clinic went further, saying
Canada's vaunted policy of multi-culturalism has blinded authorities to systemic
racism against Blacks, even as they adopt policies of inclusion and
integration." The White man just can't get it right. Here he is, adopting
policies of inclusion and integration, but they only blind him to systemic
racism against Blacks. And we are still supposed to believe racial diversity is
a strength? Outright segregation makes White people nervous so, according to the
Toronto Star of last July 19, Blacks will have to settle for a new "Africentric"
curriculum that is supposed to boost Black pride and improve grades. There is
even going to be Africentric math, with a unit on racial profiling. Does anyone
think that will really improve grades? Of course, now you have a bit of a
problem with Muslims, too. In a July 25, 2006 article from the Halifax
Chronicle-Herald, we get another revealing headline: "Study: Conflict Likely
Between Canada, Its Muslim Citizens." But maybe that shouldn't be surprising.
Last summer police arrested a group of young Muslims - "homegrown terrorists"
you have been calling them - who were going to storm the Canadian Parliament,
hold politicians hostage, and maybe even behead the prime minister. According to
the Globe and Mail of last June 29, the wives of the four main conspirators
shared "among other things, their passion for holy war, disgust at virtually
every aspect of non-Muslim society and a hatred of Canada." Maybe we shouldn't
be surprised if Canadians don't care for this. At the same time, so many of
Toronto's Muslims were taking their children out of classes that were supposed
to teach them the right attitude toward homosexuals that Ontario's prime
minister got involved. In 2004, Dalton McGuinty issued a personal plea to Muslim
parents to let their children take these classes. Diversity seems to be tricky
for all sorts of reasons.
Another source of strength gone bad. So
far, I haven't said anything about Canada's oldest experiment with racial
diversity, which is relations between Whites and aboriginals. If diversity is a
strength, this one should be well developed because it has been around the
longest. Somehow, it doesn't seem that way. It was news even in the United
States when Indians took over the town of Caledonia, Ontario, which they claimed
was on their land, and chased out the White man. Maclean's magazine warns of
more to come. An article from just last December 27 begins like this: "Canada
should brace for more dramatic displays of aboriginal defiance in 2007, warn
native leaders who say the First Nations frustrations that boiled over in a
small Ontario town this year may well be a tipping point for decades of
simmering aboriginal anger." Decades of simmering aboriginal anger. It sounds
like another source of strength gone bad. On the very day of the cited Maclean's
article, the Mohawk Nation News wrote: "Don't get any ideas that we will become
Canadians. No way! We can and will handle our own affairs. So get out of our way
while the going is good. Canada, you know, everything belongs to us. We're
getting it all back." So what are we to conclude from all this? Ladies and
gentlemen, let us face facts squarely. Racial diversity in Canada, just as it is
in America, is an ordeal. Sometimes, a difficult, agonizing ordeal. It is a
source of resentment, guilt-mongering, and endless charges of racism. If it were
a strength, non-White groups would not set up countless race-based organizations
to protect and advance their interests. If it were a strength, no one would need
diversity managers or sensitivity training. If it were a strength, Canadians
would not naturally separate on racial lines. Take a look around the world.
Wherever people are killing each other most diligently, they are killing each
other because of diversity. The Tutsis and Hutus slaughtered each other because
of ethnic differences. The Tamils and Sinhalese slaughter each other in Sri
Lanka because of religious and ethnic differences. Arabs and Blacks slaughter
each other in Darfur because of racial and religious reasons. Arabs and Israelis
slaughter each other because of ethnic and religious differences.
Orwell was on to something. The Soviet
Union broke up because of racial and ethnic differences. So did Czechoslovakia
and Yugoslavia. Zimbabwe is expelling White farmers only because they are White.
Diversity of the kind Canada is promoting is one of the most obviously divisive
forces on the planet. To keep jabbering, as Canadians are supposed to do, that
diversity is strength is like repeating the three official government slogans
from George Orwell's 1984. Let me remind you what they were: War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. "Diversity is strength" fits right
in, doesn't it? And to add to the Orwellian atmosphere, I must point out that
Canada has laws against free speech that touch on this very subject. All I have
done this evening is quote government sources and read newspaper articles, and
yet several people warned me that for giving this talk I could be arrested for
"inciting racial hatred." Others said that as an American I could be turned away
at the border for the same reason. Isn't this exactly what desperate,
totalitarian regimes do? Promote lies and then punish people who speak the
truth? We are living in dangerous times, ladies and gentlemen. If your
government will lie to you about this, what will it lie about next? If it
forbids dissent on this subject, what will it forbid next? With your immigration
and multi-culturalist policies you are dicing with the future of your country.
If there is even a small chance that by replacing European Canadians with
Third-World Canadians you will end up with a Third-World country, do you not owe
it to your children and grandchildren to think seriously about the demographic
future of your country? There are those who would prefer that you never think
about this. That you remain ignorant of any dissenting argument about race. It
was in order to keep you ignorant that I was shut out of yesterday's event. But
as Orwell warned, just as freedom is not slavery, ignorance is not strength.
March 29, 2005
Taylor Meets Canada’s Multicultural Madrassa —Almost
Gavin Miles McInnes
I moved to Ottawa, Canada in 1976 as a
very young Englishman with a father who was invited to help the Canucks with
their non-existent high tech industry.
Within weeks I had my posh British
accent pounded out of me and was able to say
"How’s it goin’,
with the best of them.
When Canada instituted its
refugee-friendly Immigration Act of 1978, few refugees seemed to take them up on
the offer. There were not, to paraphrase
Buchanan, a thousand Zulus set to compete for
assimilation with a thousand of us
There were millions of
East Indians though.
were brought in for the same reasons mine were. Each of my classes had about
three or four. Sure, we would rib Rajiv for his funny name and his accent, but
played hockey and liked
so we quickly forgot he had difficulty sunburning.
In 1984, my brother Kyle was born
very different Ottawa.
Immigration Act had
successfully taken the emphasis away from what immigrants can do for our country
and placed it all on what our country can do for immigrants. More importantly,
Canada had decided "assimilation"
and that was for those ugly Americans south of the border.
You see, Canadian identity hinges
on everything that is
anti-American. So it was decided that
Canada would become the
most anti-melting pot country the world’s ever seen.
It worked. Today it’s hard to find a
Torontonian that doesn’t puff out his chest and proudly bleat his city is
"literally the most culturally diverse city on earth."
Unfortunately, the only way
Canadians could convince themselves diversity-based immigration works was to
turn a blind eye to its downsides. Anything goes, consequences be damned! The
Mounties can wear
turbans, Sikh boxers can
beards untrimmed. And
Toronto youths can carry their
ceremonial daggers to school African refugees
can flush their passports down the toilet on the plane ride over, make up a name
when they get to the airport and they’re on the street in an hour. All they have
to do is
promise (cross your
heart, hope to die) to come back for a hearing in a few weeks.
The local stories are more of the
same. At my father’s pub, an Ottawa City
Transpo bus driver tells
me how maintenance often has to hose down the blood in his bus at the end of the
night due to the
Somali gang knife fights.
"Why don’t you read about that in the [Ottawa] Citizen?" he says
furiously. On September 12th, 2001 my mother (an
adult education teacher whose students are
about a third Muslim refugees) came in to work only to notice: "plane bomb
star of David skull" spelt out in gigantic Wingdings font on several
computers (QMYN). 
She wasn’t shocked. Other teachers
had casually mentioned similar symbols on their computers and chalkboards every
time the anniversary of the
Six Day War rolled
around. Canada had become so
tolerant of other cultures
that it now
tolerates people who are intolerant.
Her students made it very clear they had no allegiance to any country
whatsoever. Their allegiance was to Islam.
My brother’s academic life was
similar. The high school cafeteria was
into Arab, black, Chinese and white. The Arabs (mostly
Lebanese) hated the whites and fights often
broke out including one incident where the police were called in and an Arab
youth stabbed a teacher in the arm with a sharpened pencil. When my brother
caught a Somalian (a "Mali" as they were called) stealing his
skateboard a fight broke out that bled into
lunch hour. Minutes later a mini van of the Somalian’s entire family roared into
the parking lot. Again the police were called.
Finding documentation of all this
is virtually impossible. Each incident is documented as "notes" that
follow that specific teacher to whatever school he goes to next. Even when you
do track down the teacher that was there, no record of ethnicity is documented
because the administration is petrified of lawsuits. The understood code:
And of course, the local papers never
report anything about ethnic conflict. Ethnic conflict does not exist in Canada.
My old Alma Mata, Ottawa’s Carleton
University, has also been changed drastically in the past 20 years.
CKCU, the college radio station
founded by Dan Akroyd used to be a place you could hear, well, college radio.
Today we get at least two hours a day of
shows like "Voice of Somalia," "Tinig Pinjoy"
and "Asian Sounds." When I was at the school newspaper there were
still traces of 70s irreverence when editor’s photos were simply a penis with
sunglasses on them. By the mid 90s the only pubic hair you’d see in the paper
was when they were banning my magazine,
Vice, on campus.
Today the paper is so sterile it reads like a
multicultural trade journal.
And what’s worse, my old campus
pub Rooster’s has been converted into an
alcohol free bar where
Muslim students can enjoy the western college experience without the pesky
assimilation that goes with it.
Recently, when my brother paid his
tuition for the University of Ottawa he couldn’t help but notice that two pro-"diversity"
Public Interest Research Group, and
International House, were raking in over
$151,296 per semester. That means by the time Kyle graduates, he and his peers
will have spent over $1.2 million promoting diversity.
Or more specifically, stifling
anti-diversity. Kyle has just organized a talk wherein
Jared Taylor would travel up from the Great Satan and look at the cons of this
multicultural utopia we all took for granted. After all, the school had shelled
out $20,000 to hear Ralph Nader talk about the joys of diversity.
Were they willing to give Jared Taylor
plane fare? Or could he talk for free?
The short answer: no.
first brought it up with The Community Life Board [the people who organize
the talks] they were thrilled," my brother told me just after Christmas.
"They said ethnic tension and diversity is the most pressing issue on campus
today. Pierre Brault, the director of The Community Life Services still had a
broken wooden coat hanger in his office that had been used as a weapon at a
recent debate between two ethnic groups (he refused to tell me which ones). It
still had dried blood on it."
We put together a flyer for the
event and called it
"The Problems With Diversity."
That was a mistake.
people found out we were not going to be blindly praising multiculturalism
everything changed," my brother said. "After that I couldn’t catch a
Kiavash Najafi [email
him] from the Political Studies student
association made it clear to my brother that, even if his group approved,
Kiavash would personally, physically, do everything in his power to shut the
Bob Kimberley, the president of the
Communications Students association, told my brother he feared Taylor would
sound too eloquent. Even if students asked questions, he argued, they wouldn’t
sound as smart as Taylor and that would create an "unfair balance of power."
Caroline Andrew, the
dean of the faculty of social sciences
told Kyle she "can't support the talk" because she "doesn't agree with
Jared Taylor's origins and links."
The strangest response however
came from OPIRG member Mohammad Akram [email
him], who sent Kyle a long letter. Sample
word diversity is given by human being. All human being wants to live not die.
The immigrant came from other country same like your four fathers to live here
.... Just think how you are enjoying the rainbow with seven color. The idea of
Jared Taylor is not ideal for present modern, intellectual & highly advanced
society … You know the German history killing of Jews by Germany/Hitler. These
are all anti human act. If we will promote the Idea of Jared Taylor sure a time
will come in future people will fight tog her just for color supremacy … Canada
is the best country of the world. like
India. where we have
unity in Diversity."
Nice to know.
The University of Ottawa administration
automatically assumed that discussing the downside of diversity,
multiculturalism and mass immigration was tantamount to touting white supremacy.
My brother vainly asked sound
questions like: Is
Michelle Malkin a white supremacist for
defending racial profiling in her book
Defense of Internment?
Was liberal demigod
Zora Neale Hurston a
white supremacist for promoting segregation? Are anti-immigration activists
Terry Anderson and Juan
Mann white supremacists? Were the blacks at
who rail against affirmative action,
reparations, the idea of
For that matter, If they want to
attack supremacism, why don’t they talk about the fascist, racial agenda of
La Raza? Or even the
Islamists in our midst
see the Jews as "dogs."
Or the patriotic Israelis that have no problem with the fact that they live in
the most segregated place on earth.
When I published an article in the
[Banned in Canada, March
17, 2005] criticizing the school for making thinking a challenge instead of
challenging students to think, the Ottawa U administration smugly responded that
I was mistaken—they had never banned Taylor. Sure—they pulled the old
Canadian bureaucratic trick of humming and hawing until the date of the talk had
As I write this my brother is hopelessly
trying to reschedule. And he keeps running into the same "I have to talk to
this person and that person" trick. He reschedules a date and they delay him
until it passes.
Steven Pinker was recently asked if he thought
Harvard president Larry Summers’ comments about men being better at science and
math were "within the pale of legitimate discourse."
replied, "Good grief,
shouldn't everything be within the pale of legitimate discourse, as long as it
is presented with some degree of rigor? That's the difference between a
university and a madrassa."
Canadian universities today lean more to
the madrassa side.
There is one form of diversity they will
not tolerate—and that is a diversity of opinion.
Gavin Miles McInnes [email
him] is one of the founders of
[not work-safe] which will certainly be too diverse for some VDARE.COM
readers. The opinions expressed here are solely those of Gavin Miles
McInnes. They do not represent the views of his employer, Vice Magazine,
its editorial board or any of its affiliates or subsidiaries.
college or university ever seems to want to listen to Mr.
Taylors’ opinion. I wonder why? I can recall several events,
in the past, where he has not been welcomed. Could it be
that people are afraid of the truth?
in this country live in a pipe dream. For example; I was
watching a local news broadcast recently, and the reporter
was interviewing a white woman, approximately, 55 yrs. old.
The subject matter was the minuteman project along the
Mexican border. When asked her opinion, her reply was,
“Armed white supremacists patrolling the border is scary!”
thing that is “scary” is two-fold. First, that she sees the
people trying to protect their own land as being “white
supremacists”, and the second thing is she doesn’t
understand the magnitude of the Mexican migration. She will
not understand it until it is too late.
many people in this country are like the three monkeys,
“Hear no evil, See no evil, Speak no evil.” They are afraid
to face the truth.
at 6:11 PM on March 30
Liberals be educated? Can CANADIAN
Liberals be educated?This article has to be a prank.
There is no way a Liberal would admit that
multiracialism adversely effects their ability to
express themselves. Wait — would they?
Hopefully I’m wrong. As a Canadian I hope Mr McInnes is
sincere in his courting of Jared Taylor, but I am still
VERY suspicious. McInnes is a
brilliant guy, however, he gives off a bit of a Andy
Kaufman vibe. Either way, he’s got grapes! Which is
certainly rare for a White Liberal.
at 6:31 PM on March 30
I sent Dr.
Andrew a rather critical message about the lack of
intellectual freedom at her institution. I am an
alumnus of the University of Toronto and said that,
had they done the same, I would never contribute to
them again. Will let you all know what if any
response I receive.
at 6:49 PM on March 30
Kimberley, the president of the Communications
Students association, told my brother he feared
Taylor would sound too eloquent. Even if
students asked questions, he argued, they
wouldn’t sound as smart as Taylor and that would
create an ‘unfair balance of power.’”
this to be the most interesting and hopeful
statement in the entire article! Why, John
PM, why, you ask?
Well, this would be because Comrade Kimberley is
more-or-less admitting defeat before the battle
has even been fought! He is not, like the
rambling and inarticulate Mohammad Akram,
denouncing Mr. Taylor as an inhuman and
unacceptable “racist” but is instead
acknowledging him to be “eloquent.” Odd indeed,
that a speaker is banned for being “too
eloquent”? No, not really, it is however, an
admission that Mr. Taylor armed with reason,
facts, and intelligence would utterly demolish
any of the robotic and maudlin Multi Cult
idiocies, the Diversitoids would have to spew at
him. In short, an confession of weakness!
In the end, every cloud has a silver lining; by
not allowing Mr. Taylor to speak, they are
admitting that he panics them, not because he is
a “racist” but because his position is correct
regarding their failed fantasy that, “diversity
is strength.” While I find this censoring of Mr.
Taylor disgusting, I am braced by the fact that
such censoring only demonstrates the fear that
the Communist enemy harbors, that their “unfair
balance of power” is about to be cast onto “the
ash heap of history.”
God Let It
John PM at 7:40 PM on March 30
hail the new world order .
at 7:40 PM on March 30
McInnes is generally correct in his
assessments of the City of Ottawa and
the two universities : one «generally»
uni-lingual (English),- Carleton, the
other «officially» Bi-lingual (French
and English)- l`université d`Ottawa.
His statements about the violence in the
«Transpo» Mass Transit system is
generally without fault. If a little
highly coloured. The critical issue
related to the violence on the buses
concerns the nearly absolute media
blackout in the local newspapers and
radio/television networks : «The Ottawa
Citizen,» and the CBC/CTV
audio video media. It is, apparently, an
current and on-going crisis; but the
media, under orders from the governments
(all levels, municipal, provincial,
federal), refuse to comment upon it.
I believe that in one instance, about a
year ago, or last summer, there was an
reference to a bus driver who was
profiled in the «Citizen» subsequent to
having been attacked and hospitalized.
As I recall, he stated then that such
incidents occurred regularly; and that
the Transit Company (but, of course, not
only they) covered it up.
I have some experience in the courts, as
well, as a law student, and, in my
opinion, there appears to be an «behind
the scenes» policy to reduce the number
of non-White offenders before the Bar.
This is very significant, as it would
have to require collusion and conspiracy
between the Crown`s Office, public and
private defense attorney`s and, of
course, the so-called «police.» Who are
relentlessly politicized at any rate.
The municipal (city) government would
have to be involved, as well. The «City
Council has an number of representatives
and appended sub-committees with treat
«police services,» and «community
outreach.» They would have to be
involved, too. I have no proof,
Individuals who work at the courts have
denied the validity of my observations,
but I nevertheles believe that it is
What I have noticed about the
multiculturalists I have met in the
campus concerns their curious
«schizophrenic» attitude toward the
«diversity» they prize so highly; and
without which policy, they (or their
parents) would never have been allowed
into this country. While they praise it,
they tend «not» to practice it to any
I was once introduced to an individual,
homosexual, and Asian, who praised the
diversity of Metro Toronto. But, he
himself did not live, despite it`s
«glittering» «gay» «nightlife.» He lived
in Hull, the rather dowdy, somewhat down
at heel francophone «appendage» to
Ottawa, which is still (somewhat) less
diverse than Ottawa itself. And, another
individual to whom I was introduced, an
Chinese student, from the Mainland, told
me that he hated Toronto - because of
the number of East Indians. Indeed, I
cannot myself recall the last time I met
someone from Toronto, who was «not» East
Indian. All of the Indians in the Law
School, most on the Common Law side of
faculty, are from Toronto. The only
exception is a young women in Civil Law
(my faculty), whose family arrived in
Canada in 1989 - from Lithuania.
Apparently, she rarely goes «home.»
One final note, I would advise Mr.
McInnes to retain legal counsel,
so-called «Protection Services» may well
have opened a file on him. As someone to
«watch.» I would advise him to demand
the release of all material bearing or
referencing his name, immediately. And,
if his demande is ignored, to inform
«Protection Services» of his intention
to seek the release of this matter per
writ of subpoena.
David A. Kyne, bac.,
at 7:57 PM on March 30
I had no idea that Canada had fallen
to such depths. From the articles I
read and from what I glean from
television the place resembles Nazi
Germany in the 1930’s. I use to
think hosers were nice people, and
many of them are, at least on the
outside. It’s hard to think of them
as Nazi’s or Soviet
apparatchiks…secure the border now!!
Posted by Yosemite Sam at 8:59 PM on
When they won’t let you speak
your mind, they’re scared.
They’re scared of others
listening to your opinions and
Jared Taylor has ‘em on the run!
Posted by Miss Fitt at 9:15 PM
on March 30
With respect to
demographics, “Diversity” is
a code word for “as few
whites as possible,
preferably none”. With
respect to opinion, its a
code word for “as little
that is other than
possible, preferable none”.
at 9:20 PM on March 30
“You see, Canadian
identity hinges on
everything that is
As one who lives in
Buffalo just across from
Canada, I have been
saying this for years.
Canadians are desperate
to be Americans
and anything they
believe Americans do
wrong (health care,
will do the exact
opposite with vim,
vigor, and gusto.
If Americans are racist,
then Canadians will be
will embrace them by the
millions. If Americans
have a racist past,
Canadians will atone for
their racist sins and
make amends to everyone
they have “wronged”.
Yes, Canada IS the
Consequently, they will
succumb before us. If
we’re lucky, we in the
States can learn from
mistakes and we
can be the anti-Canada.
at 1:28 AM on March 31
Canada as a whole,
and especially the
practise the worst
form of group-think.
They think that by
always having the
taking the moral
they can reshape
reality into a
dreamland. This is
not the first time
such as thing has
happened to cultural
elites - ex. Eastern
Europe and communism
- but it is perphaps
the first time that
the fantasy is so
government has made
a devil’s pact with
the worst sort of
human elements to
for a free ride of
excess. The process
has not yet played
out fully, and the
corruption has not
come to its final
stage, so things
appear to working.
And that is in fact
the most common
answer you get in
Canada when you
its full breadth:
“It is working, so
why question it?”
I live in Ottawa,
and I grew up in
Toronto, and I have
made a few
things to understand
about Canada are the
change has been so
rapid that no one
has had time to
alone feel the
-There is a fast
between urban and
rural (like the
States) driven by
the fast demographic
-WASP Politicians in
Canada still think
it’s 1955 and they
represent a solid,
growing majority -
-French are still
playing the ethnic
card not realizing
that they will be
surpassed by the
Chinese within a
short time frame as
the number one
itself is changing
rapidly with an
influx of Middle
Easterns and other
-The young elites in
Canada are bought
off perhaps like no
other elites in the
world. Canada is
controlled by very
that does not allow
any room for
discussions. Most of
and this is
right here (even
though it is really
left) - especially
by the large
which engages in
-Canada pays a huge
price by always
wanting to be the
moral compass of the
world. This allows
the corruption to
happen more easily
categories are held
standards. Of course
Whites reside at the
bottom of this Moral
-If I sit down with
Whites here and
start asking the
right questions, and
wording things a
little differntly I
get a very diffent
outlook on things
then the official
line from the
Whites. Whites have
lost most sense of
rights or what it
means to survive in
this world, but when
they are shown a few
things they still
respond. The worst
nightmare of the
are Whites who
Basically all the
things that hold
true in the States
hold true here in
Canada, except thing
are worse here: more
propaganda Matrix is
much more effective
- those Canadians
who see this please:
fight the anti-White
and its evil.
And that is Canada
a nutshell. Like
John PM is fond of
saying: God help us
Posted by Tom Peters
at 1:44 AM on March
In Toronto and
diversity is on
a daily and
property. On the
receiving end is
full of it.The
as it pertains
is an eye
would have about
85% less crime,
budget would be
balanced in no
time at all.But
we still import
like it is
at 4:16 AM on
us that our
is not an
do not want
How could an
a nation of
“Why do you
and the Left
are aware of
will stop at
to wake any
at 7:08 AM
on March 31
I did so
James, that’s typical of big American universities as well. In some cases students have successfully gotten the “activity fee” (or whatever it happens to be called) removed, but often students have to ask for their money back, as you did. Inevitably the money goes to fringe-left activities, groups and speakers.
Posted by Cassiodorus at 10:55 AM on April 1
This article gave me warm fuzzies like few others have on this web site - however, the reason will not be apparent to most.
I was puzzled when I first read who wrote the article. I’m getting a little past the age when I would know about such things (I’m 31) but my understanding of VICE Magazine is that it is more or less the bible of urban degenerates, also known as “hipsters”. These are kids of ambiguous sexual orientation who generally wear retro clothes, hang out in dance and rock clubs, and have a fondness for cocaine. Cursed with overly philological educations and overexposure to post-whatever philosophy, their political opinions (if they have opinions on anything besides bands) contain equal amounts of moral relativism and cluelessness. In short, I would expect a piece extolling the virtues of group sex from the founder of “VICE”, not something defending Jared Taylor - but then something clicked.
I realized that I can’t be the only younger-leaning adult who has become convinced that not all is well in the United States of Babel. In my case, it was a reading of Gould’s fatally flawed “The Mismeasure of Man”. When Gould stated that there are no inhernet differences in human intelligence across individuals or groups, I found it to be so ridiculous that I laughed out loud and I naturally sought out all contrary evidence as a matter of intellectual duty. This led me to Jensen, Rushton, Richard Lynn, and (probably most importantly) Samuel Francis.
In the year 2005, what thinkers are truly rebels? The tweedy 60’s artifacts who pen editorials for The Nation, or people like Jared Taylor and Samuel Francis? The fact is that the latter represent about the only real alternative to the mainstream in this day and age. Neoconservatives and liberals are really just two sides of the same coin. There’s nothing more conformist than reading Howard Zinn if you’re 20 years old - but what about Spengler or Stoddard?
As liberal egaltiarian values become more mainstream, more entrenched, and more untenable with every passing year, it could very well be that those pre-disposed to a contrarian or “hipster” mindset could very well find themselves gravitating towards the worldview of their great grandparents. I realize this is a long shot at best: but then again, it makes more sense than the current hipster obsession with 1980’s pop culture.
Posted by Revelation 20:9 at 11:58 PM on April 1