How can Canada save itself?

To begin with, until Trudeau, it was a general truism that making a choice precludes others. One simple example is in the marriage vows. ‘Do you swear to forsake all other…’ etc. Marrying one spouse meant that you had made a choice and having romantic or sexual relations outside of that oath, would be cheating.

Something happened to this most obvious and empirical idea. Some people began to feel that their choices should not in any way limit them from other choices, where normally it clearly would.

Enter Brian Mulroney.


The Sikh’s lobbied to allow RCMP officers to be able to wear the traditional Sikh turban with the uniform of the federal police force of Canada. The Conservative Government of Mulroney allowed this to happen. This meant that the door was now swung wide for all who wished to indulge in inconvenient cultural and religious practices and have Canadian civilization and culture adapt to it.

This remains the utter heart of the issue. If we went back to the simple notion of freedom and the consequences of ones choices, choices would be made in a logical manner.

France, Canada, even Egypt are currently struggling with the notion of banning the Burka, a non problem if each state simply refused to accommodate. For example, if a woman wishes to wear a burka, not that her family or husband insists on it, but she freely chooses to at all times, then she cannot drive, vote, buy anything that requires identification, take a bus, or do anything else where the burka causes safety concerns or identification is required. Ultimately, the burka will not be worn at all times and eventually not at all.

Robert Spencer here explains how US airports may install foot-baths for Muslims to wash their feet. Clearly no other religion has demanded to be so accommodated. If Muslims need to wash their feet five times a day then perhaps they should not go to places where this is not possible. I know of very few people that will lament the lessened amount of Muslims on aircraft. However we all know not one Muslim will refuse to fly because he has nowhere to wash his feet. Even so, that isn’t the point. We cannot allow ourselves to start arguing what is and what is not the real tenants of someones irrational beliefs. The purveyors of those beliefs will always win those arguments because they make them up as needs be.

There is one point on which I fundamentally disagree with Mr. Spencer however.

He maintains in the Berlin speech that each victory for Islam over the secular world is actually a victory for us, as more of us will awaken and start to fight back. While this is true, the tactical facts are, each victory for Islam is a victory for Islam, further widening the door of irrational-accommodation and setting more and more precedents that further erode secular western law.

If we merely stop accommodating peoples absurd and counter productive choices, and allow reality to set the agenda, we will not have to compromise our own fundamental and extremely important values, such as freedom to wear what you want and freedom of ‘religion’, in as much as Islam is a religion.

To summarize, the solution may be simpler and perhaps even less bloody than many of us fear.

Get back to the real principles that made our nations so successful. Do not fund alien systems. Do not allow your own very important cultural institutions such as a federal police force to become confused with symbols which may not be as impartial as necessary. Would a ‘Palestinian-Canadian’ feel he was being treated fairly if the RCMP came to his door and the officers were wearing an Israeli arm band for example? or the reverse?

Our civilisation has been so successful because it has dealt with reality and done so in an efficient manner. It has been so successful that we have allowed ourselves to indulge in very expensive ideas. The cost of those ideas now threaten to destroy everything we have built. The choices are ours now. We can destroy ourselves by allowing an ideology, granted a malignant one like Islam, to destroy us because our loss of identity allows it, or we can destroy ourselves like France by passing illiberal laws on dress codes which only opens the door to the destruction of freedoms for benign cultures who actually contribute to France. Alternatively. we can simply go back to first principles. Allow individual freedoms. Lessen governments roles in our day to day lives. Make sure that no institutions of state make exceptions for people’s choices and let individuals suffer the consequences of their own practices (so long as those choices do not threaten the well being of others) or, as will likely be the case, we can wait and do nothing until a bloody three front civil war ravishes us. Three front because it will be Muslims on one, our own government desperately attempting to maintain the illusion of ‘good governance’ on the other, and people fighting for their own relatively indigenous culture on the third.

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

12 Replies to “How can Canada save itself?”

  1. At first, when I heard of Sikh-Canadian officers wearing a Turban with the uniform, I though „what a good idea and method Canada deals with problems of religious attibutes“. But no I think, that if the submission of secular laws becomes a trend, then we’ll have to for example have a separate Muslim officers corpus, which will deal with Muslim citizens, who don’t want to be touched by a Christian or Jewish officer etc.
    The secular civil codex and constitition should be above all religios allegations, and if someone isn’t allowed to work as a RCMP officer by his/her religion, then it’s up to him/her to choose, does he/she want to work but sin, or stay sinless and get that job 😕

  2. The idea of three fronts and one with the so called “indigenous culture” is rather funny. You are obviously a white Canadian, who thinks Canada is all about White Canadians who’s “Western” culture and values are under threat from the supposedly “irrational” Turban wearing Sikh Canadians.
    First of all, you are obviously grossly ignorant about the history of Sikhs in Canada which is more than a century old (1897 to be precise) when the first Sikhs arrived and initially started as lumberjacks. There were able to survive not merely because they were cheap labour but throughout the British Commonwealth their hard working ethics were well-know. During the second world war Canadian Sikhs fought for the Allies… one of the reason you today live in a free world and are thus able to protect values you so adamantly call yours.
    Secondly, Canada has always been a land of immigrants. In the first half of the past century it was mainly from countries with White population, during the second half a large chunk of population came from countries like India and China. Without these there would have been a serious labour problem in Canada.
    Thirdly, and most importantly, Sikh lobbyist were able to win the right to wear Turban because the state understood that unlike in the case of a Burka, the Turban, for a Sikh in indispensable while in public space and is not a cultural paraphernalia or “headgear”. Sikhs don’t cut their hair and hence the Turban to protect the hair. It has no bearings on others, and unlike the Burka, the Turban does not hide the face. It poses no obstruction in identifying the face and this argument was taken well by all the states including Sweden when they allowed Sikhs to wear a Turban to serve in armed forces and the police.
    Sikhs, unlike fundamental Muslims, have a proud history of serving as soldiers in the British army, before and after India’s independence and have enthusiastically taken part in all aspects of public life in all the western countries they have immigrated to. There is an entire regiment in the British army for the Sikhs. Sikh police officers do not only deal with Sikh population and its rather chauvinistic to suggest that. If you would read history you would know that Turbans have been part of many western religions as well, including Christianity and Judaism.
    The Turban is a symbol of pride and prestige for the Sikhs and unlike the Burka is not at odds with Western secular principles and poses no threat to its secular laws. Unlike the Burka for a Muslim woman, for Sikhs the Turban is more of a practical choice rather than a dogmatic ritual, although some may differ.

  3. If the turban or burka is not part of the job requirement, then those who wish to wear the turban or burka should not apply for the job. It is simple as that.
    The western world had been pandering to too many non-white, nonwestern cultures and now the creeping of islamic culture proved to be another one of the worst predominantly non-western, non-white culture to have migrated to the West and infected the West.
    It is disturbing that indian, chinese and islamic tribes and other nonwhite tribes chose to impose their tribal alien eastern cultures onto the west without considering the fact the west had already a much better and more advanced culture without the interference of the backward islamic, oriental, eastern nonwhite cultures.

  4. It think it is not fair for non-white immigrants to impose their various impractical religous or socalled religious cultures or totalitarian political ideology on the white western world while the non-whites had been so extremely intolerant of the slightest bit of western dominance in asian or predominantly islamic or nonwhite countries.
    If the western world don’t like too many non-white immigrants flooding their once peaceful and pleasant land, then the non-whites should understand that they should not impose too much on the western world.

  5. It is like for example , I as a nonbeliever cannot apply for many jobs that are reserved for moslems only or for their moslems commmunity only in a multifaith asian country such as malaysia.

  6. The Turban is obviously part of the job as it helps keep the hair intact. It obviously serves you to keep the argument over-simplistic. If that is the argument, then the hat serves no practical purpose either. And you are forgetting that apart for the natives or aboriginals, all Canadians, including white Canadians are aliens. You obviously don’t know the history of your own country?
    The fact of the matter is that the hyper-active white man is responsible for most of world’s problems today including climate change. It ventured onto Africa, plundered not only its natural wealth out of greed but also destroyed the harmony the African was living peacefully with nature. And you say the coloured man should not disturb the harmony of the your supposed “White mans land”? Ha!
    Its not your land, you have simply occupied it by subjugating the original dwellers of Canada. In case you don’t know your ancestors came with guns and pistols to shoot unarmed natives.
    Coming to the point of wearing a Turban, its not imposing, Sikhs are (thankfully for you) not telling others to wear a Turban, they, most peacefully, only want to wear it themselves as it distinguishes them from others. How they manage it during their working hours is their business, we don’t need a white man, who has dumped his morality long ago to teach others what they should be doing! What would you say to white women roaming in mini-skirts in places like Dubai. I have myself seen western women wearing hot pants to places where even tourist guide books suggest conservative clothing. Where local women are covered from head to toe or at least modestly.
    Obviously you are not educated enought to know that White people live all around the globe and not only in North America and Europe which you are the white western world. Theres a good number of whites in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia. In India and China there are truck loads of White Americans, Canadians and Europeans working because of the economic opportunity that these countries provide to people who are unable to find work in their homelands hit by recession. Migration is not a new phenomenon, it has existed for centuries and yes both ways.
    BUT clearly, you have never even been out of Yellowknife to know all this or whatever little Canadians town you live in and neither were you present for any of the history lessons in school, were you white boi?

  7. It is up to individual organisation or individual whether to accept the turban in the workplace or not. It is not for any religious organisation to force any individual or any organisation to accept the turban, just as any work organisation have no right to force their uniform or their hijab or their political ideology or religious dogma on any nonbeliever.
    Covering from head to toe does not mean modesty. Immorality are so rampant in the nonwhite world and even worst in predominant nonwhite regions, even in socalled religious asian countries.
    It is definitely wrong for any nonwhite to intrude the western world. And furthermore, it is more often the mistakes, incompetence and extreme selfishness of nonwhites who did not know how to make their predominant nonwhite shabby region a better place for all and that is why most nonwhites caused the most problems in the world with their endless nonwhite inconsiderate rules that inconsiderately and indirectly pushed more illegal nonwhite migration to the western world that they never built and were never part of. There is no need to go so far back to history to see that too many nonwhites had indeed had directly and indirectly caused so much political, social and economic problems in the world, that affected many of us disadvantaged individuals.

  8. And of course I am educated enough and suffered enough in this world to know why predominantly nonwhite asians or predominantly nonwhite african countries or predominantly islamic countries tend to bully more, tend to be more selfish, tend to stagnant more and decayed more when led by incompetent nonwhites or asians or incompetent islamic leaders.

  9. The non-white nations are stagnant and less developed because of years of white man’s colonialism. The looting of natural resources, the fucking-up of indigenous systems thats worked great according to local conditions and putting up puppet dictators that worked more for the west rather than the people they are supposed to work for. The reason why American government is surviving today is because Chinese are buying their bonds. Look what a white man did for 8 years in the White house that America had to bring in a black man to set things right.
    There is nothing wrong with non-whites immigrating to the west. Its a two way system, the West need them too, because indigenous white population refuses to do certain jobs which they think are menial and just live off the dole money.

  10. The non-white nations became stagnant after they misrule themselves. There are so many things wrong with non-white immigration because they not only take away jobs but they also are also not that competent, less innovative and most times substandard
    most times and caused more political problems with their extreme religious demand and their totalitarian politcal ideology. Most non-whites just gave the illusion that they are hardworking when in reality they are more greedy and more apathetic.
    One of America problems was because they were too many non-whites causing problems rather than decent progress.
    It is mostly non-white asians and middleeasterners that were guilty of laziness and taking welfare benefits that don’t belong to them. Just take at look at most asian nations who rather import and exploit their poorer asian neighbours to do jobs that they considered menial. Just admit it that too many non-whites were just too greedy for a big pie of America economical success, which don’t belong to most non-whites immigrants. The West don’t need the non-white unpleasant culture or their unpleasant non-white work ethics. Most non-whites should sort out their non-whilte political, economical and social problem before they migrate to the west and should acknowleged in some way that the mass migration of non-whites to the West caused too much problems and poverty to the west. Anyway, the west don’t need any non-whites to do their menial jobs. The west have more competent machines and they can do their menial jobs better than any lazy non-white .

  11. Isn’t it better that those non-whites improve their own non-white nations, instead of imposing their non-white incompatible culture, their non-white greed, their islamic extremism or other religous or political extremism and their non-white backwardness on the west?

  12. To the guy talking about the long sikh tradition in Canada, you forgot to mention the part where after only 5 years of sikh immigration Canadians banned immigration from India. Clearly Canadians did not see them as a part of their community and cultural group. Its also quite telling that you went on a rabid rant about how evil the White man is. I hate to break it to you but for 99.9% of human history every group was taking advantage of each other in a dog eat dog world. The reason its no longer like that is because western nations took it upon themselves to make organizations that protect human rights around the world.

Leave a Reply

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