Show post
Ferdinand Bardamu #racist eurocanadian.ca

The White race’s intelligence and behavior has been under intense selective pressure since late medieval times. These new environmental forces significantly increased White resilience in the face of adversity. The first of these was the Black Death that ravaged Europe from 1347 to 1351. As one of the most catastrophic pandemics in world history, it killed off one-third of Europe’s population. The evidence of bioarchaeology, drawn from skeletal analysis of burial remains from “Black Death” cemeteries, reveals that far from being random, the plague was very selective in its choice of victims (DeWitte, 2014). The weak and the elderly were at increased risk of infection. Given the strong correlation between poor health and IQ, the Whites who survived were much stronger, healthier and smarter than ever before. The dearth of peasant labor led to an increase in wages, rising living standards and the invention of labor-saving devices. This greater wealth and prosperity liberated many from the common drudgery of daily life. A century after the Black Death, the Renaissance scaled even greater heights of intellectual and artistic achievement.

The 17th century colonization of North America also subjected Whites to strong selective pressure. The first Englishmen to have disembarked on American soil had survived religious persecution in England as Puritans objecting to the “Roman idolatry” of Anglican ritual; they had survived the perilous transAtlantic voyage, unaffected by typhus or scurvy. In New England, the Puritans still had to contend with disease, the harsh winters and the “merciless Indian savages” that lay hiding in the primeval forests of the eastern seaboard. If the weak and unintelligent managed to survive the voyage, they would eventually be killed off by starvation or Indian tomahawk. This pattern of eugenic selection affected all English settlers, including those motivated by purely secular and commercial interests. By the end of the colonial period, the Anglo-Saxon in the Americas had emerged as one of the finest and most evolved specimens of the White race.

The purifying effects of eugenic selection had rapidly accelerated the evolution of Homo sapiens in Europe and North America: the fittest White men had always left behind the most offspring, but after the ravages of bubonic plague and the hardships of American colonization, their broods became larger, healthier and more intelligent. White men of lesser ability, if they were lucky enough to find mates, typically left behind few descendants, with fewer still managing to survive past childhood.

A significant increase in the population of intelligent Whites inevitably led to a rising per capita rate of innovation. This peaked in 1873, during the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901), but declined rapidly after that (Huebner, 2005). With the new science and technology, the White man was able to raise incomes, improve public health and increase longevity across the Western world. Eugenic selection for higher IQ made it possible for the White man to develop more sophisticated military technology. This far surpassed anything that had ever been developed by the ancient Greeks and Romans or even non-Whites. By century’s end, approximately 84% of the earth’s surface was controlled by the colonial empires of Western Europe. Intellectual and creative development had scaled such heights that Europe even gave birth to a race of intellectual supermen. These were the Victorian polymaths, who numbered among their ranks the colorful Sir Richard Francis Burton (1821-1890). He was a man who excelled at every subject that commanded his undivided attention. He was a brilliant writer, scholar, explorer, geographer, translator, diplomat and swordsman. A master linguist, he spoke an astonishing 40 languages and dialects fluently. This period of continuous White evolutionary development wasn’t to last forever. By 1914, the golden age of White intellectual and creative superiority had come to an end.

II: Western Intellectual Decline from Late 19th Century to Present

The general intelligence of the Western industrialized nations has declined since late 19th century, according to a meta-analysis of over a dozen reaction time (RT) studies. A cognitive, but not an economic or thermodynamic, limit has apparently been reached. There are now fewer individuals with the intelligence to solve complex mathematical and engineering problems, which is why the rate of innovation has significantly decreased since 1873. “Genetic g” - g-factor in the absence of gene environment interaction - has decreased by 14 IQ points over the course of a century, at least in the Anglophone nations of the UK, USA, Canada and Australia. This means a decrease of 1.23 IQ points per decade (Woodley et al., 2013). To eliminate the possibility of overinflated RT latencies because of hardware and software lags (Woods et al., 2015), the meta-analytic findings were adjusted for lag time. The result was that the Victorians were still faster (and smarter) than modern Western populations (Woodley et al., 2015).

Measures of vocabulary, relatively insensitive to environmental influence because of greater overall gsaturation and heritability rate, provided additional evidence of superior Victorian intelligence. A study tracked WORDSUM item frequencies over the course of 150 years. For this, a database that stored 5.9 million texts from the 1500s to the present was used. The most difficult and therefore the most highly g-loaded WORDSUM items exhibited sharper declines in historical usage since mid-19th century, consistent with declines in “genetic g” observed among Western populations (Woodley et al., 2015).

After decades of “massive IQ gains,” cognitive reversals were observed in Norway (Sundet et al, 2004), Denmark (Teasdale & Owen, 2008), the Netherlands (Woodley & Meisenberg, 2013) and elsewhere. In one study, genes associated with educational attainment and cognitive ability had declined in frequency across birth cohorts in an Icelandic population. It was estimated that a loss of 0.3 IQ points per decade would substantially affect Iceland if allowed to continue for centuries (Kong et al., 2017). James Flynn, discoverer of the eponymous Flynn effect, has acknowledged the reversal of cognitive gains in certain Western countries, especially those of Scandinavia. At a 2017 conference hosted by the International Society for Intelligence Research (ISIR), he admitted: “I have no doubt that there has been some deterioration of genetic quality for intelligence since late Victorian times.” Flynn has projected substantial losses of about 6 or even 7 IQ points for Scandinavia over a 30 year period. Such a reversal in intelligence would have catastrophic effects on the societies and economies of Scandinavia, now being flooded by hostile elites with Third World “migrants.”

A relevant question is: “If the post-WWII consensus acknowledges the existence of massive IQ gains over the last century, how does one explain cognitive reversal in the most industrialized nations?” This phenomenon is known as Cattell’s paradox and its solution is Woodley’s co-occurrence model. Although phenotypic intelligence has increased since WWII, genotypic intelligence has decreased. The anti-Flynn effect is really a “Jensen effect” because it has resulted in losses on psychometric g.

III: The Role of Dysgenic Selection in Western Intellectual Decline

Mass “immigration” from low-IQ regions of the globe, such as the Middle East, South Asia and Africa, have no doubt contributed to declines in the average intelligence of the West. In one recent study (Woodley et al., 2017), Third World “immigration” was associated with IQ declines in 13 different nations. High levels of Third World “immigration” are always significant predictors of Western cognitive decline; its most pronounced effects are on IQ subtest batteries with the highest g-loadings. Nevertheless, Third World “immigration” does not fully account for dysgenic selection among Western populations. Declines in genotypic intelligence occurred long before the advent of Third World “immigration,” which only partially explains the Western world’s declining IQ.

The greater fecundity of intelligent Whites, compared to the unintelligent, had always been the norm, especially since the 1400s. This changed during the Industrial Revolution; more intelligent Whites delayed having children until later in life, through a combination of abstinence and contraception, to further their educational aspirations and develop their innate potential. Medical breakthroughs significantly improved general health and nutrition, which prolonged human lifespans. This allowed less intelligent Whites to survive childhood and have significantly more children than those who were more intelligent. The rise of social welfare liberalism in the 20th century merely exacerbated this trend. As Western governments progressively taxed their wealthiest and most intelligent citizens, their wealth was unfortunately redistributed to less industrious and less intelligent members of the White race, who squandered the money as they multiplied recklessly.

More recent studies have shed further light on the negative correlation between intelligence and fertility. In one study, the higher the intelligence and socioeconomic status of adolescents, the lower their likelihood of having offspring. This dysgenic effect was more true of females than males, indicating that women become choosier the more wealth and status they accumulate (Reeve et al., 2013). Among adults, a negative correlation between intelligence and odds of parenthood was discovered; every 15 point increase in a woman’s childhood IQ would decrease a woman’s odds of parenthood by about 20% (Kanazawa, 2014). The female role in the transmission of intelligence is a substantial one because the genes for intelligence are X-chromosomal; if more intelligent women since the late Victorian period have had less children than the unintelligent, one can only expect a gradual decline in the national intelligence of Western populations.

Analysis of a large genealogical database revealed that Iceland’s national IQ had decreased over time because more intelligent Icelanders were having less children. Although IQ declines per decade were small, statistical significance is attained when viewed from an evolutionary timescale. Dysgenic fertility may potentially undermine Icelandic economy and society within a few centuries, unless it is reversed (Kong et al., 2017). Polygenic scores, which capture selection against g (such as dysgenic fertility or “immigration”), are the most significant predictors of the century-long decline in “heritable g” (Woodley et al., 2018). The “neurotoxin hypothesis,” like all environmental explanations, fails to adequately predict temporal trends in general intelligence because cognitive ability is under much stronger genetic than environmental control. The worst environmental deprivations (i.e. severe malnutrition) or the most costly and ambitious environmental interventions rarely, if ever have a lasting effect on heritable g.

Most experts in intelligence, cognitive ability and student achievement now attribute the anti-Flynn effect to dysgenic fertility, Third World “immigration” and worsening educational standards in Western countries; in contrast, they are far more unanimous among each other in attributing environmental causation to the Flynn effect, in striking agreement with Woodley’s co-occurrence model (Rindermann et al., 2016). Based on the evidence, Western intellectual decline is largely caused by a negative IQfertility gradient, with Third World “immigration” becoming an increasingly significant contributor as time goes on.

IV: The Road to “Idiocracy”

Nobel laureate William Shockley proposed a Voluntary Sterilization Bonus Plan (1972). He presented this as a “thought experiment.” This would be open to all members of the American public, regardless of “sex, race or welfare status.” For each IQ point under 100, the recipient was to be given $1000, as long as he or she was willing to undergo vasectomy or tubal ligation. This was not an original proposal, as it had been first suggested over 40 years ago by American journalist and scholar H.L. Mencken, albeit in a rather humorous context. What all of these proposals neglect, and what modern eugenicists have failed to acknowledge, is the obvious sex differential in contributions to dysgenic fertility, probably because of the natural sympathy that men typically have for the opposite sex.

The low-IQ male, unless he is among the 20% of males considered physically attractive, is permanently excluded from the sexual market. This is because of his lifelong inability to acquire the material resources that allow him to compensate for his genetic inferiority. On the other hand, the low-IQ female poses a far greater threat to the mental hygiene of Western populations, by virtue of her role as sexual selector. For the low-IQ female, there will always be large numbers of reasonably attractive males willing to satisfy her many sexual and financial needs. If the low-IQ male must be handsome or rich, the low-IQ female must only be of childbearing age if she wishes to attract a mate of fairly decent genetic quality. The Industrial Revolution brought with it substantial improvements in public health and nutrition, making it easier for low-IQ females to survive childhood, only to breed as much as possible throughout their reproductive years.

When, in 1869, Sir Francis Galton made his famous scientific prediction of declining Western intelligence based on anecdotal observation of changing Victorian demographics, what he really observed was more low-IQ females than ever before surviving childhood to satisfy their instinctive desire for maternity. This trend has continued without interruption to the present, making low-IQ females the primary driving force behind the dysgenic fertility that has resulted in declining general intelligence in Western industrialized nations. No successful eugenic policy can exist without taking this into full account. In order for Dr. Shockley’s proposal to have made any sense from an evolutionary perspective, the bonus for females should have been quadrupled or even quintupled for each IQ point under 100.

Into this volatile mixture was added feminism, a pernicious ideology that grants both unrestricted individual autonomy and reproductive choice to women who should not be allowed to breed for eugenic reasons. In recognizing that all women have the same rights, feminism reveals itself to be just as dangerous as the Third World “immigration” promoted by hostile elites. By encouraging low-IQ females to engage in promiscuity, march in “slut walks,” wear “pussy hats,” and breed prolifically - while high-IQ females delay parenthood because of their educational aspirations - feminism has merely accelerated the decline in general intelligence among Western populations, already well under way since the Industrial Revolution. As Whites get dumber, their “Western uniqueness,” including their high intelligence, creativity and ability to produce more geniuses than any other race of people, will disappear with them. This radical transformation of the underlying genetic structure of Western populations could take place within less than a 100 years. Few people recognize the fragility of Western intellectual gains because of selective pressures exerted by the Black Death in Medieval Europe and the 17th century colonization of North America. By undermining Western mental and racial hygiene, feminism threatens to return Whites to the way things were before the agricultural revolution of the Neolithic age.

Helmuth Nyborg, extrapolating from present trends and projecting them into the future, allows us to better visualize in concrete terms the post-apocalyptic scenario that awaits Western civilization (2011). He shows what happens when a racially homogeneous society like Denmark, with a population of over 5 million, is subjected to both “Internal Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (IRDS), referring to the preservation and multiplication of the genetically disadvantaged, and “External Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (ERDS), in reference to “super-fertile” Third World “replacement migration.”

When both internal and external relaxation are combined, “Double Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” (DRDS) is produced, a clear and unobstructed path to Western “idiocracy” in Denmark. By 2072, ethnic Danes will be reduced to 60% of the population, from a high of 97% in 1979; minority status will be reached by 2085. In 1979, Danish phenotypic IQ was 98, but by 2072, it is 93, having dropped 5 IQ points in less than a century. As national IQ decreases, Denmark will be gradually transformed into a Latin American “banana republic.” Ethnic Danes, demoralized by feminism and social welfare legislation, will have no choice but to acquiesce to the destruction of their own country. Significant damage to the economy and educational infrastructure are to be expected; a 5 point drop in Danish IQ means a 35% reduction in the nation’s GDP. Democracy will inevitably become unsustainable as average national IQ plummets below 90; it will be replaced by the authoritarian political culture and religious dogmatism found in Middle Eastern, African and Latin American societies.

Belief that “more White babies” are the answer to dysgenic fertility among Whites is just as dangerous and genocidal as the liberal belief that Third World “replacement migration” is “cultural enrichment.” Since low-IQ females leave behind more offspring than those of high IQ, more White births would reduce high-IQ females to an “endangered species.” This would intensify the “Internal Relaxation of Darwinian Selection” already occurring in Western populations. As Whites “devolve,” they will no longer be able to maintain their own Western industrialized societies. A demographic transition of such magnitude would transform Western Europe and North America, the Occidental heartland, into a cultural and biological extension of the Third World. Since women are loyal to wealth and power, but not race, one can expect genocidal levels of miscegenation between White females of low intelligence and the non-White foreigners who have dispossessed Whites and conquered the West.

To reverse the process of dysgenic selection, the White man must do three things:

He must get rid of the hostile elite.

He must forcibly repatriate all Third World “migrants,” including their descendants. Forced “remigration” is not an unrealistic policy; mass population transfers have been successfully carried out before, i.e. deportation of Germans, 1944-50, from Eastern and Central European countries to Germany and Austria.

If selective pressures in medieval Europe and colonial America led to the steady eugenic improvement of Western populations, making it possible for them to conquer 84% of the globe’s surface, only their re-emergence will reverse the dysgenic selection that has bedeviled the White race since the mid-19th century. This can only be accomplished through a rigorous application of classical eugenic principles.

If the White race is to survive, only its strongest and most intelligent members must be prepared for the harsh Darwinian struggle that lies ahead. Wasting precious resources on mental and genetic defectives is sheer pathological altruism. Race-conscious Whites have a collective interest in raising healthy and intelligent offspring, but no such interest can exist when it comes to those who are weak and unintelligent. They are “life unworthy of life”; even they would not consent to such a truncated and meager existence if given full possession of their normal faculties. From a White nationalist perspective, to bring such children into the world is selfish and morally irresponsible; they impose unnecessary fiscal burdens on Whites and use up resources that are better invested elsewhere.

The race-conscious White man is faced with a dilemma: because of liberal elite hostility to his own ethnic genetic interests, any program of eugenic enhancement would be outlawed under the current totalitarian leftist order; at the same time, he cannot simply wait out the elite-managed decline of Western civilization. In less than a few generations, most of his race may become drooling mental defectives, if they haven’t already miscegenated themselves out of existence into the burgeoning mass of Third World “migrants” who now infest his homeland. If he must take action, he must take it now, otherwise all is lost.

Race-conscious Whites must abandon all leftist-controlled urban areas to “live off the grid.” By colonizing relatively unpopulated areas of North America and Western Europe, the White man will return to a rustic existence, filling the countryside, the mountains, the forests, the tundra with Whites only settlements, similar to the Boer-only settlement of Orania in South Africa. Living the way his ancestors did centuries ago will ensure that no Third World “immigrant” follows him into the mountains or the wilderness. Self-imposed hardship will further intensify Darwinian selective pressure on Whites, jumpstarting the process of natural eugenic enhancement, just as it did during the early colonization of the Americas. Once race-conscious Whites have become sufficiently numerous, they must embark on a program of state-sponsored eugenics. This will be used to strengthen the White population until they are able to wrest control of North America and Western Europe from the hostile elites and their army of greedy “migrants.”

The new ethnostate will be constitutionally grounded on Aristotelian political philosophy and neoDarwinian biology; it will be a meritocracy based on eugenic principles. Eugenics, the scientific ideological core of the new White nationalism, is easily reconciled with the aristocratic political science of Aristotle; both are concerned with the development and formation of the best possible citizen, one along genetic and the other along characterological lines. Aristotelian philosophy is based on a linear hierarchical conception of reality; this overlaps with the dominance hierarchies of the animal kingdom and of all human socio-political organization. Furthermore, the capacity for superior moral development is improved substantially by superior genes. In an Aristotelian political order informed by eugenic principles, the state would ensure that all citizens have both the mental and physical capacity to live the good life. Mandatory genetic screening would be one of the conditions of citizenship; those at risk of transmitting hereditary diseases or conditions, such as criminality or low IQ, would undergo compulsory eugenic sterilization. Only the best and most virtuous citizens, the biologically and intellectually superior “aristoi” or natural-born aristocrats, would be the ones allowed total freedom of action in the political sphere.

In the ethnostate, the aristoi of the White race will determine who must give birth and who must be sterilized. These men are not petty bureaucrats, but aristocrats selected on the basis of health and IQ. Their sole task is the promotion of White racial survival, whatever the cost. For those who believe eugenic sterilization is barbarous and cruel, allowing the birth of children who suffer from mental retardation or cystic fibrosis is much, much worse. For this reason, only the healthiest, high-IQ females will be allowed to breed, even being massively incentivized to do so. Encouraging the natural increase of healthy, intelligent Whites, at the expense of the low IQ and genetically unfit, is the most White nationalist thing a White man can do for his race.

Some will necessarily object: “But state-sponsored eugenics will infringe on individual rights and freedoms!” This is a common, but groundless objection. The “right to procreate” is not an absolute. In 7 utilitarian ethics, rights are never ends in themselves; they exist to maximize the happiness of the greatest number and must be tempered by social obligation. Furthermore, not all men have the capacity for individual freedom. The Greek philosopher Aristotle recognized the existence of natural slavery because of the inability of some to reason autonomously, even though they may be responsive to reasoned instruction. Whether a man is free or not must be determined by his capacity to reason (for us, his IQ).

Legislation regulating some of the most intimate areas of our lives is hardly controversial; if we allow government to enforce this legislation, ostensibly in the interest of public safety, why not allow government to decide who gets to reproduce and who doesn’t? If the low IQ and genetically unfit are allowed to breed recklessly, as they do now, Western civilization will eventually be reduced to smoldering ruins. Unregulated breeding is far more dangerous than any black market specializing in the sale of illicit firearms or drugs. Society would be much safer if it allowed every citizen to acquire large arsenals of weapons without special licensing, but criminalized the marriage and procreation of the low IQ and genetically unfit.

If a large minority of race-conscious Whites emigrate, seceding from the leftist totalitarian state to independently pursue their own racial interests, reversal of dysgenic fertility and Third World “immigration” may be accomplished within a few generations. As race-conscious Whites strengthen their race through genetic enhancement, the totalitarian left will get weaker, forced to increasingly rely on low-IQ Whites and “migrants” for manpower. From their bases in the Pacific Northwest or Lapland, race-conscious Whites, stronger and more intelligent than ever before, would raid globalist-occupied territory, slowly enlarging their own dominions until the reconquest of North America and Western Europe has been completed. This is not without historical precedent. Medieval Spanish Christians, reduced to a small area of their own country, seized the emirates of Mohammedan Andalusia one by one, until the last emirate of Granada had been defeated, its Moorish inhabitants expelled from the Iberian peninsula in 1492.

Race-conscious Whites must live, think and breathe race, just as they did during the long and distinguished reign of Queen Victoria, when Whites were at the peak of their intellectual and artistic powers. In this age of drab multicultural uniformity, the White man’s race is his most formidable weapon, a thorn in the side of those who wish to replace him with the low IQ peasant masses of the Middle East, Africa, South Asia and Latin America. Nothing terrifies the hostile elites more than the prospect of encountering race-conscious White men bred for superior intellect and physical strength, able to aggressively pursue their own racial interests undeterred by elite and non-White hostility.

Show post
RD #racist eurocanadian.ca


Majority of those so called countries were not sovereign states. No borders and no idea what they had for land mass until the European's made it so. You may be right about us invading and conquering other countries. One thing you forgot to point out is that those were completely different times unlike the soft and weak world people like you are in today. You are comparing apples to oranges. Any other race, religion or creed would have the done the exact thing the Europeans done, in fact probably worse. The only difference is we done it bigger and better then everyone else. Our intelligence and creativity are more superior then other races at the time.

Your argument has a superficial logic but the historical and cultural context is seriously flawed. The Europeans who invaded other lands did pretty much what cultures/nations had always done, but they were just better at it. The arrival of millions of immigrants to white nations today is not a result of imperialistic competition but part of a concerted ideological/political program to diversify white nations through the use of manipulation, censorship, and political coercion.

Basically you are saying that white citizens should allow their nations to be diversified because in the past white nations were too successful in their imperialistic competition. This is the logic of a typical SJW, though I understand this is what you were taught, and is not your fault for being indoctrinated rather than educated.

Show post
WhenInRome #racist eurocanadian.ca

Truly gruesome stuff. Now I don't know if that kind of violence will happen in a country that you truly built. A common theme above was that white people were recent guests in foreign lands. I am not saying it was wrong for them to be there, I am just pointing out the fact. On one level, I admire their willingness to go berserk in order to try to take back their homelands. If only Europeans had that sort of rage in them every now and again. Naturally we would never be as gruesome about it though, that much is obvious. On another level, if Europeans did that kind of violence, they'd be seen as terrorists, as opposed to these "freedom fighters", whom I'm sure every liberal western woman and her five cats think did the right thing.

How I see this playing out is that Canada is doing something unique in the world. Countries like the US and the UK have flooded the underclasses with a lot of Africans, Latinos and Indian sub-continentals. People who will fill the prisons, and work at McDonald's. Canada however has prioritized the highly-educated (on paper), and then made affirmative action country-wide. Trump has said that he wants the Canadian system that only takes in the "best". How it will play out here is that our upper class, the politicians our elites, the good jobs will fall to the high-IQ (on paper) Asians and Indians (and Jews). European Canadians are getting squeezed out from below by the Blacks and others, and squeezed out from above by the Asians. The takeover will continue peacefully, as we will just be completely squeezed out of mainstream society. The Jewish media will never report it, and the Asian politicians will never discuss it. At least in the USA, everyone knows how to avoid the underclasses, by moving to the suburbs, moving to a gated community, working in certain sectors, etc. But in Canada, the non-violent squeeze will only get worse, and I am personally more afraid of being pushed out of society (already feels that way) than any form of violence.

Show post
WhenInRome #racist eurocanadian.ca

How I see this playing out is that Canada is doing something unique in the world. Countries like the US and the UK have flooded the underclasses with a lot of Africans, Latinos and Indian sub-continentals. People who will fill the prisons, and work at McDonald's. Canada however has prioritized the highly-educated (on paper), and then made affirmative action country-wide. Trump has said that he wants the Canadian system that only takes in the "best". How it will play out here is that our upper class, the politicians our elites, the good jobs will fall to the high-IQ (on paper) Asians and Indians (and Jews). European Canadians are getting squeezed out from below by the Blacks and others, and squeezed out from above by the Asians. The takeover will continue peacefully, as we will just be completely squeezed out of mainstream society. The Jewish media will never report it, and the Asian politicians will never discuss it. At least in the USA, everyone knows how to avoid the underclasses, by moving to the suburbs, moving to a gated community, working in certain sectors, etc. But in Canada, the non-violent squeeze will only get worse, and I am personally more afraid of being pushed out of society (already feels that way) than any form of violence.

Show post
Tim Murray #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Some people have accused me of being a fascist. They are wrong. I am an aspiring fascist. Don’t give me a Gold Medal until I have crossed the finish line. I have more to learn and digest before I am ready to mount the podium.

But I am almost there. I have almost assimilated the full fascist package. I am just a few pieces short of finishing the puzzle. Here is what I've got so far. This is what I have come to believe after a half century trek to the summit.

Off the top, and in no particular order...

1. Biology rules.

2. Gender and race are not "social constructs".

3. There is something called human nature. We are not blank slates. We are pack animals. Hierarchy is endemic, a necessary trademark of pack animals. There will always be and always must be "leaders" and "followers".

4. Egalitarianism is a utopian prescription which runs counter to human nature.

5. Ideologically driven experiments that substantially conflict with human nature must end in dystopian nightmares, or societal collapse.

6. Men and women are fundamentally different. Social engineering will not change that. What it can do, however, is lead to emotional stress, confusion, neuroses, alienation and societal dysfunction. More women than men aspire to become nurses, animal vets, primary school teachers — not because of 'social conditioning' or 'systemic discrimination" but because they are invested with a maternal instinct.

7. The great majority of women, at least on a subconscious level, look to male "partners' for leadership. Much of modern female angst in Western societies is the result of a collision between their consciously held feminist ideological fixations and their subconscious desire for male leadership. The problem is not that they are partnered with 'bullies' and 'controllers', but with soy boy wimps who seek to ingratiate themselves to women by trying to be more feminist than feminists. To most women, there is nothing more contemptible and off-putting in a man than sycophancy and vacillation. They want to be heard and they want to be consulted, but women who are honest with themselves also want leadership. They want decision. Hamlets NNA.

8. Women's suffrage, on balance, has had a devastating impact of Western Civilization, and may well prove to be its Achilles heel. The empathy that women possess, if directed at the stranger or outsider at our gates, can lead to an open borders mentality at the political level. In the age of a migration crisis whose ultimate scope we cannot yet imagine, this outlook can and will lead to our erasure. It is doubtful that open borders politicians like Obama or Trudeau or Angela Merkel could have been elected to office if women did not have the vote. The idea that women should guide our immigration policy is as frightening as the notion that cat ladies be empowered to run animal shelters at taxpayer expense, or that animal rights activists replace zookeepers with the authority to open cages and inflict predatory beasts upon an unsuspecting citizenry in the dead of night.

Show post
Carmudgeon_49 #fundie eurocanadian.ca

I have always had a problem with the "very real misdeeds". We know so little about ancient happenings in North America, when it comes to humans, so when do misdeeds start?. We do know that Kennewick Man, the 9000 year old Caucasian remains found in Washington State was declared to be an "Indian", because Caucasians weren't supposed to be in North America at the time. We know that the Paiute's oral history tells us that they genocided the "red haired giants" that were already living in Nevada when the Paiutes arrived. The Spirit Cave mummy had red hair, and has recently been declared to be an "Indian" because of genetic testing, even though red hair has never been an Amerind trait. Pre-Columbian Aztec art shows whites being ritually sacrificed, and the Incas have a White Gods returning legend. In Florida's Windover Bog, 7000 year old Caucasian red haired mummies have been found. The M'kmaq, the sole "Indian" tribe that has a written language, say that they were given it by non-Indians in ancient times. Amerinds have no history of mining, but someone was mining copper on Michigan's Upper Peninsula during the Bronze age.

The Amerinds did not, as they like to say, always greet Whites with open arms. They fought Europeans and among themselves viciously and almost constantly. The Iroquois genocided the Hurons, and the Ojibway fled from Ontario to Manitoba to avoid the same fate.

My point is that many of the "very real misdeeds" would likely have been much worse had the Amerinds been in charge. Past governments did what they did based on their understanding of the circumstances at the time. We are in no position to judge them on what we think today.

Show post
Carmudgeon_49 #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Natives are on our side they hate minorities more than we do. They know they wont get a thin dime if chinese or muslims takeover. They already see how corrupt these people are in canada and their own nations, also indians from india. I could never figure out how 75 different white cultures from 75 nations get lumped into ONE group ??

Show post
Brian Wiggins #racist eurocanadian.ca

But let's be clear. Whether the first colonizers in North America were Solutreans (most probably) from Spain and France, 20,000 years ago OR across the land bridge from the Bering Straits, 14,500 years ago, most native tribes were nomadic. They did not occupy Canada or the continent in a conventional sense. There were precious few permanent structures. There were no iron implements and no wheel. Natives mainly lived in tents or igloos. They were themselves "immigrants."

There was no civilization in North America. What the Europeans found in what is now Canada, or the United States for that matter, was not, in any other sense, competitive with that of Western Europe. Europe had Shakespeare, Descartes, Galileo, Michelangelo and Leonardo, agriculture, written languages, metallurgy and knitted fabrics and materials all of which were absent in North America when Columbus showed up.

It is also a lie that Europeans invaded an Indigenous "nation" or group of nations. The country was very sparsely populated and no native group or authority purported to govern anything larger than small itinerant bands, or to have borders or any concept of national space and jurisdiction. The claim of cultural genocide, or the concept of physical extermination, as in the labour camps of Eastern Europe from 1941-1944, is flat out fraudulent. Native bands and tribes were First No-Nations.

All that being said, Canada needs a genocide narrative as a founding legend in order to promote the dispossession of European Canadians. Natives, I would argue, have become useful idiots for the progressive, open borders/mass immigration lobby. Open immigration will not help Natives, Inuit or Metis and, in fact, native communities will be negatively impacted more than the majority population. "New" Canadians have no sense of obligation to native communities.

Nevertheless, the continued narrative of aboriginal victimhood enables the left to present the acceptance of multiculturalism as an act of atonement. We are required to open our borders as part of our sacred obligations as a Nation. A whole reparations industry has emerged in the past decades to provide financial restitution to the victims of federally-operated boarding schools for aboriginal children. Canadian "First No-Nations" people are more valuable to the left as abstractions than as individuals or a people. Feminists point to the Iroquois as an example of a functioning matriarchy; environmentalists, as a model of harmony with nature; and Marxists as an egalitarian utopia. These idealized visions seek to confuse us and disguise the truth. It’s all fraudulent.

The bands were not beacons of fraternity and equality. There were aristocracies and hierarchical social structures and some Pacific Coast tribes bound infants’ heads to develop elongated skulls and thereby set them apart from lower orders. In addition, there were head hunters and warfare was often for resources, territory and worse still, by the 19th Century, 15% of the population of the Pacific North West were slaves, mainly women and children (Jones, 2017). The tribes of the North West also liked to collect the body parts of their defeated foes as trophies, including heads and hands. It was a merciless, brutal and violent existence where lifespans rarely exceeded 35 years.

"Playing the Indian Card" refers to the reflexive habit of pro-"immigrationists" to remind us that "we are all immigrants — except our native peoples." It is intended to shut us up and smother dissent. Since our forefathers came as 'invaders,' we have no moral authority to oppose our own displacement. It tears away our moral authority to control our own borders. The end game is clear and it is simply to de-legitimize Europeans as founding peoples. But why are European settlers' displacement of natives perceived differently than their displacement of each other?

Indigenous groups suffer with significant problems including violence, spousal abuse, child abuse, missing women, alcoholism, drug addiction, diabetes, unemployment and suicide. We need to help them. We could start by providing their communities with safe, reliable drinking water. Before we let another single illegal or legal immigrant, for that matter, cross our border, let’s solve our problems at home. I would even consider an indigenous homeland; a new "Abronord."

Nevertheless, please remember, the next time someone challenges you, charging that Canada is not "your" homeland and that only native Canadians have a legitimate claim, thank them for playing the Indian card. The Solutreans were European. It is our homeland. Regardless, those itinerant bands we found in North America were savage and primitive by even our own standards at the time. When Europeans arrived in North America there existed No-Nations. Let’s give credit where credit is due, however. Many stood and fought, which is more than I can say for the paleface, today.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #racist eurocanadian.ca

While relying on these violent labels without definitions, Kilian has the nerve to say that
Duchesne...relies on populist clichés like "establishment," "elites," "transnational elites," and "cultural Marxists." He never defines them.
This is not true. I defined "cultural Marxism" along with other key terms requiring definition, such as "Euro-Canadians." There is no reason to define works like "establishment" which are commonly understood by everyone. Those who actually read my book will know that the meaning of the words I use are evident within the context they are used.

The One Potentially Fair Objection

The one potentially fair objection Kilian makes is too imprecise and illogical to be of much value to readers. He writes:
Duchesne...cites Canada's first census, in 1871, to argue that the new country had just 23,000 natives, barely more than the 21,500 blacks. But an Indigenous population that small wouldn't have kept the Hudson's Bay Company in furs for two centuries before Confederation.
The population of First Nations on the B.C. coast alone was estimated at 60,000 in the 1860s — before a disastrous smallpox epidemic wiped out 20,000 of them and shattered their centuries-old societies. The population of the coast before the first arrival of smallpox in the 18th century was likely 100,000 or more. Duchesne takes no notice of the demographic disasters that conveniently depopulated the Americas for the Europeans.
First, to be sure, the 1871 census does say that the native population was 23,000. Now, I should have qualified this statement by adding that these figures "are for the four original provinces (Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia) only." The census was counting the population of these 4 provinces because these were the provinces that came to constitute Canada a few years earlier in Confederation in 1867. Manitoba and Northwest territories joined in 1870, and BC in 1871.

Yes, one can argue that this census left out the natives of these newly integrated provinces in 1870 and 1871, but, as Kilian himself adds, the 60,000 he guess-estimates for BC in the 1860s was reduced by 20,000 soon after. It is also the case that the natives in these newly acquired provinces were mostly outside Canadian legal society, and that, in this respect, it would have been inaccurate to count them as "Canadians" since they were members of autonomous tribes living in the wild. Moreover, by the same token, this 1871 census is not counting the European population in the other provinces and territories apart from these four provinces. The European population in BC was about 36,000 in 1871.

I do refer to the demographic disasters the natives suffered, calling it "tragic." But my intention in offering numerous statistical facts about the ethnic composition of the Canadian population was precisely to avoid the notion that natives should be elevated into major participants in Canada's history insomuch as they were drastically reduced in numbers. I wanted to offer an accurate account of their contribution to the making of Canada's institutions, rather than a moral account driven by White guilt.

But this is exactly what Kilian tries to do in the review, once his sentence on the epidemics is completed, he goes on to exaggerate the contributions of "Chinese, Hawaiians, South Americans and countless others" in the making of Canada, totally ignoring the masses of demographic statistics I offered on the ethnic distribution of Canada's population, which totally refute his statistical fabrications.

Moral Posturing While Ignoring The Subject

The rest of Kilian's review is full of moral grandstanding coupled with bromides about Donald Trump and Anglo supremacists. He completely ignores the arguments I made, opting for the claim that I am fascist who writes history "without concepts." What about the four theoretical chapters I offered on Kymlicka, Taylor, Strauss, and Schmitt? Kilian claims that I offer "an attitude, not a thesis, that life was better under European rule because Europeans are (indefinably) superior." It is the other way around, this lazy journalist never asks one of the cardinal questions reviewers must ask: what the intention of the author was in writing the book?

My intentions were:
Why is everyone in the Canadian establishment, from left to right, engaged in a program of diversification without open debate?
Why is everyone saying that Euro-Canadians stand to be enriched as they are reduced to a minority in their own homeland?
Why are historians, and the elites, insisting that Canada is a nation of immigrants, lying to millions of students, when there is no historical evidence for this claim?
What are the roots of the ideology of multiculturalism and the obsession with excluding Euro-Canadians, and only Euro-Canadians, from affirming their ethnic identity?
Why does multiculturalism encourage the group rights of non-Europeans, while openly excluding the group rights of Euro-Canadians?
Why are Canadians being told that Canada is historically unique in its multicultural identity when we know that they are making the same claim about the unique multicultural identity of European nations, United States, Australia, and New Zealand?

I offered answers to all these questions. Kilian ignored them all and opted for a repetition of what the banks, politicians, and the lying media say about those who criticize diversification. No one respects men like Kilian; they may be called "nice" by Asians and Blacks, but they are never respected. Deep down everyone knows that a man who trashes his own ancestors lacks honour and basic human decency. There is just something wrong witnessing Kilian take regular snipes against the men who built this nation as "mediocrities," making fun of our most respected Prime Minister, Mackenzie King, while always praising foreigners-to-become immigrants as morally superior.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #racist eurocanadian.ca

On 27 May 2014 the Vancouver City Council voted unanimously to take steps toward yet another official apology for "historical discrimination against people of Chinese descent". The approved motion, which was initiated by Chinese Councillor Raymond Louie, contains a sweeping mandate directing staff to investigate thoroughly, "as long as it takes", every act of discrimination committed against the Chinese from 1886 to 1947.

It also calls for staff to report back to council with recommended actions for compensation and inclusive redress. According to Councillor Kerry Jang, the Chinese who lived in Canada before 1947 "weren't allowed to do very much...to live in certain areas...to go to school or do anything."

What Kerry Jang is saying is a historical fabrication.

The Chinese in BC prospered substantially despite the head tax and not having the right to vote until 1947. In an MA Thesis conducted by Chinese Canadian Paul Richard Yee for the University of British Columbia, 1983, under the title Chinese Business in Vancouver, 1886-1914, it is concluded that the Chinese were able to enjoy "economic opportunities arising inside and outside Chinatown".

Chinese Millionaire Migrants

Daniel Hierbert, a social geographer at UBC, has thus projected that Chinese migration will result in the creation of "a social geography entirely new to Canada". The Chinese, which currently make up about 410,000 of the population in a city of 2.2 million, are set to double to 800,000 by 2031. Hiebert also notes that the city will be increasingly divided into racial enclaves, with white residents becoming a minority group, or only 2 out of 5 residents by 2031.

This massive wave of Chinese colonizers has driven the price of homes way above what middle class Whites can afford, making Vancouver the second least affordable city in the world - behind only Hong Kong.

In Richmond, a city of 200,000 in greater Vancouver, mainland Chinese migration has already helped create the first majority-Chinese city outside Asia, with White citizens cornered into small enclaves and many being forced to sell their homes and move out as "millionaire migrants" take over (read here). It has been estimated that 74 percent of the houses sold for more than $3 million in Vancouver's core Westside neighbourhood in 2010 were sold to Chinese buyers.

Institutional Racism in China

But what is perhaps even more astonishing is that these "millionaire migrants" enjoying apologies from working and middle class Whites come from a culture that, by the standards of British Columbia between 1886 and 1947, are not merely illiberal but vulgarly racist. This has been thoroughly documented in the works of Frank Dikötter. Starting with his book, The Discourse of Race in Modern China (1992), Dikötter examines how traditional Chinese authorities commonly described as "ugly" the "ash white" skin and "indelicate hairiness" of Europeans, and the blacks as "animals, devil-like and horrifying".

More revealing is Dikötter's thesis on how these traditional Chinese notions about inferior "barbarians" intermingled with Nazi forms of "scientific" racism to form a distinctively Chinese racial consciousness in the 20th century and today. The concept of race came to be widely accepted as scientifically proven. Racial theories were disseminated through textbooks, anthropology exhibitions and travel literature, reaching the primary levels of education.

The dominant Han are described as the core of a "yellow race", which includes in its margins all the minority populations. In another book, Imperfect Conceptions: Medical Knowledge, Birth Defects, and Eugenics in China (1998), Dikötter references government publications claiming that eugenics is a vital tool in the enhancement of the "biological fitness" of the nation, heralding the twenty-first century as an era which will be dominated by "biological competition" between the "white race" and the "yellow race". A research team was indeed set up in November 1993 to isolate the quintessentially "Chinese genes" of the genetic code of human DNA.

The visit by Condaleeza Rice to Beijing in 2008 led to a flurry of racist postings on China's websites, with Rice stigmatized as "the ugliest in the world"... "I really can't understand how mankind gave birth to a woman like Rice"... Some directly called Rice a "black ghost", a "black pig"... "a witch"... "rubbish of Humans"... Some lamented: "Americans" IQ is low — how can they make a black bitch Secretary of State"... Others did not forget to stigmatize Rice with animal names: "chimpanzee", "crocodile", "a piece of rotten meat, mouse shit", "[something] dogs will find hard to eat".

Chinese elites have always been very cunning at using their quietness and cautiousness as a rhetorical device to delude Westerners with the quaint notion of Chinese innocence and purity. China is currently building an empire in Africa, based on the exploitation of cheap African labor, poor if any safety standards for workers, construction projects based on the cheapest and shoddiest Chinese materials — all in exchange for vital resources to feed the insatiable desires of 1.4 billion Chinese. That's the strategy: use dirt cheap construction materials to build up good will, then sweep in and take the natural resources. According to Peter Hitchens, Chinese companies have lax safety procedures and "employ African people in slave conditions."

Extermination of Ethnic Minorities in China

China's ethnic composition is almost exclusively Han, 91.9 percent of the population. The ethnic minorities (Mongols, Zhuang, Miao, Hui, Tibetans, and Uighurs) are treated as second class citizens. Tibetans are routinely described as superstitious, lazy, ignorant, and dirty. Tibet is an independent country occupied by Chinese imperialists; Han migration is destroying their heritage; Han companies dominate the main industries; the Chinese get all the best jobs.

The Tibetans are irritated that Chinese migrants eat their dogs (animals believed to be the last reincarnation before humans in Tibetan Buddhism); that the Chinese don't walk clockwise around temples and monasteries, and that they toss away their cigarettes at wooden temples and holy trees. The New York Times described an incidence of one man whose house was burned down for no evident reason as follows: when he tried to seek help, the authorities said, "What race are you? Tibetan? Go ask the Dalai Lama for help."

In 1949, Han Chinese amounted to only 5 percent of Xinjiang's population; today they are up to 41 percent. Urumqi, the capital city, consists of 75 percent Han Chinese, of the 2.5 million inhabitants. The average Chinese views the natives from Xinjiang as backward and as ungrateful for not appreciating the modern infrastructure bestowed upon them by the Han. In the summer of 2009, this region saw violent riots by 2,000 to 3,000 thousand Uighur workers and Xinjiang separatists, in which approximately 150 Han Chinese were killed. The Communist reprisals were swift; up to 50,000 police and security personnel were sent to restore order, more than 2000 Uighurs were detained, and a few dozen were executed. The policy of Sinicization was intensified; in May 2010 Beijing announced a new development strategy to pour $1.5 billion into the region, encourage the migration of more Han Chinese businessmen, together with a 'love the great motherland, build a beautiful homeland' patriotic education campaign that aimed to indoctrinate the Uighurs that "ethnic minorities are inseparable from the Han."

Clearly, it is superbly absurd and cowardly for leaders of European ethnicity in Vancouver to have endorsed a motion calling for more apologies in the context of a reality characterized by mass immigration from a country and an ethnic group that is currently complicit with vulgar and oppressive acts of racism.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

August 22 marks one year since the release of Canada in Decay: Mass Immigration, and the Ethnocide of Euro-Canadians. I thought this book would have an impact in the long run as the first scholarly effort to explain the nature and origins of multiculturalism from a truly critical perspective, without kowtowing to the banks, politicians, and conformist academics. I expected malicious attacks from the establishment for daring to expose the incessant lies that sustain immigrant multiculturalism and for speaking in favor of a Canada that retains a healthy white majority. What I did not anticipate was a consistent number 1 ranking at Amazon.ca in various subjects the moment the book was released last August.

I am somewhat surprised the establishment decided to ignore the book rather than attack it. I was interviewed four times about it, two times by CBC radio, one time by a university student paper, and by Walrus magazine. They all decided against publishing/broadcasting the interviews. Perhaps I sounded too reasonable, persuasive, and fair-minded, in defending the rights of Euro-Canadians to engage in identity politics. They could not fit me into their simple minded boxes. They could not paint me as an irrational xenophobe, a person who did not know Canada's immigration history, or a person with fascistic tendencies.

They could not counter my claims i) that Canada was founded by white settlers rather than diverse immigrants, ii) that the theory of multiculturalism is bedevilled by a double standard in promoting the collective right of minorities to affirm themselves as members of ethno-cultural groups while insisting that Euro-Canadians who speak as members of an ethno-collective group are racist. They could not explain why it is illiberal to criticize diversity but it is liberal to prohibit criticism of diversity. They could not explain why Canada is uniquely multicultural when almost every other Western nation has embraced this same ideology. This is why they censored these interviews.

But the reason I am writing about Canada in Decay is that I want to encourage patriotic Canadians to purchase it. This book is a serious scholarly study, not a political pamphlet. A few readers have complained about this. They wanted a shorter, no more than a 100 page statement. They are wrong. I can't stress enough how crucial it is for our side to have a fully developed criticism of immigrant multiculturalism steeped in historical analysis, political theory, sociology and philosophical reflection. The academic books promoting multiculturalism number in the thousands located in shelves across all Canadian universities. Many of these books are crappy, written by conformists with a poor education. But they are massively influential in being the only sources students are compelled to read. Whether we like it or not, full length books and journal articles have afforded leftists with a smug satisfaction that their ideas are legitimately based on "peer review research" whereas our ideas are simple outbursts from deplorables.

The left controls the production of knowledge, all the universities, the printing presses, magazines, newspapers, political parties, corporate media, think tanks — everything. They feel assured mocking our ideas when no one in academia promotes them. Our side has a lot of mass support, some of which is starting to be heard, with quite a few blogs. But if we are going to mount a sustained opposition, reverse decades of multicultural propaganda, and all the damage done to Canada, we need high level intellectual products. No social movement has ever gained political power without an intellectual foundation, without fully developed arguments against the establishment.

Therefore, since Canada in Decay is the only fully developed argument against an establishment determined to marginalize Euro-Canadians, I urge you to purchase this book as a metapolitical act. The longer the book stays as a best seller, the more it will be purchased, the more its ideas will spread, and the stronger we will become. We must totally undermine the deceitful ideological foundations of immigrant multiculturalism.

Show post
Astrofrog #racist eurocanadian.ca

Screw classical liberalism. That ideology is how we got here the first place.

Canada is ours because we took the land and built upon it. It will be ours until it is taken from us. It's that simple and there is no need for moral justification beyond this. Likewise, Sir John A. was a great man because he founded our country; his legacy does not need to be defended by appealing to whatever beneficence he may have felt towards the Asians from whom our ancestors conquered this territory.

This is not a popular opinion. However, until it becomes the default opinion of the Right, and of White Canadians more generally, we will continue to lose. We will lose so long as we accept the moral premises of the leftist traitors who wish to give our land to aliens without a fight. Most especially we shall continue to lose so long as we persist in the illusion that the Left has any moral principles beyond "European culture is evil". By appealing to the Left's pretended beliefs in universal morality, that is precisely what this article does.

Show post
Curmudegon_49 #racist eurocanadian.ca

As for the residential schools, the wealthy in Canada, Britain and France paid large amounts to have their children educated in these types of schools. The Canadian government was providing an education to Indians superior to the education provinces were providing to White children. I am acquainted with an orphaned Metis who, as an accountant, had very successful careers in several large Canadian companies. He openly states that his residential school experience was the best thing that ever happened to him. While he believes that there was abuse in some of the schools he notes that the allegations of abuse have split families where one sibling claims abuse, another claims there was none. Funny how Phil Fontaine, Ovide Mercredi, and Murray Sinclair (and many others) somehow managed overcome the abuse to graduate university with law degrees, only to discover the abuse decades later..

If we are to pay such great respect to our indigenous population, why not get them to tell us what our immigration policy should be? Even the Indians know that the "new Canadians" (the Chinese, Pakistanis, Sudanese, etc.) could give a damn about their "rights".

Show post
66wow99 #racist eurocanadian.ca

Ladies and Gents (yes, only two possible), it's self-preservation. Any white persons in position of power, will parrot "diversity is our strength" simply because it puts food on their table, and pays their mortgage. Anything less than towing this line will blackball them from their respective industries. But, what these Whites apparently fail to realize is that it will destroy their children's future in this once great country built by the ingenuity, sweat and tenacity of our European ancestors. If I were these people's child, I'd round-house them to the head.

In the meantime, it is horrifying to witness Whites eating their own.

Show post
Tim Murray #fundie eurocanadian.ca

he most significant thing about this story is not Bernier's gutsy comments, but the predictable reaction to them. The nauseating cant issuing from Scheer's spokesman Brock Harrison, and Michelle Rempel's tightrope walk over both sides of the fence was to be expected. Unless an organ donor steps forward to offer his brain, I can’t help Harrison. But I can help Rempel. If Michelle wants data to support the argument that ours is not a “functioning pluralism”, if she sincerely wants to learn about the costs of diversity, she only need to google Robert Putnam + Bob Birrell + a myriad of other studies related to theirs. Or if it would be more convenient, she can take a look at this or this or a comprehensive reference list like this.

There is even a University of Victora statistical study conducted in 2010, led by Zheng Wu, that found that many new immigrants feel comforted and protected by settling into ethnic neighbourhoods and that they are less apt to feel loyalty to Canada by doing so. Or as Wu put it, life in ethnic enclaves reduces immigrants' "sense of belonging to Canada." So voluminous is the data that even a casual perusal of it would lead any impartial researcher to assert that the onus of proof is clearly on those who promote diversity, rather than those who question its benefits. The game is over and the final score is Evolutionary psychology 1, Social Engineers 0.

As if we needed more proof, the “Bernier” incident reveals once again that the Conservatives are a a "Me Too" party. Liberals dressed in blue who share the all-party consensus that rapid immigration driven population growth and continuing ethnocultural fragmentation is self evidently good for the country. Rather than follow the Ford formula, rather than tap into the vast pool of disgusted non-voters, Scheer prefers to compete for the favour of the 5% swing voters in the middle because pundits tell him that this is the only way that a political party can win. Accordingly, he is desperate and determined to silence mavericks like Leitch, Belak and Bernier so that they can't provide Trudeau with the ammunition he needs to brand the Conservatives as party of bigots and extremists. In effect, Scheer and his coterie of strategists are allowing the CBC and the MSM to determine what kind of Conservative is fit to lead or speak for the Conservative Party.

Conservatives need to understand that the number of people who cast ballots in federal and provincial elections is not fixed. It is not a certainty that more than four in ten of registered voters will continue to stay home on election day. The only reason they do is that they understand that all the main parties are mere factions in a ONE PARTY state. They realize that parliament is a closed shop. And that as long as there are party whips, as long as there are virtually no free votes in the House, political parties will not feel obliged to listen to the feedback of their constituents. While it has become the fashion of politicians of all parties to hold "town hall" meetings in their constituencies, they do so only to give constituents the false impression that their views will be decisive in determining how their parliamentary "representative" will vote on any given issue.

Four in ten of us recognize this charade as a fraud, and we register our cynicism by abstention on election day. It is not about voter apathy, it's about voter rebellion. Some rebels spoil their ballots, some formally refuse them if they can, and some stay home. Instead of chasing after swing voters with a progressive mentality, instead of working within the closing Overton window of acceptable PC discourse, instead of conceding more and more ground to anti-Western cultural demolitionists, Conservatives should appeal to the rebels. They should think and campaign outside the box. They should weaponize the muzzled majority.

Here is some unsolicited advice to Tory strategists and convention delegates. If you want to know what leadership candidate to select — the candidate who has the best chance to win the next election— pick the candidate that the CBC and the MSM vilifies most, the one they say has no chance of winning, the one who would, they warn, lead the Conservative Party to oblivion or permanent marginalization. The one who dares to challenge the shibboleths of multiculturalism and immigration. The one whom they say does not represent "Canadian values".

That would be the candidate whose victory will send them into shock and horror and prove, once again, that the political class hasn't a goddamn clue about how the masses think, or any concept of what "values" guide them.

There is a reason why "outsiders" and "extremists" like Ford and Trump win. It is because they are not outsiders or extremists. They are "insiders". They dwell inside the world and thinking of ordinary people. The real outsiders live in bubbles. In newsrooms, broadcast studios, and ivory towers. And the real extremists are the ones who have pushed the extreme agenda of hyper-immigration, demographic displacement, quota hiring, transgender ideology, runaway political correctness, censorship, the criminalization of speech, and the conscription of tax payer dollars to subsidize those who lobby for this agenda — most particularly the radical ideologues in the CBC.

Progressives on both sides of the border contend that Trump's victory emboldened "haters" and "normalized" hate. But the truth is that haters have long been emboldened, and hate speech has long been the norm. The only reason that Leftists didn't notice it is that the hate was coming from their direction. It was looking at them in the mirror. Hating white people and Western civilization is quite the norm these days, and those who spew such hatred are rather bold about it, don't you think?

The sad thing about this affair is that Bernier's twitter comments are treated as controversial, instead of what they should be. A statement of the blatantly obvious.

Show post
Tim Murray #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Meet one of the 5,000 Brits who become Muslims each year

No one knows why Louise converted to Islam. No one knows why 27% of converts to Islam in North America are white, or why three in four of these white converts are female. It seems logically inconsistent. Many of us, accustomed as we are to the liberties that our pluralistic society confers, find this phenomena difficult to comprehend. Baffling in fact. Why would Louise embrace a backward faith that regards her species as unclean and her gender subordinate? In the absence of definitive answers, we can only speculate.

Perhaps her nocturnal tours of the neighbourhood were less a mission to relieve her bowels than a spiritual odyssey that ultimately led to Allah. Perhaps under the light of a full moon she looked down upon her turd and saw the work of a Divine Creator. Perhaps her stealthy defecation on Mr. Davis’s front lawn engendered a sense of shame and disgust which made her question her permissive upbringing. Perhaps it was the very rigidity of Islam with its strict dos and don’ts that most attracted her.

Perhaps there is a more fundamental reason to account for her shocking conversion. A reason that while compelling, is too politically incendiary for any but the most suicidal among us to mention, never mind consider. Perhaps Louise found Islam enticing because she understood what feminists don’t. She realized that she is a pack animal, and that packs are hierarchical. There is a chain of command. There is the pack leader, and his followers. That understanding is built into her nature. She is hardwired to lead — or submit. And her psychological comfort is dependent on a clear understanding of where she stands on the pecking order, and what her role is in the group. For a pack animal, nothing is more stressful than uncertainty about his or her place in the hierarchy.

It was Louise’s misfortune to have been born and raised in an environment where pathological concepts like democracy and gender equality were thought to be desirable and viable. She was raised to believe that dinner table handouts were her entitlement, and that her over indulgent superiors were to be regarded as “partners”. She was even given cultural signals to the effect that she and her kind should assume leadership positions.

While she embraced these messages on a conscious level, she didn’t on a subconscious level, for they conflicted with her nature. Until her conversion, Louise was a very conflicted individual, and the inner turmoil was killing her. Islam offered her a way out. That is the raw truth of the matter.

When patriarchal Christianity succumbed to progressive secularism, when clerics with lisps and pink shirts took to the pulpit to preach the PC news rather than the Good News, the field was left wide open to Islam. Dogs and people, pack animals both, crave clarity and moral absolutes. They need a clear demarcation of good and evil, right and wrong, dos and don’ts. Plus a sense of purpose. If you don’t give a dog a job, he’ll find one. Or the devil will find it for him.

This unhappy conclusion is a bitter pill for progressives to swallow. It is hard to admit that for Louise, becoming a Muslim was a rational choice made to deal with existential problems that white female retrievers face in Western society.

In a nutshell, conversion to Islam was Louise’s way of coping with the stresses of modernity.

Show post
Astrofrog #fundie eurocanadian.ca

You're right: Canada's a horrible, racist place full of brutal White sexists.

So why don't you go to Sierra Leone, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, or one of the other beacons of enlightened civilization from whence your pets come?

You won't? Funny that.

Show post
Astrofrog #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Were our "first nations" really first? The official narrative, like most official narratives of history, will not be allowed to be challenged. With the size of Canada and its 3 coastlines, what does "first" mean?

Our ancestors didn't "immigrate". They conquered, and they settled, and as a result this is our land now.

You midwit leftists are all the same. "Educate yourself", "you're so ignorant". Never anything original. Just because you pulled a B- average while drinking your way through university, your expensive political indoctrination does not counts as an "education". Certainly it's left you incapable basic rhetoric, to say nothing of the ability to understand the distinction between absolute numbers and per capita. You are, however, quite capable of spewing the vile, anti-White hatred your professors packed into your head while you sat there in class in a pot haze.

Show post
Stephen Summani #racist eurocanadian.ca

I like to think of myself as a cerebral and disinterested man in my philosophical undertakings. I prefer to avoid emotional involvement as much as possible in my interactions with the world, although I know that is an impossibility. Thus, I strive to demonstrate the minimum acceptable in order to convince those around me that I care and to remind myself that I have a soul.

Yet, as I write this, I am seething with fury — as should all of you who are smart enough to find yourself regularly reading here on the Council of European-Canadians.

Look at the photograph at the top of this article. This is Julianna Kozis. She was until recently a ten-year-old Canadian — EURO-Canadian — girl with a family who were blessed to see that smile every day. Julianna was of humanity’s finest and most illustrious bloodlines and was fortunate to be growing up what was until recently one of the greatest countries in the world. She was, to paraphrase a poetic national treasure, a girl “who lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow”.

Reese Fallow was the other EURO-Canadian girl killed by Pakistani Immigrant Faisal Hussain.

But now, Reese and Julianna belong with the dead.

I never met Reese or Julianna. Likely, we’ve never even crossed paths in the same city or town. But I know their faces — not theirs specifically, but the faces of our youth and our future. I see in them the emotion of Euro-Canadians who, although unaware of it, are living for what centuries of back-breaking work, sweat, cooperation, and ingenuity of our ancestors built for us. All of this was wrapped together in a pride rightfully earned: that a man who respects all that his ancestors gave him can hold up in his arms a daughter like Julianna and Reese with pride to show the world who were, where we come from, and that we deserve to be here.

When Julianna and Reese were shot, their murderer and those who back him made a statement: that they, and we, do not deserve to be seen; do not deserve to understand where we came from; and that we don’t deserve to be here.

There are all too many in this country who believe that. However, the weapons they use to make that statement vary: sometimes it’s television commercial propaganda to show us mixed-race families; sometimes it’s accepting jihadists as ‘refugees’ into Canada while turning away Afrikaners escaping black violence; and sometimes, it’s murder — in this case, THE MURDER OF OUR CHILDREN!

Julianna Kozis and Reese Fallon are two of many of our women who have been sacrificed on this altar of multiculturalism.

I was reminded today of Maria Ladenburger. She was a nineteen-year-old German girl, a student of medical school, who was raped and murdered by an Afghan refugee before he dumped her body

I don’t have enough room here to post all of the pictures I could find of the women and children of our Civilisation who have been raped and/or murdered by the jihadist influx into our countries. For those of you who are regular readers of CEC material, I don’t need to. As for those in this country who are not as aware of the threats Canada is facing, I believe the murder of Julianna Kozis and Reese Fallon will represent a turning point.

No mentally-healthy man can learn of the murder of beautiful young girls like Reese and Julianna and not feel fury and a sense that justice must be done. Of course, justice will not be done; the murderer went to face his god like a good little mujahideen, his family and friends all have expressed shock and sadness about what he did, and the Liberal government’s response will undoubtedly be to blame the gun, or Canada’s lack of compassion, or some other nonsense as to why this happened.

My hope is that our national media — dominated heavily by women, especially in television news — will begin to show more compassion and concern for Canada’s women and children than they do for refugees (fake or otherwise) who love our money but hate our Civilisation. Woman’s protective instinct over children will, as crimes such as what happened to Reese and Julianna increase, eventually break free from the strangleholds of their multiculturalist indoctrination which currently forces them to accept the deaths of our own as a necessary price for some cultural Maoist rendition of justice for supposed crimes our ancestors committed.

As for those of you reading today, I shouldn’t need to tell you this, but I ought to anyway, since many things we shouldn’t need to say often do need it nowadays: what will you do to honour Julianna Kozis and Reese Fallow? Flowers and lit candles do nothing to the massive influx of immigrants into our lands. The reason these attacks continue is because our enemies believe that we will do nothing other than lower the flag to half-mast, place a tear drop on our daily social media post, and then move on. N

Show post
Brian Wiggins #racist eurocanadian.ca

Canadians from the founding cultures, need to look beyond a conventional political solution. If Catalonia, Khalistan, Israel, Wakanda, “Farrakhanland,” Scotland, Kurdistan, Quebec, and “New” California, why not a homeland for European-Canadians in South-Western Ontario; the Maritimes; the Prairies, around Quebec City or the interior of beautiful British Columbia? It’s British Columbia, after-all.

We can’t be accused of discriminating against people we don’t live with. The massive transfer of wealth and the $35B-$40B fiscal costs of immigration will disappear. Infrastructure savings would be enormous. We’ll never have to worry about being branded racists or xenophobes again. Taxes will decline. Hospitals, currently operating at 135% of capacity in both the Fraser River Valley and the GTA, largely as a result of chain migration, will gradually decline to their intended 85% cap, and we’ll be able to move on our highways again. The Canadian environmental could heal. Employment equity plans will vanish, and organizations can get thousands of our kids out of their parent’s basements and into the workforce.

A new homeland for the founding cultures might seem fantastic or a pipe dream to some but consider that we are now, as of the credit crisis of 2008-09, at a significant historical inflection point. In their bestselling book, The Fourth Turning: What the Cycles of History Tell Us About America’s Next Rendezvous with History, authors William Strauss and Neil Howe describe the seasonal nature of history and foresee an inevitable period of decay that will destroy existing social and political institutions.

Steven K. Bannon, former advisor to President Donald Trump (and many others), agrees that a Fourth Turning began in 2008 with the global financial credit crisis and has argued that the administrative state must be dismantled in advance of the final climax. Canadians, too, should tear down everything that is no longer functional, including our pathological immigration policies and official multiculturalism. In order to renew, forests need fires and rivers need floods.

To be fair, sweeping theories of history are not as well received in academia. The Fourth Turning is non-falsifiable and has been a tough sell to professional historians who have now been co-opted into re-writing and revising history to allow for the occupation of formerly Western ancestral homelands by alien out-groups. William McLoughlin, a former history prof at Brown, believes that it is fantasy to think that “if you put enough data together and have enough charts and graphs, you’ve made history into a science.” Fair enough. Those sophisticated enough to lose money in the capital markets at any time, will confirm that the future is unknowable by definition. Nevertheless, the Turnings are much more than mere happenstance or data mining.

Readers who have stock market experience can find support in Elliot’s 5th and final wave of his grand super-cycle and with Nikolai Kondratieff’s wave theory. The cycle of crises also corresponds with cycles of war identified by Arnold Toynbee and geopolitical cycles identified by William R. Thompson. Keep in mind Vladimir Lenin’s comment that “In some decades, nothing happens; in some weeks, decades happen.”

There’s a lot to be concerned about. North Korea and Iran; the staggering mountain of immoral public debt in the United States and Canada and throughout the West; the crouching, racist and hyper-nationalist tiger dreaming of global domination and increasingly militarizing, with weapons stolen from the West, the South China Sea, or what I prefer to call the North Philippine Sea, are all potential sparks. The world’s greatest threat according to Bill Gates, is an influenza pandemic. The Institute of Disease Modelling predicts that a severe flu pandemic could kill more than 33 million people in just 250 days. Several concerning strains are already circulating.[iv]

Finally, in my view, there is a growing threat of a second civil war exploding out of the incredible divisiveness in the United States. Either of these four “sparks;” debt, China, a flu pandemic, or the outbreak of a second American Civil War or a combination of these threats could ignite the final Fourth Turning “climax” sometime between now and 2025, give or take, according to the theory.

The generational cycle cannot explain the role or timing of these individual threats. Nor can it account for the great events of history, like the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, the bombing of Pearl Harbor, President Kennedy’s assassination, 9/11 or the Lehman insolvency. What the generational cycle can do, according to Strauss and Howe, is explain how society is likely to respond to these events in different eras. It is the response, not the initial event, which defines an era according to the theory. [v] According to Strauss and Howe, the crisis period lasts for approximately 20 years.

A financial collapse driven by a debt implosion is certainly plausible. Total debt in the U.S., for example, including Federal, State, Municipal and contingent liabilities in Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare is roughly $207 Trillion. In Canada, the Province of Ontario is a financial train wreck. The province will need to increase borrowing to finance another spending shortfall, adding to an existing mountain of debt, borrowed on our grandchildren’s credit cards, and is forecast to rise to $325 Billion, or more than $22,500 for every man, woman and child in the Province.[vi]

Newly elected Premier, Doug Ford, will find his hands to be tied but at least he has the right mindset and there is some hope that his populist surge will spill over Federally next year. To make matters worse, Moody’s has joined the Bank for International Settlement (BIS) and S&P Global is warning that Canada’s banking system, yes Canada’s, is facing a growing threat of souring consumer loans amid rising interest rates. Canada’s ratio of household debt to disposable income reached a new astonishing record of 171% in the 3rd Q of 2017 and the proportion of uninsured mortgages has increased to 60% from 50% five years ago.[vii]

It is my view, however, that the final spark for the Fourth Turning will be ignited by a Second American Civil War. Either way, the day of reckoning is coming. The chickens will come home to roost.

The Fourth Turning, whatever the final cause(s), has the potential to trigger a political upheaval beyond what we can possibly ever imagine. Strauss and Howe see a return to a more traditional and conservative social order as one of the outcomes. If history is a guide, the probability of retribution for former “collaborators” and for those who resist the new expectations for conformity will be high. There will be no assumption of compassion for the traitors and complacency will not be an option.

On the bright side, fertility rates will rise again, quality of life and prosperity will climb and public investment in infrastructure will surge. We will enter into a period of Peace, Order and Good Government but many nations are likely to be fractured and geographically divided by ethnicity as a consequence.

Yes, there is hope for a new homeland for the founding cultures. This may be our opportunity to take our nation back and hold those responsible for giving it away, without our consent, as traitors. Gird your loins for our next rendezvous with destiny.

Canada is over 400 years old. Our people have a DNA all our own. We belong to a unique and storied nation with its own official languages, religion, history, heroes, mannerisms, culture and identity. We don’t want open borders. We don’t want mass migrations to change Canada into something new. We don’t want to become a minority in our own land. We want our country back.

Canadian “elites” babble about “diversity,” about how much better a country we will be in 2036 when white Europeans are just another minority and we have become a “gorgeous mosaic” of every race, tribe, creed and culture on earth. To many Canadians, such a future entails the death of our nation. To Canadians, millions of African, Chinese, Indian, Arab and Islamic peoples settling in our lands means the annihilation of the historic nation we love, the nation that came into being to preserve us. We will never forgive politicians, whether by accident, or design, if they change our country completely and forever.

Many of these aliens who occupy Canada today have no “cosanguity” with either of the two founding cultures or the larger white European family. From the growing expressions of resentment, contempt and even hostility towards us, it’s clear they we’re not compatible.[viii] Canada is increasingly being filled with people who have absolutely no connection to the great historic Dominion of Canada. They can’t be faulted. Canada was never really created for them but as anti-white sentiment goes mainstream and all of Canada’s non-whites increasingly assert their own racial and ethnic heritage, what will keep Canada together when we lose our white majority? If Euro-Canadians had the same group loyalty as Sikhs, Muslims, Chinese and Indians we would never have permitted these aliens into our land to begin with.

Our ancestors did not create the heroic and adventurous Hudson Bay Company, fight on the Plains of Abraham, Beaver Dam, Stoney Creek, Lundy’s Lane, Michilimackinac Island, Queenston Heights, Paardeberg and Leliefontein, Ypres, Vimy Ridge, Passchendaele, The North Atlantic, in Defence of Hong Kong, The Battle of Britain, Dieppe, D-Day, The Liri Valley, Normandy, the Scheldt, Kapyong and Kandahar, and endure the enormous hardships and sacrifice of the Great Depression, in order for baby boomers to turn the country over to alien out-groups and foreigners who have nothing in common with us and who don’t share our values.

Canada is much more than an idea; it’s much more than a shopping mall. The Fathers of Confederation did not frame the British North America Act to celebrate diversity. It’s the “British” North America Act, after all. Canadians did not spill their blood and treasure around the world for multiculturalism and to become a marginalized, despised but “privileged” minority in the land bequeathed to us by their ancestors; our home and native land. Did we?

If we don’t stop this madness, and establish our own lands, Euro-Canadians will learn soon enough that the non-whites our hyper-altruistic elites usher into 24 Sussex Drive will not fritter away their demographic, political and economic gains in fruitless displays of moral superiority the way we have. A Canada run by non-white aliens and foreigners will be a shockingly different place. Competitive racial and ethnic altruism is not a game non-whites play.[ix] Canadians must force our traitorous elites to abandon policies that will, before long, destroy us all and everything that was bequeathed to us.

I should be careful what I wish for, but as far as I am concerned, the Fourth Turning can’t come soon enough. We are a people. We can create great things if left free to be ourselves and only we can be ourselves. If Canada ceases to be majority white country, it won’t be a country at all. Euro-Canadians should never give up on the idea that this country belongs, first and foremost, to us. We will fight back and the fight has, in fact, already begun. A cold wind is blowing. Winter is coming…

Show post
WhenInRome #racist eurocanadian.ca

These videos are shocking, and as a native Montrealer, it breaks my heart to see the city I grew up in turned into a swamp. And I'm only 28 and yet I remember being a kid and things being much different. I used to be against separatism on the grounds that I thought Quebec was as essential part of Canada. Now, living in Ontario I feel (authentic) Quebec culture is the only one that has anything left to save, as the rest of Canada has become like the garbage shown above, a multiculti gong show sold out to the highest foreign bidder. Canadians outside of rural Quebec and the rural maritimes are content to sit in front of their TV and spout American pop culture cliches while eating a plate of Shawarma from their local "Canadian" all-halal restaurant, while their kids learn Chinese in school to prepare for their future overlords.

Regardless, we know the end game, which is to associate these cultures with Canada, and that's just a dishonest shame, since they played no part in building Canada up to what it is now. Canadians ought to be outraged as much as we are by this madness.

Show post
Marc Archembault #racist eurocanadian.ca

went to the Canada Day parade from Fort Street to Dominion Square, Montreal, where there were thousands of pieces of free birthday cake dished out by a crew of mostly Latinos and Caribbeans with security team of Haitians. The clients evident were Chinese, Filipino, Muslims with hijabs and American tourists with cameras.

The parade was a quarter or more Chinese complete with dragons, representing communist order and ethnic regions. The rest was from dozens of countries around the world each waving their flag and proudly sporting their costumes, music and dances.

The image below is taken from the "The Official Website of Jimmy Chan" where he basically brags (in 2016) about how "Canada Day" is now "Chinese Day".

There were even Turks waving the Turkish flag wearing Ottoman fezzes, pretending to be Shriners..?! There were Iranians sporting their flag with lion of imperial Persian empire. There was one small authentic French Canadian band with Kiwanis and real quad-4-wheeler Shriners giving Canadian participation of less than 10% of the show. I did notice most of the Montreal police were Canadian, many stayed in their car, police cadets were on some street corners

The parade should have been called United Nations Day or Mass Migration Day — nothing to do with Canada.

Here are some video clips of the Montreal parade this year 2018 taken by foreigners implicitly claiming they now own Canada and that July 1st is their Day, for the benefit of their race and culture against "racist" Canadians.

Thirty years ago when the Canada Day parade was for Canadians it would have had school, college bands representing education and military groups; army, air, marine bands representing security; hospital/ health care facilities; church; larger iconic national businesses such as hydro, manufacturing, telecommunications, transport: rail, automotive, aerospace; mining/ smelting, banking; athletic/ sports; culture such as Cirque du soleil, Montreal symphony, country and folk; indigenous peoples. The true essence of national pride.

Today Canada has none of these to celebrate. Only third world multiculturalism.

For the founding European culture: pioneers, nation builders and defenders of the "true north strong and free" — it must be a sad day.

The government vision and plan for the rapid and dramatic transformation of Canada from an English/ French bi-cultural country to a multicultural post nation has taken place. It's a gamble Canada will loose. It already feels now to be a country lost.

What I see is a bunch of foreign powers vying for control in the vacuum of what was once a country.

Show post
Robrecht #racist eurocanadian.ca


I regret to tell you that in the very near future there won't be much left of the ' Québécois pure laine ' culture. The days of Gilles Vigneault, Félix Leclerc, Robert Charlebois, Jean-Claude Léveillé and so many more will be swept aside to be replaced with more ' diverse ' cultures. The Québécois as patriotic as they may be will follow the same path as the English Canadians, slowly but surely becoming minorities in their own land.
Unless...unless a strong leader such as the late René Lévêsque comes around. Vœu pieux...Wishful thinking.
If that happens we can expect a ' Just watch me ' from le fils à papa. If he is still around, that is.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

We should not be satisfied. In my books The Uniqueness of Western Civilization and Faustian Man in a Multicultural Age I emphasized the "continuous creativity" of Europeans from ancient Greek times to the present. I also went back to the revolutionary contributions of pre-historic Europeans in the domestication and riding of horses, their co-invention of wheeled vehicles, their principal contribution to the "secondary-products revolution," their invention of chariots, their creation of the most dynamic language in history, the proto-Indo-European language, their nurturing of the only true aristocratic culture in history (in which rulers were not despots but first among equals), their origination of the first heroic and tragic literature, and, most important of all, their responsibility for the appearance of "self-consciousness" in history, which laid the foundations for the Greek Miracle.

I highlighted the scholars who wrote about the Greek invention of secular observation of nature, the invention of mathematical proof, the invention of artistic realism, the invention of prose writing, the invention of historical writing, the invention of politics, the invention of infantry warfare, the production of the highest sequence of the greatest thinkers in history, the Hellenistic Revolution in Science, not to mention technological and economic novelties.

I also mentioned the Roman contribution of the first rationalized legal system that recognized each citizen as a legal person, Rome's unsurpassed engineering, aqueducts, Latin literature, and rational infrastructure of war-making as well as the greatest empire in human history. I argued that the Middle Ages were one of the most creative periods in history as evidenced by the invention of universities, corporate autonomy of the church and towns coupled with the "first modern legal system," the invention of mechanical clocks, the scholastic method of investigation, the best water mills, Romanesque and Gothic architectural buildings unsurpassed in history, the three field system of agriculture, an entire Renaissance in the 12th century.

The West is filled with "origins," "transitions," "inventions," "renaissances," "discoveries," and "revolutions": the Printing Revolution, the Portuguese rounding of Africa, the discovery of the New World, Cartographic Revolution, the Italian Renaissance, the invention of perspective painting, the Copernican Revolution, the Newtonian Revolution, the Military Revolution, the Glorious Revolution, the French Revolution, the First Industrial Revolution, the Second Industrial Revolution, the German Philosophical Revolution(s) from Leibniz to Kant to Hegel to Nietzsche to Heidegger, the invention of the Novel, the Romantic Rebellion, the Darwinian Revolution — to mention a few.

Meanwhile, the Rest of the world remained stuck without any major novelties after the inventions of the Bronze Age that we associate with the rise of civilization as such. There was change, but no revolutionary novelties, no major thinkers, no major scientists, no major artists. There were a few philosophical reflections by Muslims out of their reading of Aristotle early in the Middle Ages, and some novelties in pharmaceutical ingredients and optics. The Chinese also produced a few trinkets by way of water clocks, firecrackers, and paper. But Chinese "development" consisted only in demographic expansion, intensification of rice farming, and the building of big ships called "junks."

Measuring European greatness has always entailed an evaluation of the way artists, novelists, philosophers, composers, mathematicians have occasioned a breakthrough, a new way of explaining history, a new style of poetic expression, a whole new philosophical outlook. In contrast, the measurement of non-European greatness tends to be about men who were good at following an existing tradition, perfecting an existing style of painting and poetic expression, reinforcing the unquestioned thoughts of sages.

The standards for Western greatness are far higher. Here is a glimpse of European greatness in classical music. We learn that in Claudio Monteverdi (1567-1643), pioneer of opera, "for the first time in history there was a complete unity between drama and music." We learn that "it is harmonic intensity above all that sets Bach's music apart from that of his contemporaries...In Bach's music a completely new harmonic language is forged [...] There is no music in the literature that has Bach's kind of rightness, of inevitability, of intelligence, of logically organized sequence of notes."

When Haydn started, "the new music — the music of the style galant — was in its infancy and Haydn put everything together. It is not for nothing that he is called the Father of the Symphony. With equal Justice he can be called the father of the String Quartet...Rococo is left far behind; this is Classicism of the purest kind, and the music is big." Beethoven, "from the beginning he was a creator, one of those natural talents, full of ideas and originality [...] Then came Eroica, and music was never again the same. With one convulsive wrench, music entered the nineteenth century."

Berlioz "was a natural revolutionary, the first of the conscious avant-gardists...Uninhibited, highly emotional, witty, mercurial, picturesque, he was very conscious of his Romanticism [...] he was in every way a revolutionary, fully prepared to throw established and even sacred notions into a garbage can." Chopin "was not only a genius as a pianist, he was creatively a genius, one of the most startlingly original ones of the century [...] For the first time the piano became a total instrument: a singing instrument, an instrument of infinite colour, poetry, and nuance, a heroic instrument, an intimate instrument." [The above citations are from The Lives of the Great Composers, 2006].

This kind of originality can be found in all the arts and sciences of the West. Actually, the entire history of physics, chemistry, biology, geology, historical writing, logic, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, economics, geography, is dominated by Europeans from beginning to end. After all, these disciplinary fields were all invented by Europeans.

Why this is so should be the mother of all historical questions. Yet even the thought that Europe was slightly greater terrifies an academic world obligated to push a multicultural mandate in education. This explains the hysteria against King. Talking about European greatness is now identified as "mentally stunted."

The only unique contribution Europeans are allowed, known as the "great divergence," is the Industrial Revolution, with perhaps permission to connect this revolution to the rise of modern science. But students are quickly reminded that China is now surpassing the West in industrial development. Jack Goldstone and Kenneth Pomeranz are two prominent names behind this historical revisionism. They say the West was merely different in reaching an industrial state first thanks to the exploitation of the Americas, the availability of coal in England, or the "fortuitous" development of an instrumentalist-engineering science in the 1700s. A few critics are begging for the inclusion of Western liberal institutions in the assessment of this divergence. But all in all, the uniqueness of the West is now suppressed.

This is what diversity enrichment entails.

Show post
Eurocanadian #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Uniqueness

Half of my book, The Uniqueness of Western Civilization, is about discrediting the multicultural claim that, as late as the mid 1700s, the West was no more advanced than the major civilizations of Asia, or China in particular, and that only a set of fortuitous circumstances gave the West a chance to industrialize first. The West did not "stumble" accidentally into the New World, I argued, and it was not "easy access" to the resources of the Americas, enslavement of blacks, or availability of cheap coal in Britain, that made possible Britain's take-off.

Columbus voyages were one among many other European explorations, starting with the organized expeditions of the Portuguese around Africa into the Indian Ocean in the 1400s. During the 1500s and 1600s, thousands of Europeans set about discovering and mapping the whole world for the first time in human history. While the acquisition of resources from the Americas, and the colonial trade did affect the timing, magnitude, and rate of industrial growth, this revolution occurred first in Britain because of this nation's freer markets, property rights, superior applications of modern science to industry, representative institutions, and a dynamic middle classes imbued with a Protestant ethic. Many other European nations, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Nordic countries, would soon industrialize in the 1800s, with next to no colonies. Overall the home market and the intra-European trade were far more significant than the colonial trade.

What I did new in Uniqueness was to argue that the rise of the West can't be reduced to the industrial revolution and even the preceding Galilean-Newtonian revolution. The West has always stood apart from the Rest as a singularly different civilization since prehistoric times. The history of the West is filled with continuous "births," "origins," "creations," "transitions," "renaissances," and "revolutions". We can start with ancient Greece and the "world's first scientific thought," the "invention of deductive reasoning," the "birth of citizenship politics," the "emergence of historical consciousness" and "the discovery of the mind". But then we have to explain what made Greece so different. The current, widely accepted explanation for Greek uniqueness, is question-begging. It says that the Greeks developed a unique institution, the polis, or city state, which encouraged individualism and reasoned discourse. Rather than having to submit to a priestly or government hierarchy, the citizens of these city-states were free to participate in the affairs of their city as well as enjoy a cultural atmosphere which encouraged individuals to contest for excellence.

But why the emergence of the polis and the higher individualism of the Greeks in the first place? Some have pointed to the geographical distinctiveness of Greece, its mountainous ecology, which compartmentalised the land into separate valleys, and encouraged the rise of small independent city-states. The geographic uniqueness of Europe generally is always part of the explanation. There is no question that the greater environmental diversity of Europe, its multiple rivers and links to a wider variety of seas, coupled with the fact that its mountains, plains, and valleys are all "of limited extent," and that no great river or plain dominates the ecology, and that farmers can rely on rainfall rather than on centrally controlled irrigation systems based on one large river, encouraged less centralized political authorities.

But rather than viewing geography as the active historical agent, the way Jared Diamond and others do, I drew on Hegel to emphasize the deep effect this environment had on the "type and character" of European peoples. The peoples of the world belong to the same species, but their state of being — their mental vision, temperament, and character — is deeply influenced by their place of habitation in the earth. I also went back in time to the prehistorical Indo-Europeans to argue that before the polis in Greece was established around the eight century BC, there were already aristocratic characters unwilling to submit to despotic rule. The Mycenaean civilization (1900-1200 BC) was uniquely aristocratic in the sense that "some men," not just the king, were free to deliberate over major issues affecting the group, as well as free to strive for personal recognition. The material origins of this aristocratic individualist ethos are to be found in the unique pastoral lifestyle of the Indo-Europeans who evolved out of the geographical area known as the "Pontic steppes". They were the riders of horses, the inventors of chariots and co-inventors of wheeled wagons, as well as the most efficient users of the "secondary products" of domestic animals (dairy products, textiles, harnessing), which gave them a more robust physical anthropology and the most dynamic way of life in their time.

I used the philosophical insights of four German thinkers, Spengler, Weber, Hegel, and Nietzsche — their writings about the "infinite drive," "the irresistible trust" of the Occident, the "energetic, imperativistic, and dynamic soul of the West," the "rational restlessness" of Europeans, the "powerful physicality [of aristocrats]...effervescent good health... [love of] adventure, hunting, dancing, jousting and everything that contains strong, free, happy action" — to argue that only European man has exhibited an intense desire to subject the world to its own ends, and that it is mainly this self who has been unable to feel "at home" in the world until it got rid "of the semblance of being burdened with something alien" (Hegel's words).

Why has the European mind shown less reluctance to accept "the ineffable mystery of the world"? Why have Europeans been less willing to accept a social order based on laws and norms which have not been subjected to free reflection? Drawing on Kojeve I argued the ultimate origins of Western uniqueness are to be found in the reality that only Western man became "truly" self-conscious because only this man created — in the environment of the Pontic steppes — a society in which the struggle to become a man involved a contest "for something that does not exist really," that is, a contest solely for the sake of being recognized by another human being as a man exhibiting aristocratic excellence against the biological fear of death and against the fear of rebelling against the norms mandated by mysterious/despotic gods and rulers.

In all cultures men have struggled for manhood and recognition by other men but only among the aristocratic culture of Indo-Europeans do we find an incessant contest to validate one's aristocratic status among one's peers, for these nomadic, horse-riding warriors were not subservient to any ruler but were possessed by an attitude of "being-for-self" or self-assertiveness (rather than an attitude of "being-for-another" or deference towards a fearful god or despotic ruler). This contest had a profound effect on the constitution of the human personality, leading to the discovery of a unified self. This discovery was not, in the first instance, an intellectual affair, as bookish academics prefer to think; it was an intensively passionate drive for masculine identity in the pursuit of the highest form of recognition, aristocratic status, for the sake of the highest ideals, honor, courage, immortal glory.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Thinking that others think and behave in the same way as we do has been indispensable to our evolutionary enhancement. If other humans thought in a manner that was very different from us, we would not be able to develop this social intelligence. It is very difficult for us to think that other people do not have the same mind as ours. But this is precisely the problem Europeans find themselves today. Through their much higher cognitive fluidity and intense sense of introspection and critical consciousness, they have created a society in which tribal identities are weaker and discredited, for the sake of a hyper-individualism in which everyone is to be judged in abstraction from their group identities. This "libertarian" culture worked as long as Europeans were the only players. But millions of immigrants from non-Europeans cultures, together with hostile elites in charge of the media, who do not think in this individualistic way, have weaponized this moral universalism to obligate Europeans to treat outsiders as equal individuals, cunningly employing their social intelligence to promote their own tribal interests. It is not that the Darwinian component of social intelligence has disappeared altogether among Europeans. There is reason to hope that populist nationalism and white identity politics will continue to grow, and then Europeans will be able to enjoy their higher cognitive fluidity within their own independent homelands.

Show post
TM #racist eurocanadian.ca

As for concern for nature, I need only ask you how many non-whites belong to conservation, naturalist or environmental groups? How many non-whites do you see in provincial or National Parks? How many non-whites do you see fly-fishing, or canoeing, or back-packing, or bird watching? Proportionately, damn few I wager. The conservation movement emerged out of a matrix of German Romanticism and the English love of the countryside.

Show post
astrofrog #racist eurocanadian.ca

Our Faustian creativity has been our strength, but our empathy and xenophilic altruism is proving to be our downfall. The former gave us the ability to feed the world. The latter led us to actually feed it, and to allow the resulting hordes into our territory. If we wish to survive, we must reawaken the spirit of our Indo-European ancestors, and establish strict boundaries to our empathy.

Show post
TheAntidote #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Only in the context of Britain: the entire pink map said it wanted Brits out; that it wanted independence, self determination, their own culture, language, politic. Arguably this started with Massachusetts and South Carolina but eventually it came to Sudan, Nigeria, India, Jamaica, Pakistan, Singapore and Hong Kong. Now as the British see themselves swamped and suffocated by the entire former British Empire, don't THEY have the right to self determination----or even an identity?

Show post
Richard Storey #fundie eurocanadian.ca

After Achilles had defeated Hector in battle, his chariot dragged his corpse by the heels. Such was the hubristic spirit of our Indo-European ancestors — warrior nomads who conquered and ruled peoples from Europe to Asia, millennia before anyone had heard of Alexander. But the same spirit which restlessly pursued immortality in fame and glory would not only cause their European descendants to circumnavigate the globe and conquer its poles, but map the human genome also; not only has the White man needed to tower into the skies and conquer the moon, but that spirit has searched the depths of its own soul to master itself. Achilles was visited that night by Priam, King of Troy and father of Hector, tearfully requesting to bury his son's body and reminding him of his own father. Achilles called a truce for the funeral — the honour of the magnanimous gentleman, Plato's rational self-mastery, was born.

Both inwards and outwards, rationally and empirically, with brains and brawn, the spirit of the White man has continued to restlessly pursue glory, pushing whatever boundary it perceives, conceptual or physical. Like Prometheus, we would flout the gods in order to victoriously bring illumination to mankind, ever reaching into the infinite, like Faust (the Prometheus of the Renaissance), even if it will cost us our lives, like Frankenstein (The Modern Prometheus).

Cattle die and kinsmen die,
thyself too soon must die,
but one thing never, I ween, will die,
fair fame of one who has earned.
— Havamal, 75

But what is it about Europeans that gives us this high 'tendency towards the infinite,' as Spengler put it? What is the source of what he called the 'Faustian' spirit of the West?

Sadly, the study of genes as they relate to race differences is yet another dogmatic boundary the White man finds himself confronted with in our time, but I am far from the first one to vault it. We Europeans find ourselves on the scale of most IQ measurements residing above Africans but just under the East Asians (Japan, Korea and China). So what x factor has caused us to be overwhelmingly overrepresented in the number of great intellectual achievements of the past 3000 years? I believe the answer lies in psychopathy.

Now, psychopathy does not necessarily mean antisocial, sociopathic and violent traits. In fact, Factor 1 psychopathic traits are quite desirable qualities, making moderate psychopaths the most charming and charismatic characters we know. Whites have a higher average level of psychopathy than East Asians, whose ancient despotic states have long domesticated any individualistic assertiveness out of them. Yet we are moderate when compared to the average levels of Africans which, as Prof. Richard Lynn has explained in his article, Racial and Ethnic Differences in Psychopathic Personality, leads to a higher average propensity to antisocial behaviour. How then does this Faustian, moderate psychopathy manifest Western civilization?

Prof. Ricardo Duchesne, in his magnum opus, The Uniqueness of Western Civilization, has shown the origin of the Faustian spirit in the Indo-Europeans. These warlike aristocrats were only accepted as noble if they showed a willingness to sacrifice themselves in combat to achieve an immortality for their name, not necessarily any sexual conquest. Breeding for the trait to take no thought for one's own life, to the extent that naked, berserker warfare became their most noble form of combat, produced a rather psychopathic people in the Europeans. Associated with creativity, this psychopathic competition for glory and esteem, evolved men who restlessly found a way to go beyond whatever was currently considered rational or possible, inventing new concepts, abilities and technologies. So it is rather our inherited genes, which have given rise to the Faustian West in the great dance between blood and environment we call 'culture.'

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #racist eurocanadian.ca

Whites are the only race prohibited from having any pride in their ancestors. Millions of white students across the West are told daily their history is a litany of crimes, while foreign immigrants are told to be proud of their heritages and to believe that without white racism and imperial exploitation their cultures would have flourished beyond anything seen in the West.

They have declared a racial war against whites consisting of four angles: i) denigrate white history, ii) celebrate third world peoples, iii) condemn as racist negative statements about the history of non-whites, and iv) call racist any white who admires the achievements of his ancestors.

These angles are intrinsically connected around the idea that modernization of white nations was possible only through the "underdevelopment" of non-white countries that had long been more advanced. White nations became rich by plundering non-white nations, derailing them from their own "communitarian" path of progression, destroying their identities and "self-respect".

Only years of British self-flagellation have given Tharoor's argument any force. The argument is devoid of empirical support. The British had the easiest time taking India over because it was a totally corrupt, inefficiently-run, caste-divided, backward, starving, inept, irrational empire. The little statistic he offers in the just cited passage is incredibly misleading and not quite accurate. It is based on calculations by multicultural historians, such as Kenneth Pomeranz, who were determined to elevate Asia over Europe as part of creating a multicultural curriculum. They argue that Asia was "richer" than Europe before the industrial revolution began in 1750/1820 and that only the exploitation of non-Europeans enriched Europe.

But all the estimations about Asian superiority have been refuted. First, it should not be surprising that India and China were generating a higher percentage of the world GDP since these two nations represented about one-third and one-quarter of the world's population, respectively. They were producing a lot of rice for hordes of people barely surviving.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #racist eurocanadian.ca

Whites should not concede one inch to this racial war against them. They should not only show that Europeans were already ahead of non-Europeans by the time of the ancient Greeks, but were in fact responsible for developing the rest of the world. One can concede that, in terms of gross economic output, Asia was ahead of Europe before the industrial revolution due to its vastly larger population and the naturally higher productivity of rice over grain agriculture.

Broadly speaking, however, when we look beyond mere gross output, pre-industrial Europeans were ahead not only in per capita income but in all spheres of human life. Going back to prehistorical times, the Indo-European Aryans were responsible for the domestication and riding of horses, the co-invention of wheeled vehicles, the major agents behind the "secondary-products revolution," the invention of chariots, the creation of the most dynamic language in history, the proto-Indo-European language, and the cultivation of the only aristocratic culture in history (in which rulers were not despots but first among equals) -- all of which allowed them to conquer large swaths of lands in the East and West, Persia, India, Anatolia, Russia, and Old Europe.

The ancient Greeks dominated Mediterranean commerce, were responsible for the invention of mathematical proof and logic, artistic realism, prose writing, historical writing, real politics beyond palatial despotism, infantry warfare, the highest sequence of the great thinkers in history, culminating in the Hellenistic Revolution in Science.

It was the Romans who created the first rationalized legal system that recognized each citizen as a legal person, together with the greatest empire in history. It was during the Middle Ages that universities were first created, towns with corporate autonomy, the "first modern legal system," mechanical clocks, the scholastic method of investigation, the best water mills, Romanesque and Gothic architectural, the three field system of agriculture, the Renaissance in the 12th century.

Whites Developed the Rest of the World

But the point I want to emphasize here is that Europeans have been the ultimate developers of the world. Tharoor complains that the British did not give Indians representative institutions, equality of rights and all sorts of goodies he expects for free, employing white guilt to extract reparations, as if empires are rose gardens and as if India today is still not caste divided with lots of shitting on the streets.

But here is the most salient fact: Without the diffusion of European inventions there would have been no development anywhere. After one examines all the varying factors involved in the developmental experiences of non-European nations, the truly ultimate factor, the one variable that stands apart as the most important, has been the diffusion of technologies invented by European nations.

Geographical conditions, type of governments, and cultural values have undoubtedly played a role in encouraging or obstructing diffusion, but the rider in all cases of non-European industrialisation has been the diffusion of European inventions, not whether non-Europeans were able to invent new technologies. All the countries that developed outside Europe, managed to do so only in the degree to which they created the setting for the assimilation of European technologies. Japan, China, South Korea did not industrialize thanks to domestic inventions but only insofar as they carried out political reforms conducive to the integration of technologies invented by Europeans.

Only after they industrialized, Japan first, and now South Korea, Taiwan, and China, are we witnessing domestic inventions. Moreover, the modernisation of the political institutions, upon which Asians relied to create the framework for the adoption of European inventions, was itself a European creation. Europeans were not responsible for creating liberal-democratic states only; they were also great rationalisers of institutions and governments, which sometimes came together with liberalism, but not always, as the case of Germany showed with excellence.

The German path has been called "authoritarian modernisation from above", that is, industrialisation led by the old agrarian Junker class in cooperation with the new industrial class, both committed to the creation of an efficient rational state and capitalist economy, by means of universal conscription, centralisation of power, state promotion of industry, technical training of future state officials, emphasis on a scientific (but also a nationalistic-authoritarian) curriculum. Japan's industrialisation is unthinkable without a consideration of their adoption of this "German model" of rational authoritarianism.

Don't let tricksters like Tharoor demand "respect" for Indians while trashing your own history. Don't let them tell you that you have no right to be proud of your ancestors while every other group, blacks, Asians, and gays are constantly told to be proud. Without the diffusion of white technologies Tharoor would have little to brag about India today.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

But it is time to question the way the word "immigrant" has been deceptively extended to include what were in truth pioneers and settlers. Almost all the men and women who came to Canada from the British Isles and elsewhere in Europe, and, if you like, from British America, before 1914, were pioneers, not immigrants.

Immigrants started to arrive in Canada mostly after WWII. I am saying this in accordance with all the dictionary definitions I have examined. The New Oxford English Dictionary is very clear. Immigrant is "a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country". Settler, however, is "a person who settles in an area, typically with no or few previous inhabitants". Pioneer describes "a person who is among the first inhabitants to explore or settle a new country or area". "Pioneering" means "to be the first to use or apply a new method, area of knowledge, or activity, open up a terrain as a pioneer".

While the early settlers were responsible for this core culture, future settlers were responsible for the extension of this core culture into the "American frontier" or the "Great West". These men and women who opened the West were not immigrants. Immigrants only began to arrive in large numbers after the 1820s into the already created towns and cities.

In Canada, it can be said that the "core culture" was created by the time of Confederation in 1867, with French and English as the major languages, Catholic and Protestant values, French civil law and British parliamentary institutions and law. The "non-French and non-British" men and women who arrived in the 1800s and early 1900s were also settlers, insomuch as many of them settled in the new prairie provinces and British Columbia, or in new areas in Upper Canada and the Maritimes.

This distinction between settlers/pioneers and immigrants, which was recognized (at least implicitly) by past historians, has been explicitly obfuscated by current historians. The two standard history textbooks I have referenced often in my series on Canadian immigration, Origins: Canadian History to Confederation (2000), and A History of the Canadian Peoples (2011), avoid the use of the words "settler" and "pioneer", but always use the words "immigrants" or "diverse immigrants". Consider this: "immigration" enjoys the longest entry in the index of J.M. Bumsted's A History of the Canadian Peoples, after the words "Canada" and "Aboriginal Peoples".

It is not that historians did not use the word "immigrants" or "immigration" in the past. George Bryce's book, A Short History of Canada, published in 1914, a solid book of 600 pages, uses immigrants often, but he also regularly uses "settlers" and "colonizers" (without the negative connotation this term currently carries). The same is true of Donald Creighton's Dominion of the North: A History of Canada, first published in 1944, revised in 1957, which I greatly enjoyed reading in a tiny room at summer residence, University of Toronto, this past May. Both these books portray Canada as a nation fundamentally shaped by the French in Quebec and the English, not as a "nation of immigrants". J.M.S. Careless's book, Canada: A Story of Challenge (1959), subtitles the first period of large scale immigration to Canada as "Immigration, Development and the Pioneer Age, 1815-1850".

Canada's Pioneers

If I may disagree a bit with Huntington, it is more accurate to identify the settlers who created the core culture as "pioneers", in contrast to those who extended this culture into new areas in the West, who should be identified as "settlers" proper. The word pioneer carries two key meanings; one is very close to the meaning of settler, that is, a person who is among those who first enter or settle a region. But another meaning is uniquely about pioneering in the sense of being the earliest in any field of inquiry, enterprise, or cultural development. The French and the English were the earliest settlers and originators of Canada's core culture and therefore the true pioneers, while the Europeans, including English, who settled the West from about 1867 to 1914/21, were setters both in the sense of extending farming to the prairies, as well as extending Canada's political culture to this barely settled area of Canada.

The first settlers pioneered many types of home-made foods using local products, including buckwheat cakes, rich batter puddings, berry pies, molasses, gelatin, ciders. The diet of the settlers — wild asparagus and berries, chestnuts, ducks, partridges, cucumbers, celery and turnips, roasted pig, boiled mutton, rice pudding, fishes of several kinds — was far superior to the current overrated food of dirty Chinese restaurants with their artificial sticky sauces and rootless globalist menus. They also pioneered city halls, fire-fighter's organisations, theatres, Temperance Societies, sports and inter club games (curling, bandyball, lacrosse, softball, hockey, horse racing), public libraries, debating societies, mechanics' institutes, agricultural associations, literary societies, private schools and colleges, circuses, brass bands.

Conclusion

The goal of the globalist left and corporate right is to destroy the national identities and heritages of European peoples. They want to equate the Canadians who pioneered and settled Canada with the immigrants who came to a ready-made nation after 1921/1945. The fact is that, as we will see in a future article, the immigrants who came between 1921/45 and 1971 were mostly Europeans who came to be part of an already created Canada, worked hard and assimilated without any ulterior motives. The immigrants who have been coming since multiculturalism was announced in 1971 are very different from these European immigrants, and the reason for this is not only that they are from Third World cultures; it is that they are arriving into a Canada that is under the tutelage of an ideology that celebrates their non-European traditions and encourages them to affirm their group rights in ways that will eventually undermine the Canada created by the White pioneers, settlers and hardworking immigrants who came before.

Show post
Brian Wiggins #racist eurocanadian.ca

Let me say this. Rather than be ashamed, I am proud to be white and of European descent. That’s right, I said it! I’m PROUD to be related, in a way that North African and Middle Eastern Muslims, Chinese, Indians, Sikhs and Pakistanis are not, to Dante, Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Aristotle, Aeschylus, Cicero, Sir Thomas Moore, da Vinci, Galileo, Copernicus, Bacon, Newton, Descartes, Hume, Kant, Darwin, Thoreau, Rembrandt, Hegel, Weber, Mill, Nietzsche, Booby Orr, Gordie Howe and Racine. The National Hockey League and the CN Tower says something to me which it can never say to “them.” You won’t see any hijabs or turbans or Chinese characteristics on those antique lithographs of the voyageurs and coureurs des bois paddling those beautiful birch-bark canoes.

In North America, the Trump Administration cannot deliver on their signature campaign promise: to build a wall on their southern border. It’s hard for me to understand how the Americans put up without a wall for so long. The RINO’s, the Chamber of Commerce and of course the Democrats see the future as brown. One seeks cheap, low and high skilled labour, the other, votes, to become the effective governing party, forever. Transferring money and power from whites to browns and blacks. This is a recipe for a dystopian third world hell-hole, not much different than India, Brazil and Africa. The point is, however, that if the Trump Administration can’t get their wall built, and Brexit can’t Brexit how do we, in Canada, expect to establish an immigration moratorium and repeal our Multiculturalism Act? Not very likely. We need contingency plans for a new homeland(s) inside Canada.

I’m an average Canadian and no modern-day Louis Riel but Canadians from the founding cultures need to look beyond a political solution and take heed of the events in South Africa; the UK, Sweden, Calais and throughout Western Europe. If Catalonia, Khalistan, Wakanda, “Farrakhanland,” Scotland, Kurdistan, Quebec, and “New” California, why not a homeland for European-Canadians in South-Western Ontario; the Maritimes; the Prairies, around Quebec City or the interior of beautiful British Columbia? It’s British Columbia, after-all.

A defined territory is crucial for the survival of an “ethny.” According to Dr. Frank Slater, “the special quality of a defended territory is that it insulates a population from the vicissitudes of demographic disturbances . . .” Acquisition and defense of territory, he argues, are therefore an integral part of the tribal strategy of humans. The passionate relationship between a people and its homeland has been constant throughout history. A people can suffer many setbacks, but as long as it retains its own territorial space, it can recover.[14]

In the long run, only territory ensures survival, and human history is largely a record of groups expanding and contracting, conquering or being conquered, migrating or being displaced by migrants. The loss of territory, whether by military defeat or displacement by aliens, brings ethnocide — precisely what is happening in “multicultural” Canada and throughout the West today. Also worth noting, Salter concludes that there is no evidence of so-called “hybrid vigor.” There is no increase in intelligence, health, life expectancy or creative ability in mixed-race populations. [15]

We can’t be accused of discriminating against people we don’t live with. The massive transfer of wealth and the $35B-$40B fiscal costs of immigration will disappear. We’ll never have to worry about being branded racists again. Taxes will decline, hospitals will become efficient again, and we’ll be able to move on our highways. Our environment will heal. We could banish employment equity plans and we might get lucky and find that many aliens self-deport. Go back home and be free at last from the terrible indignity of white racism. And take your employment equity plans with you! Here’s your hat, Hijab and turban, what’s your hurry?

Show post
Astrofrog #racist eurocanadian.ca

Drawing the contrast with blacks and browns isn't so hard; they're just observably inferior. Where it gets interesting is with East Asians, particularly the Japanese. The Chinese seem to have the capacity to mimic, but not to create. I suspect they are primarily lacking intrapersonal intelligence: they simply aren't fully conscious. The Japanese, however, are a highly creative people; alien to the European mind, to be sure, but they show every sign of being equivalently conscious to the European, of being fundamentally on an equal footing. I suspect much could be learned via a detailed contrast of the two.

Show post
WhenInRome #racist eurocanadian.ca


I agree with a lot of what you said, but the Japanese are not as creative as you think they are. I lived in Japan for a few months and studied Japanese language and culture extensively, and I can say that they are good at making things better and reliably, but have zero creativity, because they are still fundamentally Asian, and while we were programmed with thousands of years of Christianity for example, they were pumped with Chinese Confucianism for thousands of years as well, where deference to elders and the group at large, rote learning and having qualifications were and still are front and centre. The Chinese are like this as well, but they are only as good as and a product of their manpower and lack the "island mentality" and any refinement that the Japanese developed. But I respect the Japanese very much, as in my mind, they are the only non-European country that figured things out, and managed to develop to a very high standard, in their own authentic Japanese way.

Show post
WhenInRome #racist eurocanadian.ca


I really respect the Japanese, but I think creativity is more than about being good at something that other's don't engage in. That's like saying the Africans are really creative because they make ceremonial voodoo masks, and that's an example of high art. To be creative it has to be outside the box that others simply are unable to do, because they take years of honing and experimentation within your own society. For anime and manga, it's not difficult to do, there just needs to be a desire to write and create such works, especially on a large scale. Hollywood could just as easily stick to traditionally animated films and they would be comparable to Japanese anime (ignore the fact that Hollywood is currently a cess pool). And let's be honest, Japanese fashion sense, especially that of Harajuku, is horrible except for the classy ladies. Very good at what they do, yes, but creative... I think I need more convincing.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #racist eurocanadian.ca

The New York Times review happily stated without equivocation that "the evidence of black superiority in athletics is persuasive and decisively confirmed on the playing field". Some journalists added that White people only dominate sports that require expensive equipment, such as golf, sailing, hockey. Others surmised that without "the economic gap", without "racist control" of the economy by whites, blacks would dominate every single sport.

Actually, the only condemnations came from the academic world. The author Jon Entine, thought to be White but really a Jewish guy from Australia, was accused of perpetuating the stereotype that blacks are good in athletics but not in academics.

They are all lying. The scientific evidence is decisive: Whites, both males and females, dominate almost all the competitive sports. Blacks are very good in some sports, the sports that American media moguls love to showcase, basketball and football. They are also dominant in some athletics, but mainly just running. They are not good in all jumping competitions, white males and females absolutely dominate the pole vault Olympic medals.

The constantly repeated phrase that "white men can't jump" is a another lie of the establishment: White athletes have dominated the high jump. Just check the male and female Olympic medalists.

As far as "major sports" are concerned: Whites dominate Hockey and Soccer and Tennis and Golf, and, to a considerable degree, Baseball as well. The majority of the top 100 Soccer players in the world are white. While some blacks have been excellent at Baseball, in a very good assessment "ranking the 25 best Baseball players of all time", Whites outnumber non-whites 20 to 5.

Whites dominate ALL the Winter Olympic sports: alpine skiing, luge, short track speed skating, biathlon, freestyle skiing, skeleton, and snowboarding, bobsleigh, curling, cross-country skiing, ski jumping, figure skating and speed skating.

The ten most successful nations in the Winter Olympics are all White nations.

White males and females also dominate the Summer Olympics. Nine of the ten nations with the most Olympic medals are White. It is true that a few of the medalists in these White nations are black. But aside from a few competitions in athletics, whites have decisively dominated Triathlon, Swimming, Archery, Water Polo, Canoeing and Kayaking, Cycling, Wrestling, Gymnastics, Equestrian, Fencing, Field hockey, Handball, Lacrosse.

They have been very competitive, and sometimes dominant, in all the other competitions, such as Boxing, Running, Volleyball, and Judo.

Almost all the "all-time top 25 decathlon athletes" are White. Yes, Aston Eaton is ranked number 1, but he is half white, and the second and third in rank are white.

Therefore, Jon Entine's claim that blacks athletes are genetically "better at sprinting, endurance running and jumping" is false. They are clearly better at sprinting only — and not always

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca


Actually, Gardner's determination to identify instances of simple numerical accounting among primitive peoples as viable demonstrations of the "universality" of logical-mathematical reasoning constitutes an egregious downgrading of the very meaning of this form of intelligence. This intelligence has been characterized by stages of development from a sensorimotor stage, through pre-operational and concrete operational stages, to a formal operational stage. In the chapter where Gardner's writes that Piaget "painted a brilliant portrait of development in one domain — that of logical-mathematical thought," he forgets that adolescents in traditional cultures (not educated by the West) barely reach and cultivate the final stage of development in Piaget's theory, the stage of formal operations, in which young adolescents exhibit a capacity to figure out the "implications that obtain among a set of relative propositions" (to use Gardner's own words, 19).

No just in primitive cultures, but outside the West, the logical-mathematical intelligence barely exhibited its full potential. Mathematics is essentially a European accomplishment. Gardner says that "it is left to the greatest scientists to pose questions that no one has posed before, and then to arrive at an answer" (149). Does he know that Europeans and North Americans account for 97 percent of scientific accomplishment?

The history of logic, too, is overwhelmingly European. The magisterial eleven-volume work, Handbook of the History of Logic (2004 –2012), which was written from a "global perspective," and contains four chapters in the first two volumes on Indian and Arabic logic, cannot but dedicate all the other chapter and volumes to the West since almost all developments in logic came from this civilization.

Europeans have also been the best in "linguistic intelligence." Most of the examples of great poets, essayists, and novelists Gardner mentions are Western. We all know that humans have an innate capacity for language, but Europeans have developed the literary capabilities of their languages to the highest degree. Take the novel; it is really a European invention. The word “novel” came into use at the end of the 18th century in England as a transliteration of the Italian word “novella.” The roots of the novel can be traced back to i) Spanish picaresque tales (1500s) with their strings of episodic adventures held together by the personality of the central figure; ii) Elizabethan prose fiction and the translation of ancient Greek romances into the vernacular, iii) French heroic romance (mid 17th century) with its huge baroque narratives about thinly veiled contemporaries who always acted nobly and spoke high-flown sentiments. What British novelists added in the 1700s was a more unified and plausible (down-to-earth) plot structure, with sharply individualized and believable characters, and a less aristocratic (or more “middle class”) style of writing. The novel, in these respects, was invented in Europe, particularly after 1750 (Watt 2001). It was “associated from its inception,” in the words of Roy Porter, “with individualism and a certain political liberalism” (2000: 283). England played the leading role in this genre, cultivating a new sensibility for authenticity, personal experience and feeling, a spirit of nonconformity towards rigid and “insincere” conventions, a fascination with the inner depths of the self. Samuel Richardson’s Clarissa was one of such novels, as was Pamela and Sir Charles Grandison by the same author; as well as Sarah Fielding’s The Adventures of David Simple (1744), Henry Brooke’s The Fool of Quality (1765), Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719) and Moll Flanders (1722), Lawrence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy (1759–67) and A Sentimental Journey (1767).

Same goes for musical intelligence. All humans have this intelligence but it is empirically beyond question that the European world produced most musical styles, the most sophisticated forms of musical notation, and a new polyphonic music where sounds could be seen as a phenomena moving through time, written on a paper using a codified and standardized system of notation for all sounds and rests. Europeans developed into their current forms almost all the known musical instruments. All the greatest classical composers in history are Western.

We are told that "spatial intelligence" refers to an ability to think in terms of physical space, as do architects and navigators. Drawing, jigsaw puzzles, maps, all rely on this intelligence, as well as models, graphics, charts, photographs, drawings, 3-D modeling, multimedia. Again, it so happens to be the case that almost all the greatest navigators, explorers, and geographers in history were European. The invention of modern maps, the cartographic revolution, was strictly European. Europeans are responsible for the development of models, charts, photographs, and the like. Gardner tries to downplay this reality by saying that "the capacity to make one's way around an intricate environment, to engage in complex arts and crafts, and to play sports and games of various types seems to be found everywhere" (p. 200). But most of what he says about spatial reasoning relies on Western instances. His appeals to spatial reasoning outside the West for the sake of pushing the notion that all cultures are equal constitute a downgrading of the very meaning of intelligence.

Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is about body awareness, using the body effectively and graciously, body language, hands-on-learning, making tools. Again, Europeans cultivated the highest instances of this form of intelligence. Europeans, for starters, are better athletes in most sports. Gardner says that "of all the uses of the body, none has reached greater heights...than the dance" (p. 222). Well, Europeans invented most of the dance forms in history, including the dances which reached the greater heights in difficulty and creativity, ballet and modern. They are also the greatest dancers and the greatest hands-on inventors.

Europeans have exhibited the highest levels of "naturalistic intelligence" in their far higher understanding of nature, their sensitivity towards plants and animals, their unique love for pets and for street animals. The creation of national parks is a Western achievement.

Show post
Albionic American #fundie eurocanadian.ca

After a quarter-millennium we can see that important parts of the Enlightenment's agenda don't work in the real world, notably the ideas of equality, ethical universalism and how anyone can become anything. Rationally we should jettison those bad ideas and work with what we have left.

I like to call white nationalism a kind of pro-white humanism, in that we have a vision of human flourishing and the good life in line with the humanist tradition, but oriented towards white people's interests because the ethical universalism of the Enlightenment has failed; it conflicts with man's nature, unlike the identitarian ethics which arises organically in a people who live in extended families, communities and nations and who share a common sense of historical and cultural identity.

Show post
Katebushfan666 #fundie eurocanadian.ca

If you believe in karma you'd never suggest that today's white european descendants are responsible for the misery of today's natives.. you are a simpleton.. its not stolen lands.. its conquered lands.. and as far as that goes the question of whether natives are the 'first' is just that a big fat question... the 'carbon footprint' comment is laughable.. truly... http://plantsneedco2.org .. natives want separate special treatment, I say they should get none... then there would be real 'reconciliation' .. hundreds of years of whites are born natives and fish and hunt and log .... 'hunter gatherers' is not just a native way of life and you are now trying to say it is ?? I don't know why natives feel so special and unique.. I know that liberals feed that narrative and I have no idea why... as for not liking the Western way of life they like their trucks and fishing boats and they sure like their cheap tobacco and cheap booze... so they just want to pick and choose.. maybe their plumbing is western too .. but we call it civilization, its an improvement over shitting in the woods.

Show post
Jakob Scheffer #fundie eurocanadian.ca

The excuse for 3rd world mass immigration being tied to our displacement of Aboriginals is easily exploded. My experience has been that our Aboriginals don't like "people of colour". I have engaged many Aboriginals in conversations about our immigration policy and why I think it hurts Aboriginals. I have yet to hear one disagree with me. To the SJWs and moronic politicians who spout this nonsense, I ask when they had consulted our Aboriginals on immigration, and what the response was. None had, and none will, because they know, to borrow a phrase from our neighbours to the south, that dog won't hunt.

That makes perfect sense. Before 1960, the vast majority of non-whites in Canada were Amerindians. Today, Amerindians are a minority among the non-whites, who at some time in the future will the majority. If the sole fact of being non-white means that one can claim victim status, then Amerindians now have to share this status with many others. Moreover, there is no reason whatever to assume that the many Asians and Africans who come to Canada will feel any historical guilt about the (very real) misdeeds perpetrated against the ancestors of today's Amerindians. The mass immigration of non-whites to Canada has significantly weakened the political position of the Amerindians here.

Show post
Alex Fontana #racist eurocanadian.ca

Whites, for some reason not including Portuguese, are only the eighteenth highest income earners and yet are legally discriminated against because of an imagined "White privilege." The higher earning groups are virtually all "new immigrants" who were let into the country after the change in the laws in the 1960s. The raw data corresponds to Brooks statements, and one reason to explain this is by reference to Putnam's social science study of the loss of social capital experienced by natives due to diversity. Another way to explain this is to appeal to the Darwinian theory for the effects that invasive species have when they move into another's habitat. Once upon a time, common sense nativism and populist racial sentiment was regarded as a natural extension of preserving one's own species, to preserve one's own culture, way of life, and most especially living space. The Chinese exclusion acts and head taxes represent this natural form of self-preservation — the Chinese built a Great Wall to keep the barbarians on the north out.

In our days, however, Darwinian theory is applied only to the natural, not the human world. A non-for-profit organization, The Invasive Species Centre, for example, has launched a campaign against the invasive species of Asian carp, which it deems dangerous to the Great Lakes:

"Because Asian carp breed so quickly, they can take over lake and river habitats, pushing out native species and unbalancing the natural ecosystem. Asian carp also contain parasites not native to our waters, such as the Asian tapeworm."

Perhaps the other fish are merely 'inferior species,' like Brooks' European Americans. If there is to be a parallel between the species protectionism against Asian carp and the racial protectionism against Asian people that Whites enjoy in Australia, America, and Canada before the 1970s, it is because both adhere to the same common sense natural principles of environmental and species protectionism. Common sense was simply not beholden to political correctness back in 1882 when the American government first issued the Chinese Exclusion Act.

To my own mind one of the main reasons for European underperformance in traditionally European derived and still majority White nations is the presence of a toxic popular culture and laissez-faire attitudes towards employment, education and child rearing we've inherited from the 1960s onward. The anti-authoritarian tendencies of the liberal order is a disease in which immigrants and their offspring are not subjected to — leading to articles with titles such as: "Are Chinese Mothers Superior?" (the superiority lies in authoritarian parenting). These attitudes and general laissez-faire approach to life, an increasingly morbid sense of atomistic individualism and existential self-creationism are also to blame. Westerners are concerned with 'finding themselves' while Easterners are concerned with success and worldly status — 'getting ahead.' Our cultural operating system has become incredibly crippling and dis-empowering.

However, the height of the 'current year' absurdity leading to our slow suicide is probably the ideological-politics of ethno-masochism constantly kowtowing to a highly selective, often ahistorical and decontextualized series of 'injustices,' prompting our Prime Minister to issue tissue-soaked apologies. This progressive propaganda is meant to promote 'White guilt,' a most pernicious form of demoralization that leaves Europeans far from adopting self-preservationist strategies. Wallowing in our own 'moral inferiority,' which is the most idiotic ahistorical lie imaginable (the exact opposite of the truth, in fact), presents us with the lack of a natural drive towards self-preservation, to natural protectionist policies.

It really tells how pathologically insane our ruling elites are apologizing to the very groups that are replacing, out-competing and pricing us out of our habitats, and if you permit me to be truthful to the natural world analogy of invasive species discussed above, without recourse to metaphor, apologizing to the "Asian Carps" that are killing us.

Show post
Peter Goodchild #fundie eurocanadian.ca

The word "aborigine" comes quite simply from two Latin words, "ab origine," meaning "from the origin." But origin of what? The origin of human settlement in the Americas? Says who? There is considerable (though confusing and uncertain) evidence that there were people in the Americas, probably from Southeast Asia, or perhaps from several parts of southern Asia, long before the people who now consider themselves "the first." These earlier people were not Mongoloid, unlike our present "aborigines."1

Why should we assume that the Americas were totally uninhabited for hundreds of thousands of years before the present Iroquois etc. were here? Homo sapiens is a very old species, compared to what we know of the past of the people who now claim to be "aborigines." Our present so-called aborigines probably arrived only about 12,000 years ago.

The word "indigenous" is no better, since it means "born in." Well, that would apply to a great many people now in Canada. And "native" means plain "born." Anyone born in Canada is both an indigenous Canadian and a native Canadian.

Another thing to consider is how much land is being re-classified as "native" land. There seems to be more and more as the years go by. One cannot assume that a walk in the countryside is some sort of "inalienable right" anymore. This loss of land is mainly a problem for people not living in urban areas — most White people who live in rural areas assume they can hunt and fish without great restrictions, and for many people such activities are a major source of food. As more and more areas become Indian land, I suspect White people won’t feel so comfortable being there.

In other words, all the usual distinctions between "aboriginals" and "non-aboriginals" are artificial and meaningless. The only meaningful distinction I can think of is that our "aboriginals" were living literally in the Stone Age before the time of Columbus. They do not seem enthusiastic about returning to a technologically less advanced culture, no matter how many evils they may claim to see in the present world. But they are enthusiastic about receiving billions of dollars annually from government sources. And how is it that, in the name of "employment equity," people are so often hired on the basis of some tiny percentage of so-called aboriginal ancestry?

As with so much of present-day government-enforced hiring practices, "employment equity" means little more than "White male removal." The solution is to remove everything that constitutes "aboriginal status." These people should be given full citizenship in the true sense: all the rights — and all the responsibilities. That in turn would give them pride, and it is the lack of pride that now results in such terrible rates of crime, of alcoholism, and of many other social ills.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

It has been established at CEC that the current portrayal of Canada as a nation populated from the beginning by peoples from diverse cultures and racial backgrounds should be seen as nothing more than an act of deception orchestrated by academics in wilful disregard of the historical evidence for the sake of legitimizing the leftist/global corporate goal of creating a race-mixed Canada against its European heritage.

The record shows, rather, that ninety percent of all immigrants who came to Canada before 1961 were from Britain, that it was only after the institutionalization of official multiculturalism in 1971 that immigrants from the Third World started to arrive in large numbers, that Canada was 96 percent ethnically European as late as 1971, and that immigration itself was not even the most important factor in Canada's population history but the high fertility rates of true born Canadian pioneers.

It has also been established at CEC that the French Canadiens were practically a new people born in the soil of New France, or within lands inside present-day Quebec, driven by the "exceptionally high" fertility rates of women, 5.6 surviving children on average, coupled with honourable patriarchal respect for women with children, the hard work and self-reliance of farmers.

In this article we will show that before the conquest, from Canada's origins up until the 1760s, immigrants played a very small role demographically in the making of Canada. Not only the Quebecois, but the Acadians as well, were a newly created people in the soil of North America. Native born Quebecois and Acadians were the main historical protagonists in the settlement of Canada for almost the first two hundred years.

Another Misleading Text about Canada's "Diverse" History

Don't you believe current historians who tell you that "New France was a multicultural society, with a considerable First Nations population and an African community". This is the message advocated by one of the most widely used texts in Canadian universities, consisting of two volumes, Origins: Canadian History to Confederation, and Destinies: Canadian History since Confederation, by R. Douglas Francis, Richard Jones, and Donald B. Smith. This very successful text, now in its seventh edition, claims that it is a major improvement over "the older texts", not only in incorporating "new historical research", but in showing that "anyone seeking to understand our diversity today must first examine the pre-Confederation era" (Origins, pp. 108, viii, fourth edition).

The two volumes seek to imprint upon students an image of Canada as "diverse" and "multicultural" from the beginning. Needless to say, Amerindians were the first inhabitants of territories that came to be identified as "Canada" only through the establishment of French and Anglo institutions during the 1600s to 1800s. But the "first peoples", the Hurons, Algonquins, Cree, Iroquois, and others, were organized in tribes spread over territories that can in no way be identified as part of "Canada" before Europeans arrived. They were territories actually contiguous with the United States rather than neatly located within Canada. Only in retrospect, through the European science of geography, have they been, and can be, demarcated in the continent of North America for pedagogical instruction, but not as actually existing tribal nations with definite geographical boundaries, since none of these tribes were organized as nations with marked boundaries.

Amerindian cultural areas

European geographers, not the Amerindians, have classified the natives of Canada in terms of six cultural areas, "Northwest Coast", "Plateau", "Plains", "Subarctic", "Arctic", and "Northeast". Indians had an intimate knowledge of the land, the soil, migration pathways of animals, weather, location of rivers, lakes, mountains, upon which the first European settlers and fur traders relied for survival. It was the Europeans, however, who mapped these territories and eventually created our modern institutions from the ground up.

It is extremely anachronistic and misleading to tell students that these tribal groups were members of a multicultural Canada. The French and English, for one, inhabited separate cultural lives, and in respect to the Natives, they inhabited totally different worlds. Their interactions with Natives are best described as interactions between separate peoples, commercial and military interactions, which affected both sides, but which essentially involved the modernizing encroachment of the Anglo-French side upon the Native cultures, leading to a situation in which, by the time of Confederation in 1867, only 1 percent of the racial population of Canada was Amerindian.

This reduction was of course tragic for the Aboriginals. But it is only by identifying them as a separate people that we can acknowledge their distinctive heritage instead of falsely assimilating them into a "multicultural Canada" as co-creators of a nation that only became multicultural in 1971 and in which, to this day, most Natives remain apart.

It is outlandish for Origins and Destinies to tell students that "in 1867" the Natives peoples were one of the three "major groups" that made up "Canada's multicultural society" (Destinies, third edition, p. 1). How can one percent of the population living in "lands reserved for Indians" — to use the official designation of the British North America Act — be identified as a "major" cultural group in Canada, equal to the French and the British, which made up 92 percent of the population?

The historians of these volumes want to have it both ways: an image of a European Canada that "decimated" the Natives through diseases, and an image of "First Nations" as co-partners in the creation of Canada's parliamentary institutions, legal system, schools and universities, churches, and modern economy. They want students to believe that the Natives were the "first peoples", followed by the French and English, as the next two "major groups", followed by the arrival of "non-British and non-French immigrants", as a fourth major group. This fourth group is portrayed as a multiracial lot, even though the statistics contradict any such picture.

The facts about the ethnic composition of immigrants, which this text cannot hide altogether, show that, at the time of Confederation, the English constituted about 60 percent of the population, the French 32 percent, and the remaining "non-British and non-French immigrants" about 8 percent. The non-British and non-French were all whites from Europe and the United States.

Origins: Canadian History to Confederation

There was no "considerable" African community in New France. The facts stated in Origins, which are the only facts that can be legitimately used, contradict this contrived interpretation: from its origins to 1759, only about 1,200 African slaves were brought to New France (p. 111). Another source says that "from 1681 to 1818 there were approximately 4100 slaves in French Canada, representing less than one per cent of the population".

The facts Origins has to rely on, since they are the only historically documented facts, contradict not only its claim that Canada was created by diverse racial groups but also the claim that the Europeans generally were "immigrants". In the case of New France (and let us not forget that the history of New France is basically the history of Canada up until 1763), the text offers a detailed table on the number of French immigrants "by decade" from 1608 to 1759, from which we learn that the total number of immigrants throughout this period was only 8,527 (p. 93). By contrast, the population of New France in 1759 was about 60,000. These numbers are consistent with the numbers I offered in The Canadiens of New France: A People Created Through the Fecundity of the Women — Not Immigration.

Since the French were the first Canadians, and the English proportion in Canada as a whole, before the Conquest of 1763, was scattered and incidental, it behooves us to conclude, on the basis of the above numbers, that immigrants played a minimal role from the time Samuel de Champlain planted the first permanent settlement at Quebec in 1608 up until 1763.

This point can be further accentuated through a consideration of the Acadians. In the calculation of the demographic history of French Canadians, the Acadians are sometimes included without a clear identification of their own demographic identity. The Acadians were another newly created people in the soil of America, not in present day Quebec, but in the maritime part of New France, or in the province of present day Nova Scotia.

The beginnings of the Acadians closely resembles that of the Quebecois; they too began as a small colony of men, or wooden buildings constructed in Port Royal in 1605 by Champlain, but these colonists were forced to return to France in 1607. In 1611, 20 new colonists, including a family, were brought back to Acadie, but this settlement failed as well.

It was only in 1651 that a demographic dynamic was set in Acadie, when about 50 families, or about 500 settlers, were brought in. After 1671, 40 more families were recruited from France, leading to a population of 800+ by 1686. By 1710, there were around 2,000 Acadians, "most of them born in North America" (J.M. Bumsted, 2003, p. 39). The text Origins likewise informs us that the "average Acadian couple usually married in their early twenties and had ten or eleven children, most of whom survived to adulthood" (p. 140).

Without any more French immigration, "the Acadian population multiplied by nearly 30 times between 1671 and 1755". By 1750, "there were more than 10,000", and "in 1755, more than 13,000 (excluding Louisbourg" (Origins, pp. 141-44). J.M. Bumsted tells us that Louisbourg's Acadian population was 3,500 in the 1750s (2011, p. 67).

The British gained control of Acadia in 1713, and in 1749 some 2500 British Americans were recruited, and then in 1750-51 about 1500 German Protestants settled at Lunenburg. This population, however, has not been counted in the above Francophone numbers. We will be writing about British immigration/birth rate patterns in a future article.

In the context of a full-scale war between France and Britain, and the refusal of the Acadians to give a formal pledge of loyalty to the British rulers in Acadia, in 1755-58 the British deported about three-quarters of the Acadian population. By 1762, they had expelled another 3000. However, in 1764, the British allowed about 3000 Acadians to resettle back in Nova Scotia, and by 1800 the Acadians numbered 4000.

It should be noted that in the 1740s there were about 700 Acadians in Prince Edward Island (PEI), then known as Île St-Jean, and categorized as part of Acadia (Nova Scotia). In 1757, approximately 2,000 Acadians had fled to PIE as refugees, which increased the population to about 4,500, but the British expelled many of these Acadians in 1758. A census of 1803 showed a population of nearly 700 in PEI. In New Brunswick, a territory carved out of former Nova Scotia in 1784, there was a population of 4,000 Acadians in 1803, a "result of high birth rates rather than the return of more exiles" (Origins, p. 153; Bumsted, 2011, p. 109).

The conclusion we must reach is quite self-evidential: the Acadians began as a small group of immigrant families, only to grow into a people with blood ties firmly set in Acadia, through a very high fertility rate, with its own unique Francophone identity, with speech patterns quite different from the Quebecois, in a very harsh environment that required the harvesting of salt from the salt marshes, the clearing of forested uplands, the building of dikes to reclaim land from the Bay of Fundy's strong tides; yet establishing themselves with a "far higher standard of living than all but the most privileged French peasants", coupled with a spirit of independence and refusal to submit to external authorities, which led to their expulsion, though not their demise, constituting today about 11,000+ in Nova Scotia, and 25,000 in New Brunswick.

The claim that Acadians were just immigrants no less different to the making of Canada than Sri Lankan Tamils, corrupt Chinese real estate millionaires, and Somalis is patently absurd, a discreditable claim that only academics who are out of touch with historical reality, and shamelessly unburdened by their traitorous attitudes towards their ancestors, would make.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

We should not be satisfied. In my books The Uniqueness of Western Civilization and Faustian Man in a Multicultural Age I emphasized the "continuous creativity" of Europeans from ancient Greek times to the present. I also went back to the revolutionary contributions of pre-historic Europeans in the domestication and riding of horses, their co-invention of wheeled vehicles, their principal contribution to the "secondary-products revolution," their invention of chariots, their creation of the most dynamic language in history, the proto-Indo-European language, their nurturing of the only true aristocratic culture in history (in which rulers were not despots but first among equals), their origination of the first heroic and tragic literature, and, most important of all, their responsibility for the appearance of "self-consciousness" in history, which laid the foundations for the Greek Miracle.

I highlighted the scholars who wrote about the Greek invention of secular observation of nature, the invention of mathematical proof, the invention of artistic realism, the invention of prose writing, the invention of historical writing, the invention of politics, the invention of infantry warfare, the production of the highest sequence of the greatest thinkers in history, the Hellenistic Revolution in Science, not to mention technological and economic novelties.

I also mentioned the Roman contribution of the first rationalized legal system that recognized each citizen as a legal person, Rome's unsurpassed engineering, aqueducts, Latin literature, and rational infrastructure of war-making as well as the greatest empire in human history. I argued that the Middle Ages were one of the most creative periods in history as evidenced by the invention of universities, corporate autonomy of the church and towns coupled with the "first modern legal system," the invention of mechanical clocks, the scholastic method of investigation, the best water mills, Romanesque and Gothic architectural buildings unsurpassed in history, the three field system of agriculture, an entire Renaissance in the 12th century.

The West is filled with "origins," "transitions," "inventions," "renaissances," "discoveries," and "revolutions": the Printing Revolution, the Portuguese rounding of Africa, the discovery of the New World, Cartographic Revolution, the Italian Renaissance, the invention of perspective painting, the Copernican Revolution, the Newtonian Revolution, the Military Revolution, the Glorious Revolution, the French Revolution, the First Industrial Revolution, the Second Industrial Revolution, the German Philosophical Revolution(s) from Leibniz to Kant to Hegel to Nietzsche to Heidegger, the invention of the Novel, the Romantic Rebellion, the Darwinian Revolution — to mention a few.

Meanwhile, the Rest of the world remained stuck without any major novelties after the inventions of the Bronze Age that we associate with the rise of civilization as such. There was change, but no revolutionary novelties, no major thinkers, no major scientists, no major artists. There were a few philosophical reflections by Muslims out of their reading of Aristotle early in the Middle Ages, and some novelties in pharmaceutical ingredients and optics. The Chinese also produced a few trinkets by way of water clocks, firecrackers, and paper. But Chinese "development" consisted only in demographic expansion, intensification of rice farming, and the building of big ships called "junks."

Western Accomplishments Are Exponentially Greater

The immense and continuous breakthrough of Europeans in all fields of human endeavour can only be properly captured when we zero in on particular philosophers, painters, novelists, mathematicians, logicians, musical composers. Even the startling lists that Charles Murray produced showing, for example, that the giants for each of the natural sciences (the top twenty in astronomy, physics, biology, medicine, chemistry, earth sciences, and mathematics) consisted of Europeans with the exception of one Japanese, do not capture adequately the originality of European greatness. His statistical calculation that 97 percent of accomplishment in the sciences occurred in Europe and North America from 800 BC to 1950 is obviously revealing.

So is his observation that the sheer number of "significant figures" in literature in the West is 835, whereas in India, the Arab World, China, and Japan combined the number is only 293. The same is true of his observation that the West produced 479 major figures in the visual arts as compared to 192 for China and Japan combined (with no significant figures listed for India and the Arab World). And the observation that the West produced all the great figures of classical music.

It is also very revealing that, according to my estimations, 95 percent, and most likely 98 percent, of the great explorers in history were European.

Still, these numbers don't capture the qualitative originality of European greatness. Measuring European greatness has always entailed an evaluation of the way artists, novelists, philosophers, composers, mathematicians have occasioned a breakthrough, a new way of explaining history, a new style of poetic expression, a whole new philosophical outlook. In contrast, the measurement of non-European greatness tends to be about men who were good at following an existing tradition, perfecting an existing style of painting and poetic expression, reinforcing the unquestioned thoughts of sages.

The standards for Western greatness are far higher. Here is a glimpse of European greatness in classical music. We learn that in Claudio Monteverdi (1567-1643), pioneer of opera, "for the first time in history there was a complete unity between drama and music." We learn that "it is harmonic intensity above all that sets Bach's music apart from that of his contemporaries...In Bach's music a completely new harmonic language is forged [...] There is no music in the literature that has Bach's kind of rightness, of inevitability, of intelligence, of logically organized sequence of notes."

When Haydn started, "the new music — the music of the style galant — was in its infancy and Haydn put everything together. It is not for nothing that he is called the Father of the Symphony. With equal Justice he can be called the father of the String Quartet...Rococo is left far behind; this is Classicism of the purest kind, and the music is big." Beethoven, "from the beginning he was a creator, one of those natural talents, full of ideas and originality [...] Then came Eroica, and music was never again the same. With one convulsive wrench, music entered the nineteenth century."

Berlioz "was a natural revolutionary, the first of the conscious avant-gardists...Uninhibited, highly emotional, witty, mercurial, picturesque, he was very conscious of his Romanticism [...] he was in every way a revolutionary, fully prepared to throw established and even sacred notions into a garbage can." Chopin "was not only a genius as a pianist, he was creatively a genius, one of the most startlingly original ones of the century [...] For the first time the piano became a total instrument: a singing instrument, an instrument of infinite colour, poetry, and nuance, a heroic instrument, an intimate instrument." [The above citations are from The Lives of the Great Composers, 2006].

This kind of originality can be found in all the arts and sciences of the West. Actually, the entire history of physics, chemistry, biology, geology, historical writing, logic, archaeology, anthropology, sociology, economics, geography, is dominated by Europeans from beginning to end. After all, these disciplinary fields were all invented by Europeans.

Why this is so should be the mother of all historical questions. Yet even the thought that Europe was slightly greater terrifies an academic world obligated to push a multicultural mandate in education. This explains the hysteria against King. Talking about European greatness is now identified as "mentally stunted."

The only unique contribution Europeans are allowed, known as the "great divergence," is the Industrial Revolution, with perhaps permission to connect this revolution to the rise of modern science. But students are quickly reminded that China is now surpassing the West in industrial development. Jack Goldstone and Kenneth Pomeranz are two prominent names behind this historical revisionism. They say the West was merely different in reaching an industrial state first thanks to the exploitation of the Americas, the availability of coal in England, or the "fortuitous" development of an instrumentalist-engineering science in the 1700s. A few critics are begging for the inclusion of Western liberal institutions in the assessment of this divergence. But all in all, the uniqueness of the West is now suppressed.

Show post
Mark Wiegierski #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Although the Polish-Canadian community (called "Canadian Polonia" by Polish-Canadians) is sometimes spoken of as a unity, it is in fact divided into numerous groups and subgroupings, depending mostly on the time of arrival in Canada. Obviously, waves of immigrants have come from much different Polish societies, and have arrived in much different Canadian societies. There have also been minorities among the immigrants whose relations to the Polish-Canadian community have greatly varied, notably Polish Jews. While one of the most stalwart Polish-Canadians was the sociological scholar Benedykt Heydenkorn, author of numerous worthwhile books about the Polish-Canadian community, others had highly negative feelings towards Poland.

The main waves of Polish immigration to Canada could be identified as pre-World War I; interwar; post-World War II; 1956-1979; Solidarity era; and post-1989. Before World War I, Poland had endured Partition (harsh foreign occupation under Tsarist Russia, Prussia/Germany, and the Habsburg Empire) since 1795. Independence was regained only in 1918. The Polish Second Republic fell before the savage onslaught of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union (then Hitler's ally) in September 1939 (when World War II began). It is today relatively little-known outside of Poland that a combined total of about five million Christian Poles perished under the genocidal occupation policies carried out by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union (the latter occurring especially during 1939-1941, when Stalin was Hitler's ally).

Betrayed by America and Britain at the Yalta Conference, Poland was assigned to the Soviet sphere of influence (to be officially called the People's Republic of Poland) — along with the wrenching displacement of her frontiers in a westward direction. Stalin and his henchmen imposed hard-line Communism on Poland, rejecting the possibility of permitting considerable internal autonomy, which happened (for example) in the case in Finland.

In consequence of the death of Stalin in 1953, the coming to power of Wladyslaw Gomulka in October 1956 essentially "polonized" the regime and moved it away from the harsh, grinding totalitarianism of the Stalin era. The disturbances of 1968-1970 brought Edward Gierek to power, whose economic policies initiated a short period of considerable prosperity. Nevertheless, the election of the Polish Pope in 1978 galvanized opposition to the Communist regime, culminating in the flowering of the independent trade-union movement, Solidarity. On December 13, 1981, Communist General Jaruzelski declared martial law and attempted to crush the Solidarity movement, which went underground. Finally, the impetus of Solidarity was one of the factors that helped to initiate the massive transformations that resulted in the collapse of the Communist regimes in Eastern Europe in 1989. The Polish Third Republic was proclaimed.

The main socio-cultural and political eras in the far, far more placid Canadian history occurring in roughly the same time-frame could be identified (for example) as pre-1867; Confederation to 1965; 1965-1982; 1982-1993; 1993-2006; 2006-2015, and post-2015. These correspond to the adoption of the new flag, and the beginning of the waning of traditional Canada (1965); the arrival of the new Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982); the Mulroney era (to 1993); the Chretien (and Martin) era (to 2006); and the Harper era (2006-2015). As of the 2015 Canadian federal election, the Harper era has come to a close, and the Justin Trudeau era has begun.

The arrival of Polish-Canadians increased the intra-European diversity of Canada. It could be argued that the initial definition of "multiculturalism" in Canada was mostly meant to refer to other European groups, apart from the English and French, especially Eastern and Southern Europeans. That definition has been mostly eclipsed since the 1980s, with the arrival of huge "visible minority" immigration. Today, Polish-Canadians are seen as mere members of a once homogeneously "White Canada."

Although everyone among the various groupings and subgroupings of the Polish-Canadian community may be "of Polish descent" — they in fact have distinctly different self-definitions and cultural preoccupations. Coming from much different Polish societies, and arriving in much different Canadian societies, fundamentally changes the self-definitions and cultural preoccupations of persons, even if they are said to belong to the same ethnic group.

Poles in Canada have mostly failed to establish a line of generational continuity. Thus, while young people continue to arrive from Poland, the young people of the generations born in Canada, are almost invariably lost to Polishness. There does not seem to be a strongly-active and more intellectual forum or setting or context where a dynamic, intermediary, somewhat enduring, emphatically Polish as well as Canadian identity can get underway and be worked out.

For those young persons who have maintained extensive ties to Polishness, there has frequently occurred a high degree of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, they had mostly accepted the enculturation by their Polish parents, viewing Polishness as a very large element of their lives, yet at the same time, they had very great difficulties with ever finding a recognition of the importance of Polishness in the society at large. Thus, their inner map or picture or understanding of the world was set on a path of fundamental tension with the prevailing societal environment.

Those few young people who clung to extensive elements of Polishness were likely to have found the dissonance rather difficult to bear. And they had virtually no groups of peers within the Polish-Canadian community to interact with, or find a degree of comfort or reassurance with.

What seems to be the invariable destiny for virtually all persons of Polish descent in Canada, is to melt and meld into the rather bland category of the so-called mainstream. And it could be argued that the so-called mainstream is not a particularly exciting place to be today.

In Canada, unlike in the U.S., multiculturalism policies — especially in the 1970s — did give considerable attention to so-called "White ethnics." The increasing diversification of Canada has meant that Polish-Canadians are seen as less and less important. Most Polish-Canadians are astounded at the pace of the demographic transformation of Canada. They remember a time when they were considered as "too ethnic" — but now, they are seen as "not ethnic enough."

The prevalent, current-day mood of postmodernism and multiculturalism in Canada should in theory encourage the construction of various, strongly-felt intermediary identities — one among which could be the Polish-Canadian. However, this does not appear to be happening, as far as the creation of a more collectively-felt and lasting identity for those persons.

It would be in the interest of the Polish-Canadian community to see limits on current-day immigration — over 80 percent of which consists of "visible minorities" — since Polish-Canadians are becoming regarded as less and less important under the newer forms of multiculturalism. There is also the fact that the immigration numbers are now so huge, resulting in very rapid and massive demographic shifts. It would also be in their interest to cultivate a distinct Polish-Canadian identity, which would allow them to resist the various blandishments of the current-day North American pop-culture and consumer society.

It may be noted that in Poland today, there is a salutary resistance to alien immigration, and most of the country remains proudly patriotic. Canada and Poland could be seen as polar opposites within the broader Western world.

Show post
Katebushfan66 #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Remigration.. the solution to mass immigration and ethnocide against the current population of original peoples.. this would include natives .. how long before their 'reserves' are asked to be multicultural? Time will tell.. it would be amazing to have the aboriginal leaders support the immigration restraint policy... how could we hope to make this happen?

Show post
Spud #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Men over the course of 3000 years have created the law using rationality, fairness and facts. Women are 53% of the electorate and are now in charge of Western Law ; they do not employ rationality and are immune to facts ; sentiment and caring now rule. To make matters worse , in Ontario, Yassir Naqvi appoints a majority of female judges for that reason; they pass judgement on the grounds of nicey-niceness and the female judges , strangely, will give Islam a free ride and figuratively crucify us.

Show post
Alex Fontana #racist eurocanadian.ca

I could not disagree more. As David Henry Hwang pointed out to the BBC regarding hyphenated Asian identities, the change in the status of China as a rising power has changed the perspective of these identities, "resentment, anger, jealousy," by Whites towards these groups

Having a token Asian here and there, as in the kid actor in "The Goonies" is one thing, having over 40% of Vancouver being of Asian extraction or a very high percentage of Toronto is something entirely Other.

While the Canadian government is concerned over the invasion of Asian carp as an invasive species, it should be concerned over the invasion of Asian people, who represent an invasive alien species that is an existential, cultural and economic threat - by gifting them "New Stock" status I was being overtly generous, rather I would call them "Alien Stock" to be more precise as to how I perceive them. It's disingenuous to claim that race does not matter in regard to community and national identity.

Show post
Damian #racist eurocanadian.ca

For some time now I have been saying the same as this blogger has written here. The response I get is something like this...”Well at least the Chinese aren’t interested in killing us and looking to introduce their version of sharia law.’’ I live in France now, partly because I cant stand to see first hand what has happened to Canada...the CBC, even the Liberal Party when it stood for a palpable version of Canadian nationalism. But I have a summer home on a beach in PEI. I thought PEI would at least be pure and relatively free of the multicultural death cult flourishing in the rest of Canada. But no, the Chinese are coming in and buying up everything they see. They came ten years ago because the Federal Government promised them money to start new business, and they took the bait, but the whole business turned out to be a fraud. They took the money but there was no need to do anything other that to have a registered company. The feds want to repopulate the maritimes because the maritims are one of the last regions of the country with a predominant European culture. I hate the Chinese...they are the fodder for the population displacement that is well under way all over Canada. How would it be if millions of European westerners repopulated Asian cities just as Vancouver has experienced population displacement. It wouldn’t be allowed. It would be considered a new form of colonialism...ok for Canada, no go mister for China. Wake up Canada.

Show post
Grace Kim Kwon #fundie eurocanadian.ca

[Commenting on an article seriously called 'Europeans The Greatest In Everything Since The Beginning']


Yes,
in Theology and Philosophy and Literature, too. They also advanced the
Math. Their Church music is incomparable among mankind. Europeans are
the greatest only until the Western ones started demanding the entire
mankind to support the homosexual depravity. The Eastern ones are still
intact as of today.

Europeans have been the greatest and far superior only
because of Christianity. Europeans are another case of oppressive
barbarians like the rest if they have no Christianity. Today's gay West is the proof.
Mankind should never be forced to endorse the mentally ill depravity imposed by
the Western whites. It's the worst kind of tyranny on earth. Europeans need Christianity to be true and moral and noble, not just to be saved.

Show post
Spud #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Your Doctors are rarely White -- she ran into two or more of them? A Pakistani Doctor wanted to do emergency surgery on my 85 year old neighbour around Christmas; the DP said that George would be dead in 24 hours ; George looked fine. He might have died over the Christmas holidays , ruining the family's holidays, but the Pakistani would have made $300.00 , had some surgical practise and gotten brownie points with Allah for killing an infidel. George lived 3 more months without any surgery. Attempted murder is worse than name calling and gratuitous murder more hurtful.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #racist eurocanadian.ca

In light of this study (and there are many other studies showing that to this date white and blacks in the United States have not created a community with a sense of "we", and that Canada still has a marginalized native population), should we categorized past whites in BC as "irrational" in their insistence that Asians were not capable of assimilation? Were they altogether wrong in fearing that, if the borders were not regulated, they would be "swamped" by Asian immigrants?

Past whites assessed and forewarned us about the dangers of Asian swamping. Current whites offer us delusional dreams about racial assimilation and togetherness on the supposition that whites are the only ethnic groups capable of racism. It does not occur to them that the racism of non-Whites may be far cruder since they lack any notion of civic citizenship and a universal "we". Roy's work is all about white racism, of course, but in a sentence about the "leading anti-Asian agitators" among different white ethnics, she slips the following: "the Aboriginals lacked the franchise but when they came into contact with Asians, mainly Japanese fisherman, their views were similar to those of their white counterparts."

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #racist eurocanadian.ca

The official interpretation of the Canadian government on race relations between Whites and Chinese immigrants is summarily articulated in the Library and Archives of Canada, under the heading, ARCHIVED — The Early Chinese Canadians 1858-1947. The essential explanation this web page offers as to why Whites "were so hostile" to Chinese immigration is "anti-Chinese racism". The document does not ignore other factors, such as the fear that "the Chinese could work for lower wages and would take jobs away from white workers", but the message of the web page is that anti-Chinese agitation was centered "around the idea of 'white supremacy', captured best in the phrase 'White Canada Forever'".

This explanation is rarely challenged by anyone in Canada today. It is part of the mainstream curriculum, widely disseminated by all the media outlets. This explanation has provided the rationale for the apologies and financial compensations by the Federal government in 2006, and, most recently, the apology from the British Columbia Legislature in May 2014. It is also the explanation embraced by Chinese leaders in Canada in their still ongoing demands for "inclusive redress".

The discursive apparatus sustaining this explanation is powerful, well-documented, and seemingly beyond dispute precisely because it is the only scholarly developed explanation today, and it is the only developed explanation because it is an integral component of Canadian elite efforts to create a nation in which the historic White majority population is obligated to accept a multiracial nation where the role of Whites as the founders of Canada will be marginalized. Once you accept this commitment to a multiracial culture, which by necessity implies believing that a White society dedicated to diversity is morally superior to a White society that is not, this explanation is inevitable.

Oxytocin Promotes Ethnocentrism

The most comprehensive study of British Columbia's effort to stop Chinese immigration is Patricia Roy's three-volume series: A White Man's Province: British Columbia Politicians and Chinese and Japanese Immigrants, 1858-1914, The Oriental Question: Consolidating a White Man's Province: 1914-41 and The Triumph of Citizenship: The Japanese and Chinese in Canada, 1941-67. While this study offers great details on the economic factors that influence the attitudes of whites towards Asians, its central preoccupation is the "race" factor in the creation of this province, premised on the idea that race is a "socially constructed" category, which can be deconstructed by writing critical books about "white superiority" and "racism" as prejudices that can and should be transcended as we go about creating a Canada that is open to all races.

No racial group in human history other than Whites has ever been committed to racial diversity. The peoples of the earth have always exhibited ethnocentrism, preference for their own culture and a disposition to judge other cultures by the standards of their religion, customs, and ethnicity. Research has been coming out lately showing that ethnocentrism is a natural and practical evaluation of one's ethnic identity and interests consistent with evolutionary theory and cultural sophistication. This argument was well articulated in Psychological and Cognitive Sciences (January 2011) under the fitting title: Oxytocin promotes human ethnocentrism. This study was based on a series of experiments in which participants were administered doses of oxytocin wherein the researchers learned that "a key mechanism facilitating in-group cooperation is ethnocentrism, the tendency to view one's group as centrally important and as superior to other groups" at the expense of an out-group.

I said "fitting title", because "oxytocin" is commonly known as a hormone associated with breastfeeding and love, but this article showed that it is also associated with in-group favoritism and ethnic tribalism, that is, with behavioral traits commonly associated in the West with intolerance and conflict. How can the same "cuddle chemical" be associated with ostensibly opposite behaviors such as in-group bias or "out-group derogation"? But this is no contradiction at all — despite the equivocations of the authors as liberals who can't digest ethnic identities — since preference for one's ethnic group requires affection and attachment to one's own people, being loyal, reliable, trustworthy, and cooperative within one's group.

But in the "imagined" future that our Canadians elites envision for Canada, a nation in which multiple races are projected to be able to get along without biases, ethnocentrism is seen as an "irrational fear" that only exists, and has existed, due to human ignorance, which can be remedied through proper education. This is the belief underpinning the official interpretation of race relations in Canada's history. But there is a major dilemma in this way of thinking and program, and it is that a particular people, "white Canadians" — to use the official wording — are the only ones under the burden of overcoming their ethnocentric biases.

In the study of race relations in this nation, racial egalitarians cannot but be preoccupied with the dominant White group in its relations to minority out-groups since Whites have always constituted the vast majority in Canada. We thus have a situation in which early generations of Whites living in an extremely harsh environment, where a livelihood was hardly guaranteed, being subjected to the moral judgment of White liberal elites committed to racial equality living in comfortable settings made possible by past generations. The overplayed drama of "racism" is driven by well-off Whites condemning the actions of poor past Whites in the name of an imagined future free of ethnocentric favoritism. The non-Whites are always seen as the victims since Whites are the majority and only majorities can impose institutionalized racism.

The archived article, The Early Chinese Canadians, manifests this dilemma and blindness in almost every paragraph. There is never an effort to examine ethnocentrism as a human attribute partaking in all cultures. The only group standing in the court of judgment are Whites. Among many similar expressions we have: "White British Columbians firmly believed that their way of life was better than all others." "They said that Chinese people carried diseases and other bad habits." "Anti-Chinese racism reflected a belief in the superior power of the British Empire." "In daily life, white Canadians felt free to show their dislike of Chinese people without any concern for the consequences."

Why were Whites so malicious? No reasons are offered. One is simply left with the impression that humans are not naturally ethnocentric, but would prefer a universal communion of all races if not for the racist Whites standing in the way. The preference Whites had for their own group is portrayed as a historical anomaly; a mistake to be overcome in the world once we get all Whites to accept diversity. White racial acts are based on irrational fears. Other groups consist of normal humans beings eager to assimilate into a diverse Canada free of racial divisions.

Chinese Cheap Labor versus the White Native Workers

But when one examines the sources critically regrading the relationship between European settlers and Asian immigrants in the late 19th to early 20th century, one can detect the inherent flaws of this official interpretation. We can start by showing that in the most developed explanation of racism against the Chinese, namely the work of Patricia Roy, there are a number of implicit observations pointing towards a different, more realistic and scientific interpretation, of the events.

Obviously I can only offer a glimpse of what would constitute a new way of looking at Canada's race relations from the perspective that we are all ethnocentric. For this purpose the "Introduction" to the second volume of Roy's book, The Oriental Question, is quite useful. Right away, in acknowledging the role of economic competition, she says that "fear" of Asians, of being "swamped" by an inflow of Asians, was connected to the fact that Asians were competing against whites for jobs "in the fishing grounds, in the fields, in the market place, in the classroom". Citing her own words from the first volume, A White Man's Province, Roy adds that this competition was serious enough to "warrant deep fears about the ability of white British to maintain their dominant position in the province."1 Now, of course, Roy, is trying to bring attention to the role of economic competition, but what is important is that she is implicitly admitting that white "fears" about the Asians as a race were not irrational since fear of out-groups is always connected to competition for resources, which is more accentuated when resources and opportunities are scarce. In other words, what Roy says could be fitted within an interpretation that fully recognizes the reality of in-group ethnic bias, rather than assuming, as she does, that ethnicity is merely a "socially constructed" identity based on "erroneous" assumptions about the existence of different racial groups.2

Roy observes that during the years between 1914 and 1941, with the passing of the exclusionary Chinese Immigration Act in 1923, the fear about Asian "swamping" declined, and whites were able to consolidate "their white man's province". Excluding Asians, and episodic reactions against Japanese residents, serve as a way for whites to acquire their own identity; that is, the formation of BC as a viable province with its own culture and people entailed use of the Asian "other" as "part of their [white] self-definitions".3 Again, there is very little to work on here, but if we don't accept her premises, we can ask: has there ever been any other identity in human history that was not formed by identifying an "other"? Can a community be created in which everyone belongs and no one is excluded? Roy, and everyone who writes about the making of Canada's provinces, takes it for granted that we can have a universal inside-ness freed from any taint of xenophobia and in group-favoritism.

Show post
Elizabeth #fundie eurocanadian.ca

End multiculturalism. Close borders. Remigration of all intruders. End affirmative action. End no fault divorce. End persecution of white men in divorce courts. Anti-miscegenation law. End abortion for whites unless mother's life in danger. End Feminism.

Show post
John #fundie eurocanadian.ca

The third world migration is encourage to ease the cost of extraction of resources, eradicate Caucasian from the land, and provide a platform for exploitation. To conclude, this mass migration was first enacted by the Spanish settlers in South America or today's Argentina to eradicate the Indian tribes. We are next.

Show post
Gary john #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Racial diversity is akin to biological warfare. A clash of races. Those that promote multiculturalism have failed to understand both history and human nature.

Those that promote multiculturalism are biological terrorists.

People are tribal by nature. Birds of a feather flock together. Blood is thicker than water. Good fences make good neighbors.

Canada is just a social construct. Europeans (Whites) have been around for millennia. Your race is your nation, not some social construct.

Question: Whites are celebrating themselves being outbred and displaced by non Whites. Why?

Diversity means chasing down the last White person. The evidence is everywhere.

Whites are funding their own suicide. Insane. Hitler actually wanted to save Whites. Today's Whites are hellbent on pretending diversity is a strength because they think it gives them the moral high ground. When did collective suicide become associated with the highest morality?

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Why a problem to be transcended? Because this evolutionary selected instinct is characterized by xenophobia, fear of those groups who are different, and preference for one's ethnic group. But why is this a problem if it is a behavioral disposition selected by nature for its survival advantages? Because this is a panel of Western scientists committed to the idea that diversity is a strength and that Western societies must be open to mass immigration. Why? Because these scientists are members of a European-created culture that has come to believe that European ethnocentrism, and only this ethnocentrism, is harmful to humanity. Therefore, Europeans, and only Europeans, must work towards universal forms of community and human solidarity without outside-ness and without fear of the other.

The word "self-delusion" came often to my mind as I heard these speakers. Self-delusion is defined as the act or state of deceiving or deluding oneself. A common example, the dictionary tell us, "is a person who believes himself to be much smarter than he actually is." But these scientists are smart. Perhaps the definition by Voltaire would apply: "The human brain is a complex organ with the wonderful power of enabling man to find reasons for continuing to believe whatever it is that he wants to believe." But the self-delusion here is even worse since these scientists have found reasons (based on their life-long research) not to believe whatever it is they want us to believe, but they still believe what they are ideologically expected to believe. And they are doing this openly in front of a large audience without anyone pondering over this self-imposed contradiction.

So, who is irrational? Those who fear the mass colonization of their countries by out-groups, or these scientists? These panelists are not the only cases of irrational reactions by researchers facing findings that question the mandated program of diversity. A well-known one is Harvard professor Robert Putnam's reaction to his own research discovery that ethnic diversity decreases trust and co-operation in communities. But his liberal convictions persuaded him to keep this research hidden for half a decade "until he could develop proposals to compensate for the negative effects of diversity". The proposals essentially came down to additional, more effective methods of indoctrination in favor of diversity. As he put it, "the central challenge for modern, diversifying societies is to create a new, broader sense of 'we'".

Show post
Edward Norton #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Almost all the sports were invented by Whites including the very notion of competition. Whites win most of the contests in the Olympics, totally the Winter ones, and the majority of the contests in the summer, even though they are a minority in the world.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Japan, Korea, and many other countries today have a high degree of homogeneity, including the Nordic countries Sachs mentions, but none of them are engaged in wars of exclusion and violence against other ethnic groups in other places. Why then is everyone presuming that if Western countries decide to end mass immigration they are thereby engaged in acts of exclusion and violence? The evidence is clearly pointing in the opposite direction: violence and rapes against out-groups have increased dramatically in those Nordic countries that decided to "enrich" themselves with diversity. Britain was a very peaceful country (devoid of hatred towards other groups) when it was overwhelmingly populated by native Brits in the 1960s.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

But the evidence we have so far is that only in the case of intra-European mixing do we have evidence of successful assimilation to a common "American" or "Canadian" culture. Canadians in the 1960s from different European backgrounds were well assimilated, despite their ethnic differences, to Canada's Anglo heritage. Once we look at the data for black and White integration, in the case of the United States, for which we have the most data, or, for that matter, White and Indian integration in Canada, Australia, and the US, we find that tensions, ethnic segregation in places of living, where children go to schools, and in cultural activities, have not declined one bit, even though all blacks and Aboriginals now enjoy the same civic rights. The evidence shows, to the contrary, that the closer to each other different races live, the less tolerant they are of each other.

Show post
Remy Tremblay #fundie eurocanadian.ca

The 60's were a time of change with Pope John XXIII calling the Second Vatican Council in order to modernize the Church. This had a devastating effect on Catholic Quebec. The leftist uprising of May 68 in France and the rise of the New Left in America also contributed to the destruction of the traditionalist way of life of French Canadians. Quebec went through its own Quiet Revolution, a revolution that changed our very nature. Today what is remembered is that most of our institutions (schools, hospitals, social services) were transferred from the Church to the government. If this secularization has had enormous effects on our society, the deepest change brought about by the Quiet Revolution was a redefining of our identity. The term French Canadian, an exclusive ethnic term, was transformed to Quebecois, an inclusive term encompassing anyone living in the territory of Quebec. While pre-60's nationalism was ethnic, religious and linguistic, with the promotion of strong links with outside of Quebec French Canadians, the neo-nationalism of the Quiet Revolution had become linguistic, civic and provincialist.

This neo-nationalism has become the norm nowadays, although ethnic nationalism is still very present, although only implicitly. While the media has adopted political correctness as its credo, some mainstream columnists like Mathieu Bock-Côté and Gilles Proulx openly advocate the defense of our ethnic identity and interests, something that is yet to be seen in the rest of Canada. In Quebec, multiculturalism is universally despised and is seen as a Canadian way to crush our people. The opposition to multiculturalism is so great that the Liberal government and pseudo-intellectuals Charles Taylor and Gérard Bouchard decided to invent our own form of diversity à la québécoise; interculturalism. Needless to say that interculturalism is an even worse model of society than multiculturalism, as it does not even allow our culture to exist as it is, but forces it to change and adapt to new immigrants.

Today a majority of Quebecers openly reject Islam. The announcement of the Liberal government about increased levels of immigration recently caused a public outcry. Pierre-Karl Péladeau, a charismatic leader who is closer to traditional nationalism than neo-nationalism, could awaken Quebec's underlying ethnic nationalism, but it is yet to be seen. Like in the rest of North America and Western Europe, political correctness is still very powerful and makes many adopt positions that clash with their own self-interests.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

The historians of these volumes want to have it both ways: an image of a European Canada that "decimated" the Natives through diseases, and an image of "First Nations" as co-partners in the creation of Canada's parliamentary institutions, legal system, schools and universities, churches, and modern economy. They want students to believe that the Natives were the "first peoples," followed by the French and English, as the next two "major groups," followed by the arrival of "non-British and non-French immigrants," as a fourth major group. This fourth group is portrayed as a multiracial lot, even though the statistics contradict any such picture.

The facts about the ethnic composition of immigrants, which this text cannot hide altogether, show that, at the time of Confederation, the English constituted about 60 percent of the population, the French 32 percent, and the remaining "non-British and non-French immigrants" about 8 percent. The non-British and non-French were all whites from Europe and the United States.

Show post
Ricardo Duchesne #fundie eurocanadian.ca

In complete subservience to the mandated idea that Canada must be identified as an immigrant nation of "diverse peoples", Bumsted interprets immigration between 1815 and 1867 as an experience that reinforced the diversification of Canada. He argues that the immigrants who came from the British Isles did not come from a "homogeneous anglophone group of people". Britain was a nation of diverse dialects, religions, and historic minorities, and this was manifested in the people who emigrated from the Isles to Canada.

Through this period of immigration, he observes, there was a strong Irish presence, ranging from 30 to 70 per cent of the total number of arrivals, many speaking "the Irish tongue", and, after the mid-1840s, "huge numbers of Catholics" were included among these Irish immigrants. There were also Scottish immigrants, amounting to 10-15 percent of the total throughout this period, almost all of them speaking Gaelic as a first language. Immigrants also originated from other "dialects and linguistic variants" and "distinctive regions" within England proper and "distinctive peoples in Wales" (p. 134).

Bumsted wants to imprint upon students the idea that this internal-English diversity was in line with the diversity Canada is currently experiencing, when peoples of very different races, totally different religions, and cultures are arriving in the millions. But one has to wonder if he believes, then, that all European nations, not just Canada, were uniquely diverse from the beginning insofar as they were not "homogeneous" but were populated by people with different dialects, regional customs and folkways, which was surely the case before the standardization of national languages and the full integration of regions through modern communications?

Take France, for example, late into the 1800s, regional dialects such as Breton, Gascon, Basque, Catalan, Flemish, Alsatian, and Corsican, prevailed across the nation, notwithstanding France's reputation as a nation centralized since the absolutist days of Louis XIV or the French Revolution. Different folkways, heroes, provincial loyalties superseded any notion of a homogeneous nation before 1900. Are we to conclude that France was also uniquely multicultural (and immigrant) from its origins?

Bumsted does not ponder over these questions. All academics are for diversity, and diversity academics avoid any question that threatens their mirages. The goal is to push the claim that Canada's was "uniquely diverse" from "its origins" in order to trick white students into accepting their eventual dispossession.

Yet the rationale underlying Bumsted's argument about England's inherent diversity is now standard fare among the promoters of immigration in both the settlers nations of America and Australia and the nations of Europe at large. Deceptive academics and politicians are exploiting the presence of different dialects, ethnic minorities, and different Christian denominations in the past to push onto unsuspecting students the notion that these nations have always been diversely shaped by migratory waves of peoples from all over the world. The sudden arrival of millions of Muslims and Africans to England, France, Italy, Sweden...is nothing to be alarmed about, so they tell naive white girls; it is consistent with the ethnic histories of these nations.

Show post
Cecil11 #fundie eurocanadian.ca

The anti-White establishment in Britain is now openly admitting it’s genocidal plans again the indigenous White Northern Irish people…but says it’s okay because it was all just a little “joke”

A recent news article had this to say

“Newly-declassified documents released at the National Archives in Kew, west London reveal how senior civil servants reacted enthusiastically to proposals in 1983 from a University of Reading
academic that a chunk of Ulster – between Coleraine and Londonderry – beturned into a new home for Hong Kong’s 5.5m citizens.”

Just to be clear, the current population of Northern Ireland today is1.8 million. If flooding 5.5 million non Whites into the Northern Irish peoples living space is not genocide as per the UN Genocide Convention then what is?

“Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” (Article 2c Genocide Convention)

The article continues:

“The proponents of the plan, which one Northern Ireland office official declared should be “taken seriously”, suggested the mass transportation of Cantonese speakers would have the dual advantage of boosting the Ulster economy while solving Britain’s dilemma over what to do with the millions of Hong Kong residents concerned they would have no future under Chinese rule.”

The anti-Whites were “concerned” that 5.5 million non-Whites would have “no future” in Hong Kong but it didn’t seem to bother them that generations of White children would have no future in their ancestral
homeland because it was turned non-White by traitors?

That’s pretty anti-White don’t you think?

It seems that some anti-Whites are trying to pass this plan off as a “joke”, or so they claim. After all wouldn’t you lie about a genocidal scheme if your cover was blown?! How pathetic are these anti-Whites anyway?

The thing is, if it was just a “joke” as they are trying to pass it off as then why are they still working on the replacement of the Northern Irish today, albeit at a slower place? You see, it can be argued the only reason they didn’t go ahead with this plan in 1983 is because the N Irish would have noticed something was wrong if 5.5 million non-Whites were suddenly transplanted into their homeland. Instead they are taking the slow route to replacing the Northern Irish, only this time it includes: Africans, Middle Easterners AND Asians.

Let’s not forget either that a prominent anti-White “politician” in Northern Ireland is Anna Lo, originally from Hong Kong; an ardent proponent of anti-White policy in Northern Ireland today.

Remember folks, White genocide is not just happening in one or two White countries. This plan is for ALL and Only White countries.

Show post
beaconhill #fundie eurocanadian.ca

No one here in North America wants to have anything to do whatsoever with Chinese culture, that land of poverty and overpopulation. An attempt to encroach on the Host culture will backfire. Look to Europe to see how they are repaid for their generosity and how a tipping point is emerging in the Right direction.

As for all of that wasted tax money on embedding foreign cultures into the Host or revisionist propaganda regarding the Head Tax, this all needs to be repaid back to Canada.

Yu knows very well, the Head Tax was completely fair and necessary to Canada's protection from foreign entities and an apology or any restitution is a trick and a theft upon Canada.

Show post
Steven #racist eurocanadian.ca

The immigration problem can be solved by abolishing nonwhite immigration and refugee intake. Just simply make it permanently illegal in order to combat white genocide. We can and should make all residential real estate prices that exceed 6000 man hours at minimum wage illegal to fight white genocide. We can outlaw rental rooms and apartments and we can outlaw all forms of land and real estate speculation and profiteering in order to get rid of all that stands in the way of the propagation of the white European peoples. We can outlaw all nonwhite and non Canadian real estate ownership and investment in Canada. Violation or not implementing these reforms is white genocide and for that the maximum penalty can be imposed on violators no matter how many there are. Real estate is place to live and may be to work. It is not an investment.
We must secure the existence of our people and ensure a future for white children

Show post
John Law #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Hasan craves whiteness and he resents himself for it, so he lashes at any white who shows the slightest sense of pride. Obviously, the Europeans are the greatest people on the planet, the ones who achieved the most, accomplished by white hetero males. As Charles Murray and Ricardo Duchesne have documented, 97% of the greatest accomplishments in the Sciences were by Europeans, 96% of the greatest philosophers were European, 95% (and this is a modest figure) of the greatest explorers, 100 percent of the classical composers — with similar percentages in all the fields of human knowledge and endeavor.

Show post
brutus maximus #fundie eurocanadian.ca

Of course these elites live in nice neighborhoods and have their kids in the best schools. While we the peasants should shut up and accept this god given gift called multiculturalism. Worse than multiculturalism is the newspeak term "diversity", including "transabled", LGBT and god knows what. Soon pedophiles or zoophiles will ask for special rights, it's coming. Ironic how two countries with a peaceful reputation like Sweden and Canada are becoming left wing hellholes.