burkas and the "cultural common good"

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65


J.J. McCullough ‏@JJ_McCullough

My latest column about burkas and the "cultural common good"



http://www.jjmccullough.com/index.php/2015/03/13/on-immigration-tories-have-facts-and-the-public-on-their-side/ …


We are indisputably going through a phase of dark viciousness in Canadian politics at the moment, much of it rooted in the hysterical, Pavlovian thrashing that occurs whenever the realities of immigration are acknowledged even slightly critically.

Progressives are churning out sombre columns and somewhat less sombre social media campaigns in response to Prime Minister Harper’s ongoing efforts to ban burka-clad immigrants from reciting the citizenship oath, and related claims that this costume is “anti-women.” The plight of a Pakistani immigrant who had trouble at a Quebec courtroom on account of her headscarf — something Harper had nothing to do with, for whoever cares — is usually shoehorned into this same narrative of creeping “Islamophobia,” an evil that also featured prominently in Justin Trudeau’s big “liberty” speech earlier this week.

Progressive thought leaders see only bigotry and fear animating such distaste, but it is not irrational to be concerned about women wearing burkas in this country. Tenting up women as radioactively shameful or seductive creatures is a profoundly alien custom from a particularly regressive part of the planet, and one that will undermine Canada’s hereto understood norms of openness, civility, dignity, and equality if permitted to popularize. Whatever we think of veil-wearing as a case study in constitutional rights, it’s cultural consequences are undeniably corrosive, but the left has long ago abandoned interest in promoting the cultural common good in favor of identity politics — in which the uninhibited promotion and protection of diverse identities is the only principle worth defending.

Even the Conservative Party appears unable to operate entirely outside this intellectual lockbox. In an interview with Maclean’s the day after the Trudeau speech, Minister Kenney attempted damage control on the Islamophobe front by noting that his government has imported nearly 300,000 Muslim immigrants since coming to power. Who exactly, is such a statement intended to inspire, beyond other members of the elite who value the endless diversification of Canada as a positive unto itself? Polls suggest most of us think the country’s diverse enough already.

Meanwhile, New Brunswick MP John Williamson has been subject to a whole other demonization campaign for publicly musing that “it makes no sense to pay ‘whities’ to stay home while we bring in brown people to work in these jobs” — with “these jobs” being those of the traditional working-class.

In shrieking down such comments as “racist,” Williamson’s critics have consciously turned off their brains in a very particular way, since the (literally) colorful terms employed by the MP are well-worn phrases with highly appropriate meaning in the context in which he used them.

“Brown people” is an intentionally condescending turn of phrase used mostly by progressives to mock what they imagine to be paranoid bigots. Just the other day, I was listening to Jesse Brown’s Canadaland podcast, for instance, and his impeccably progressive guest made fun of the idea, supposedly deeply held by conservatives, that “only brown people are terrorists.” Brown, in this case, is a bland adjective, chosen to emphasize the inconsequential nature of race. For this reason, when someone speaks of “brown people,” they are invariably speaking of victims, or subjects of unreasonable scorn and suspicion.

“Whitey,” in contrast, is a phrase never used anything but pejoratively, and has its origins in the ultrajudgmental rhetoric of black power militants in the 1960s (my favorite example being Gil Scott-Heron’s wonderfully snarky poem: “Whitey on the Moon”). The whites MP Williamson was describing were undeniably of the “trash” variety — entitled slugs content to sit back and collect EI while the state imports low wage migrants from the third world to perform labor considered beneath caucasian standards.

The fact that it’s increasingly rare to see white people working menial minimum wage jobs in Canada’s big cities is a distressing cultural phenomena, and one worth bluntly observing. Yet elite groupthink demands we describe immigration as presenting no moral challenges whatsoever; their mantra cries diversity uber alles.

Immigration in Canada is often spoken of as a force of nature, like the wind or rain, for which the proper reaction is endurance without complaint. But of course immigration is simply a government program like taxes or CRTC regulations, and something that can and should bend to whatever needs and priorities the voting public deems appropriate.

The voting public, for its part, has expressed rather clear opinions on the matter, and the Harper government, in its own imperfect way, is heeding their wishes better than the press or opposition.

At that, many are enraged.


Tories trying to protect the cultural common good » J.J. McCullough » Archive
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
Harper is right to say Islam is anti women.

its a woman's duty to obey in Islam. Failure to do so is against Gods rule.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Here are my thoughts on the burka and niqab. As a woman, I look at other women covering themselves in an extreme manner (not to be confused with modesty) and I cringe. I look, with albeit western eyes, as someone who can go to school, hold a job, drive a car and own property with or without a man that I might choose to have at my side, and a part of me wants to give them freedom.

Then I look at all the restrictions, can't wear, shouldn't wear, and I can't help but feel that telling her what she can't wear is equally as bad as telling her what she can or that she has to. So, for me, there is no easy answer.

But yes, things like testifying in open court, passport pictures, driving and licensing, and yes very important oaths like Citizenship, it's not oppressive to require removal of the veil. Personally I don't get the whole hijab in the Quebec court thing, I think it's more nit picking than anything else. But maybe that's just me.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Then I look at all the restrictions, can't wear, shouldn't wear, and I can't help but feel that telling her what she can't wear is equally as bad as telling her what she can or that she has to. So, for me, there is no easy answer.
Day to day life, wear what you want.

Voting, Court Proceedings, Oaths, simply slip the veil off, discretely, identify oneself, do what you have to do, slip it back on, move on.

I really don't see the issue. Other than the Usual Suspects and their need to fabricate offence.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
Day to day life, wear what you want.

Voting, Court Proceedings, Oaths, simply slip the veil off, discretely, identify oneself, do what you have to do, slip it back on, move on.

I really don't see the issue. Other than the Usual Suspects and their need to fabricate offence.

Exactly. Religious, cultural, don't care.

There should only ever be a minimum of times where the rules or laws of the land will or may infringe upon our freedoms, but they will happen and no one should be exempt from that.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Exactly. Religious, cultural, don't care.

There should only ever be a minimum of times where the rules or laws of the land will or may infringe upon our freedoms, but they will happen and no one should be exempt from that.
Bingo.

We only run into problems when politicians aim for cheap shots, attention wh-ores need attention, the Usual Suspects need to feel superior, and fools feel the need to say something. The latter two are interchangeable, btw.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
I have zero problem with banning the burqa....if we don't there will never be a choice.

As for immigration policies with numbers, I don't have an opinion on it at this point.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
Here are my thoughts on the burka and niqab. As a woman, I look at other women covering themselves in an extreme manner (not to be confused with modesty) and I cringe. I look, with albeit western eyes, as someone who can go to school, hold a job, drive a car and own property with or without a man that I might choose to have at my side, and a part of me wants to give them freedom.

Then I look at all the restrictions, can't wear, shouldn't wear, and I can't help but feel that telling her what she can't wear is equally as bad as telling her what she can or that she has to. So, for me, there is no easy answer.

But yes, things like testifying in open court, passport pictures, driving and licensing, and yes very important oaths like Citizenship, it's not oppressive to require removal of the veil. Personally I don't get the whole hijab in the Quebec court thing, I think it's more nit picking than anything else. But maybe that's just me.

The wrench in the machine here is that this issue was/is restricted to one event, that being the immigration swearing-in.

Only the Liberals via Trudeau and Flossy are working feverishly to market this one event as the gvt's demand that it invade every aspect of life.

My opinion is that Justine is feeling less and less relevant as everyday goes by and absolutely needs an issue to get him in the headlines in a manner that doesn't highlight his stupidity.

What becomes an also interesting element is that (to my knowledge) until this lady is sworn-in and takes the oath, she is not a citizen, therefore has no formal rights under Canadian law to start flapping her gums in this manner.

I say, send this issue through a very legnthy court process and while it is going on, she can wait patiently back in the nation that she is wanting to leave... We'll see exactly what kind of degree of importance that she applies to this when she has to actually put her money where her mouth is
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
I have zero problem with banning the burqa....if we don't there will never be a choice.

Except the choice to wear one, as unfathomable as may be for you and I to contemplate. I have a real problem telling any one, man or woman, what they can't wear, ever. Outside of reasonable restrictions, safety and pertinent legal reasons, as I've already stated of course.

The wrench in the machine here is that this issue was/is restricted to one event, that being the immigration swearing-in.

It is, and I come down on the side that taking such an important oath to be one of the restrictions I can support.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
The wrench in the machine here is that this issue was/is restricted to one event, that being the immigration swearing-in.

Only the Liberals via Trudeau and Flossy are working feverishly to market this one event as the gvt's demand that it invade every aspect of life.

My opinion is that Justine is feeling less and less relevant as everyday goes by and absolutely needs an issue to get him in the headlines in a manner that doesn't highlight his stupidity.

What becomes an also interesting element is that (to my knowledge) until this lady is sworn-in and takes the oath, she is not a citizen, therefore has no formal rights under Canadian law to start flapping her gums in this manner.

I say, send this issue through a very legnthy court process and while it is going on, she can wait patiently back in the nation that she is wanting to leave... We'll see exactly what kind of degree of importance that she applies to this when she has to actually put her money where her mouth is
Not to forget the federal judge's decision that the government wants the SCOC to overturn ....they have a small window of time to appeal the judge's decision....
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
Except the choice to wear one, as unfathomable as may be for you and I to contemplate. I have a real problem telling any one, man or woman, what they can't wear, ever. Outside of reasonable restrictions, safety and pertinent legal reasons, as I've already stated of course.
no sorry I will never agree it can be a choice that a free woman would make ever

it's not unfathomable for me it's impossible.

I have no problem telling a man his wife isn't wear a burqa in Canada.
I have no problem telling a woman she isn't wearing a burqa in Canada.

zero problem

it will never be safe to walk down the street in a burqa; they are a head to toe covering with little allowance for sight or tangling therefore they are safety hazard period..here's a thought, if the wife wears one, buddy does too then yeah maybe I can get on board with examining the possibility

no different than freeing the slaves...we unchained them, we can unburqa our women
hijab I have no problem with, well actually I do but some women embrace the hijab once they've found allah, it isn't a tent so it's fine I guess, at least I wouldn't outlaw it's use
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
See and I see it as, although the exact opposite, being essentially the same thing. Instead of a husband or community telling her what she can or can't do, you're telling her what she can or can't do. How is this different? Because one reflects your values and the other doesn't? At what point in either extreme does her choice become a factor and shouldn't her choice be the deciding factor?

Nobody is going to tell me what I can or can't do, what choices I can make, least of all about how I dress. I'm sure no one would be able to tell you the same thing.
 

Spade

Ace Poster
Nov 18, 2008
12,822
49
48
9
Aether Island
Harper is right to say Islam is anti women.

its a woman's duty to obey in Islam. Failure to do so is against Gods rule.

In Xianity, too.
There ought to be a rally.
"Free at last! Free at last! Thank Gawd Almighty, free at last!"

Will someone make me a sand witch?
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
See and I see it as, although the exact opposite, being essentially the same thing. Instead of a husband or community telling her what she can or can't do, you're telling her what she can or can't do. How is this different? Because one reflects your values and the other doesn't? At what point in either extreme does her choice become a factor and shouldn't her choice be the deciding factor?

Nobody is going to tell me what I can or can't do, what choices I can make, least of all about how I dress. I'm sure no one would be able to tell you the same thing.

this isn't about you, you're Canadian, it isn't about me, I'm Canadian, it's about women in Canada who are immigrants and for the most part isolated from any type of protection and tied to their former culture, way of life and indoctrination

it becomes a choice when she is free from the yoke and not before then

it becomes a choice when our country can protect her from her spouse...we cannot yet do that effectively

it becomes a choice when she loses her fear and we aren't even three steps into any of that yet

it becomes a choice when everyone who thinks she has a choice understands that she doesn't but that some would like to, others aren't even at that point yet

I know ONE muslim woman who has chosen to wear a veil...one, her spouse couldn't care less because he isn't convinced that Allah will ban them from heaven if they don't comply, he doesn't feel it's his job to keep her in line, he doesn't live in fear but many, many men and women do...not much different than some Christians who believe it is their job to convince you that if you don't accept Christ that you are going straight to hell...once one embraces a belief system such as that, all choice vanishes.

I am passionate about this for many many reasons...

for me it's not just an intellectual exercise
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
3
36
London, Ontario
What? No pickles?

Geeus, it's so hard to find good mods these days.

You need to ask yourself, just how badly do I really want a pickle. ;)

this isn't about you, you're Canadian, it isn't about me, I'm Canadian, it's about women in Canada who are immigrants and for the most part isolated from any type of protection and tied to their former culture, way of life and indoctrination

it becomes a choice when she is free from the yoke and not before then

it becomes a choice when our country can protect her from her spouse...we cannot yet do that effectively

it becomes a choice when she loses her fear and we aren't even three steps into any of that yet

it becomes a choice when everyone who thinks she has a choice understands that she doesn't but that some would like to, others aren't even at that point yet

I know ONE muslim woman who has chosen to wear a veil...one, her spouse couldn't care less because he isn't convinced that Allah will ban them from heaven if they don't comply, he doesn't feel it's his job to keep her in line, he doesn't live in fear but many, many men and women do...not much different than some Christians who believe it is their job to convince you that if you don't accept Christ that you are going straight to hell...once one embraces a belief system such as that, all choice vanishes.

I am passionate about this for many many reasons...

for me it's not just an intellectual exercise

I get you're passionate about it, and I'm not trying to undermine or dissuade that at all. And it's more than just an intellectual exercise for me as well. And I've known Muslim women who've come down on both sides of the debate themselves. But I still keep coming back to "what right do I have to say what she can and cannot choose". Likewise I have no right to tell anyone when they're actually making a choice or not. I get where you're coming from, believe me I do, but there is a line where I feel it becomes invasive. On principal.