Canadians support sensible immigration policies

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
45
48
65
this may trigger our resident dhimmis but c'est dommage.



A new comprehensive immigration study has left many liberal pundits and journalists in the mainstream media disillusioned about one of their favourite Canadian myths.

It turns out, Canadians support sensible immigration policies.

Or, as its spun in a University of Toronto and McGill Institute study, Canadians are not as “tolerant” and “open” as we like to think.

The study, based on public opinion polling of 1,522 people in late January, found Canadian attitudes towards immigration are mostly positive or neutral.

However, it also found there is pushback against open border policies.

For instance, most Canadians prefer that newcomers are educated, speak basic English or French and have a job offer before being accepted for immigration.

We prefer skilled immigrants to unskilled.

About 70% of Canadians surveyed agreed or strongly agreed that “people who come to Canada should change their behaviour to be more like Canadians.”

In other words, Canadians want immigration policies focused on selecting the best candidates and ensuring newcomers integrate into our economy and communities. That’s common sense.

When it comes to refugees, Canadians prefer private over government sponsorship (perfectly reasonable, given that private refugees fare much better) and most Canadians believe we should only admit bona fide refugees fleeing real persecution.

None of this should be controversial. Canadians want sound immigration policies, and are rightly skeptical of mass migration without proper screening and vetting.


And yet, many in the media and even the report’s author interpreted this as indicating Canadians are not open-minded enough.

The study concludes we do “not appear to be an exceptionally tolerant public.”

An article in Maclean’s goes further in disparaging Canadians for not being “enlightened” enough on immigration issues, simply because we want to select the best people to come to Canada.

But the study also shows Canadians have an “impressive” knowledge of our own immigration system.

Most Canadians could correctly identify the basic criteria that we use to select newcomers.

It isn’t out of naivety, bigotry or close-mindedness that Canadians are skeptical about mass migration.

It’s based on our experiences — both at home and around the world.

Even a casual observer of Europe’s hands-off approach to selection and integration of newcomers can see the problems with unchecked migration from a war zone.

It’s common sense to be wary when ISIS terrorists boast about infiltrating the crowds of migrants with jihadists, and Europe is then hit by a string of deadly ISIS-connected or inspired attacks.

Or, closer to home, when the Trudeau Liberals scrapped a portion of the language test for citizenship, Liberal MP Gary Anandasangaree justified the decision by saying, “many Canadians may not be able to pass that test.”

When we shrug our shoulders about isolated communities and second-generation Canadians without language skills, it doesn’t lend confidence to the idea that newcomers are integrating and adjusting to life in Canada.

Despite the handwringing, Canadians are a tolerant and welcoming bunch.

But there are limits to our generosity, and a rightly-held skepticism towards open border policies like those often championed by our prime minister.

Canadians are not naïve. We can tell the difference between good immigration policies — ones that focus on selecting skilled individuals who want to embrace the Canadian way of life — and reckless policies based on reactionary politicking and virtue signaling.

When it comes to sound immigration policies, Canadians are right; it’s elites in media and politics that are off base and misguided.



Canadians are smart about immigration | MALCOLM | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto

 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Here is a partial list of immigrants who would have failed a language test had it been applied prior to the 231st century.

Ukrainians
Germans
Italians
French
Portuguese
Greeks
Spanish
Poles
Rumanians
Hungarians
Czechs


In other words pretty much every nation in Europe. In my estimation that would have left Canada with only about half its current population.

So far as mass migration is concerned what do you call the several million immigrants who came to Canada prior to World War I? Considering Canada's population was only five million in 1900 it had a much greater impact than it would have had today.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
I'd say let's adopt a more open border but let's also allow those Whites who want to do so organize White student unions and private White gated communities with their own money if they want to do so. I won't be joining any of them but at least they would have a place to retreat to where they could feel comforted in their fears.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
I'd say let's adopt a more open border but let's also allow those Whites who want to do so organize White student unions and private White gated communities with their own money if they want to do so. I won't be joining any of them but at least they would have a place to retreat to where they could feel comforted in their fears.

Ghettoization of any group does not work. When one group cuts itself off from society for whatever reason all of society suffers.
 

Danbones

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 23, 2015
24,505
2,197
113
helps globalist nazis like george soros and the clintons rape your country

Ghettoization of any group does not work. When one group cuts itself off from society for whatever reason all of society suffers.

you should tell Israel and the pope too, and also mexico
(southern border where the refugees come IN)
they like walls well enough
..and if Israel likes walls, so should you

the known world was globalized in 1177 BC and it sure didn't help them when their civilization completely collapsed because they had no regional Independences.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRcu-ysocX4&t=3398s
1177 BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed (Eric Cline, PhD)
a real professor for you lefties to be afraid of
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Ghettoization of any group does not work. When one group cuts itself off from society for whatever reason all of society suffers.

Migration controls are the most extreme form if forced 'ghettoization. At least allowing Whites to self-srgregate would be voluntary. Plus, the only Whites who would choose to self-srgregate would be White nationalists and other like-minded people
Such self-srgregate on is happening already through suburban migration. With open borders though, they could self-srgregate only so far and so in reality would be less ghettoized than they are now. Allowing them to segregate more would be mère partial compensation for more open borders.

Why? To what end?

To promote more economic efficiency and friendlier international relations among many other reasons.

For those who think we'd be flooded by hordes, just look at the example within Canada. Most French Canadians stay in Quebec and most Inuit in Nunavut in spite of open borders. Quite often, a language is a greater impedent to migration than any sicially-engineered artificial border.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
I'd say let's adopt a more open border but let's also allow those Whites who want to do so organize White student unions and private White gated communities with their own money if they want to do so. I won't be joining any of them but at least they would have a place to retreat to where they could feel comforted in their fears.

That is exactly the problem we have now. The only immigrants we should let in must be of use to the country. Educated and willing to be Canadians.
 

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
10,607
5,250
113
Olympus Mons
Here is a partial list of immigrants who would have failed a language test had it been applied prior to the 231st century.

Ukrainians
Germans
Italians
French
Portuguese
Greeks
Spanish
Poles
Rumanians
Hungarians
Czechs


In other words pretty much every nation in Europe. In my estimation that would have left Canada with only about half its current population.

So far as mass migration is concerned what do you call the several million immigrants who came to Canada prior to World War I? Considering Canada's population was only five million in 1900 it had a much greater impact than it would have had today.
I'll give you one guess as to what the difference is between then and now.

To promote more economic efficiency and friendlier international relations among many other reasons.
Oh yeah, the whole open border concept is working so well in Europe. Welfare states with open borders is an incredibly stupid idea.
 

Remington1

Council Member
Jan 30, 2016
1,469
1
36
I'd say let's adopt a more open border but let's also allow those Whites who want to do so organize White student unions and private White gated communities with their own money if they want to do so. I won't be joining any of them but at least they would have a place to retreat to where they could feel comforted in their fears.
Which country are you referring too BTW where whites would need to hide? Japan? Morocco? Congo? Syria? China? Wonder where whites people would have to go to hide, certainly not Canada, USA, France, England perhaps?
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
6
36
That is exactly the problem we have now. The only immigrants we should let in must be of use to the country. Educated and willing to be Canadians.

Should we start pitching out some of the native born ones of any ethicity who aren't?
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Which country are you referring too BTW where whites would need to hide? Japan? Morocco? Congo? Syria? China? Wonder where whites people would have to go to hide, certainly not Canada, USA, France, England perhaps?

I was referring to their irrational fears of foreigners fed by prejudice.

I'll give you one guess as to what the difference is between then and now.


Oh yeah, the whole open border concept is working so well in Europe. Welfare states with open borders is an incredibly stupid idea.

When did I ever mention the welfare state? Open borders actually work well in Svalbard. The difference though is that they merely involve a visa-free zone where people can work, do business, etc without a visa but do not get to enjoy social assistance. As a result, you still need to respect the local laws and be financially self-supporting to remain there, otherwise you will be deported.

My concept of open borders is not a welcoming welfare state but rather just making Canada a visa-free zone for those who want to come here to work, just like in Svalbard. Statistically, there have been more terrorist acts in Canada than in Svalbard by far. Plus, if you look it up, Norwegians, Russians, and even at least one Thai and one Persian live or lived in Svalbard, so it is at least somewhat multicultural and seems to work well.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
helps globalist nazis like george soros and the clintons rape your country



you should tell Israel and the pope too, and also mexico
(southern border where the refugees come IN)
they like walls well enough
..and if Israel likes walls, so should you

the known world was globalized in 1177 BC and it sure didn't help them when their civilization completely collapsed because they had no regional Independences.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRcu-ysocX4&t=3398s
1177 BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed (Eric Cline, PhD)
a real professor for you lefties to be afraid of

Somehow I don't think ancient history has any bearing on the modern world. Do you actually know the background of the Sea Peoples and why they suddenly began to invade other nations? And referring to the world as globalized in 1177 BC is completely inaccurate. Hell, the Egyptians had little or no knowledge of anyone beyond the Mediterranean Basin. That means they did not know about China, India, or Northern Europe.

But I am glad that the part of your post about Israel shows agreement with my views. And please spare me your racist BS about the Clintons and the Jews.