Jerry,
We have not had the global type of " isolated Muslim" problems in Alberta that are being experienced in the rest of the world. Perhaps it is because Muslims integrate better into our conservative mindset, which holds that if you come here, you accept "our ways". Come here to work, buy a home for your family, live in peace, and speak your mind. If you want to shoot someone because you don't like what they say, go to jail or get out. Bottom line.
The cultural problems we have in Alberta mainly arise from Asian, First Nation and homegrown caucasion populations, in areas where individuals are densely cloistered together, and there are barriers to integrating into the mainstream of urban society, being the inability to speak English, inadequate education, mental and physical handicaps, lax criminal laws, and political inattention.
It is practical and logical that Countries, Provinces, or States, who are experiencing tumult from a particular culture, stop or limit the number of immigrants coming from those cultures until the problems are solved.
In Alberta, the eastern European immigrants have an excellent track record. They are typically honest, ethical, hardworking and compassionate people. We should be going over to those countries and actively recruiting immigrants. The continent of Africa is also a largely untapped resource for immigrant recruitment.
Marilyn Burns
Pryde <jpryde1@cogeco.ca> wrote:
The Hamilton Spectator
(2006-10-14)
Discover
Storm watch warning; A political debate in Europe over liberal, democratic values and immigration rights is about to hit Canada -- like a tsunami
If forewarned is
forearmed, Canadians would be wise to heed debates in Europe that could spell
the death of immigration and multiculturalism here if we
don't unite tout de suite to make it work.
For they are symptomatic of a so-called clash of cultures that, tsunami- like, is about to ram our shores.
Consider, first,
that yet another writer -- French philosophy professor Robert Redeker -- is
under police protection because of death threats made over
an article he wrote saying, "Islamic extremists of today are like the Communists
and Bolsheviks of the Cold War."
Then consider a
response from Toronto's Hamid Rizvi in a letter to the National Post, mocking
Redeker for requesting help from "responsible Muslims out
there who should without a doubt support me."
"Does he want
moderate Muslims to support him when he is insulting the basis of our religion?"
Rizvi asks. And in that we have the basis for our own clash
of culture, for Rizvi, missing the point of free speech entirely, suggests if
you don't agree with his views on the Koran (which many Muslims do not),
you're asking to be killed.
I despair.
Where's this going? To a hasty retreat by immigration's most fervent supporters
if we aren't prepared to resolve how best to protect freedoms
and human rights, including free speech, that are the hallmark of Western
culture.
Example?
Financial Times columnist Martin Wolf, a former economist with the World Bank
and supporter of immigration, recently argued Britain must -- for
economic and social reasons -- reconsider the huge numbers it takes in.
His social
reasons: the welfare of existing citizens has priority over those wanting in,
"political communities have a right to determine their own composition,"
and "the country must insist on the universality of its liberal values," he
says.
These arguments
are astonishing in liberal circles where any suggestion of selecting immigrant
groups based on their ability to integrate into a host country's
culture is considered racist.
Wolf, a former
stalwart of diversity, now argues his belief was based on "the possibly naive
assumption that a shared commitment to core common values --
to democracy, equality of men and women, a single, secular legal system and
freedom of expression -- would unite all citizens.
"When a small
number of citizens wish to murder a random collection of their fellows and a far
larger number sympathize with them, that belief begins to
look very foolish."
Some feminist
supporters of immigration now admit discomfort with immigrants who wear the
veil, demand sex-selective abortions, seek out back-street butchers
to genitally mutilate their daughters, engage in honour killings or import
impoverished, and hopefully docile, mail-order brides.
Which brings us
squarely to yet another European debate over the "veil," launched after British
MP Jack Straw acknowledged he requests that female Muslim
constituents meeting with him remove the niqab -- the veil that covers all but
the eyes -- because it's a barrier to good communication.
Please, let us
not pretend it is not. Muslim and non-Muslim women alike agree it creates a
barrier. That's its purpose. No, the veil debate isn't about
whether women can wear it, but over fears they will be forced to or face
consequences, like the Parisian Muslim girls who report they are targeted for
rape by Muslim men if they don't. Sadly, that infringement is gaining ground. In
a Maclean's excerpt from America Alone, Mark Steyn reports: "In Linz,
Austria, Muslims are demanding that all female teachers, believers or infidels,
wear head scarves in class."
But it's not just
about social issues. Increasingly, immigration is under attack on economic
grounds. Too much has been made of the effect it has on improving
an economy and too little on the effect it has on individual means, Wolf argues.
"China has a bigger economy than Switzerland. Most people would prefer
to be Swiss."
His arguments add
weight to a study Canada's C.D. Howe Institute recently released that found
increased immigration cannot save Canada from the economic
effects of an aging population unless it is prepared to take in 2.6 million
immigrants a year, compared to about 250,000 it now accepts.
No one of any
standing is suggesting a halt to immigration but a debate on Wolf's argument --
that the welfare of existing citizens should be considered
when policy is made -- might seem a good idea. To fear to tread there is
unforgivable and suicidal. We need to talk.
Dianne Rinehart is an Ottawa-based writer.
Dianne Rinehart