Glad the Line is publishing this. There aren’t many things that I can put my hand over my heart and say that I truly believe that Canada is better than every other country in the world — but “multiculturalism that works” is one of them. I sometimes call it the Canadian Multicultural Miracle. We do immigration and integration at the scale/rate we do, better than anyone else. We should celebrate this more.
(Aside, this is the one thing I will never forgive Justin Trudeau for: Spiking the immigration rates so high that it broke our ability to integrate and house everyone. And maybe permanently breaking the immigration consensus and the Canadian Multicultural Miracle. We already took immigrants at 3x the rate the U.S. does, with better outcomes, but we had to go and jack the rates to 10x the U.S. Just a damn tragedy.)
If that "success" of multiculturalism holds through any significant upheaval or material hardship that requires people to put the group before themselves, maybe then it's worth bragging about. Until then, I don't think people living side-by-side (not necessarily together) in relatively good economic times with little incident--happy with the deal they get as individuals--means we're not eating away at social resources and a reserve of trust we didn't recognize we ever had.
Thank you for an excellent illustration of the cumulative effects of public policy meant to facilitate greater good. Greater good is quantifiable and it’s important to do so in the face of 4 of 10 immigration questions on Alberta’s October referendum, and timely because Premier Smith recently implored Albertans to vote yes to restrictions on immigrant support. Albeit Alphonso Davies and his teammates are outlier examples of what’s possible, I’m sure most ‘newcomer to citizenship’ family stories could be framed in this way of cumulative effects of public policy that facilitate successful newcomer integration into Canada. We are not survival of only the ‘fittest’ that is the US melting pot approach.
I'm not sure why this has to be framed as an either/or choice. The Humboldt Broncos tragedy has nothing to do with Canada's men's soccer team. We can honour the memory of those young men and still celebrate one of the greatest achievements in Canadian soccer history.
The Broncos, and many other Canadian deaths, are a direct consequence of mass immigration. Which has bad consequences that vastly outweigh the benefit of a better national soccer team.
The Humboldt Broncos tragedy was exactly that—a tragedy. It was not an act of hatred or violence, and it wasn't caused by immigration. It was a catastrophic traffic accident caused by one man's terrible mistake.
The driver accepted responsibility, served his prison sentence, and has expressed profound remorse from the beginning. You can believe his driving was negligent while also believing that someone who has accepted responsibility and paid his debt should not face perpetual punishment. I strongly disagree the CBSA's decision to seek deportation for this man.
Reasonable people can disagree about immigration policy—I certainly think Canada needs to manage immigration far better than it has in recent years. But using the deaths of the Humboldt Broncos to argue that immigrants as a group are responsible for the tragedy is neither fair nor accurate. That's not justice, and it's not the Canada I want to live in.
Mass immigration has brought a vast number of incompetent and corruptly licensed truck drivers into Canada. The driver who killed the Broncos was one of them. Without mass immigration, those deaths would not have happened.
At this point you're no longer analyzing evidence—you're fitting every tragedy into a worldview you've already decided is true.
An applied epistemologist follows the evidence wherever it leads. An ideologue starts with the conclusion and works backward. Your comments suggest the latter.
But you are correct though, based on your further comments, I can confidently advise that your first statement was "racist".
I would add, You describe yourself as an "Applied Epistemologist," yet you're drawing a sweeping causal conclusion from a single tragic event without demonstrating the connection. That's not applied epistemology; it's simply asserting a conclusion.
To enumerate all the bad consequences of mass immigration would take a lot of time. The deaths of the Broncos is merely one such consequence. But one which, in my opinion, by itself outweighs the benefits of a better national soccer team. YMMV
Aftab...."Hockey will always be the headline sport here, but Canada’s win over Qatar was, arguably, one of this country’s finest international sporting achievements, on par with the men’s hockey gold medal at the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics." This is a long stretch for sure!
An average of 16.6 million Canadians watched the 2010 men's gold medal hockey game between Canada and the U.S., making it the most-watched television broadcast in Canadian history. The viewership peaked at 26.5 million, meaning roughly 80% of the entire Canadian population tuned in to watch at least some part of the game.
To compare that with a victory of Qatar in the group stage of the World Cup disqualifies you as a commentator.
And that game in 2010 was not the most important game in Canadian history. If you have to ask what was, you were not alive then.
I remain thoroughly disinterested in sports, but I do love the idea that Canada is succeeding at something we barely even engaged in before because the dynamism of our population made it possible.
Despite how immigration has been mismanaged in recent years, and despite it being a bit unfashionable to say so, I still really do feel that our diversity is a true strength. We just forgot that diversity works best when it's paired with competence.
Hopefully we internalize that this can apply to much more, and start doing more things differently, making newer and better things instead of relying too much on past strengths that no longer drive us forward. We have so much potential to grow and change.
Immigrants playing a sport that's primarily popular among immigrants is not reminding Canada of itself, surely. People will have to judge whether they like the changes immigration brings on its own merits (and this one at least is a positive contribution), but it doesn't help Canada remember itself to pretend like it has a history than started in WII (or worse, 1988) either.
Refugees on average are not net contributors, which is fine because this is not the purpose of asylum. This should of course not take away from any individual's success in difficult circumstances. But individual success should also not convince us to blur the lines between asylum as a shared humanitarian obligation and economic immigration as a benefit to us, or ignore that so many attempt to use asylum as a backdoor to economic immigration that our current asylum system might as well be a regular immigration stream that happens to admit a few refugees.
I enjoyed reading this article because it reminds us that Canada has benefited enormously from immigration and multiculturalism. I live in one of the most diverse parts of Mississauga, and my family and I have been enriched by getting to know people from so many different cultures. I truly believe Canada is a stronger and richer country because of that diversity.
At the same time, I think there is an important part of this discussion that cannot be ignored. During Justin Trudeau's time in office, the federal government increased immigration levels faster than our housing, health care, schools, and other essential services could keep pace. In doing so, it unintentionally damaged the broad public support that Canadians had long shown for immigration and multiculturalism.
Supporting immigration and expecting it to be well managed are not contradictory positions. In fact, they go hand in hand. If we want Canadians to continue embracing immigration, we must ensure that newcomers have a realistic opportunity to succeed and that our infrastructure and public services can support both new arrivals and those already living here. Responsible immigration policy should strengthen public confidence, not erode it.
As for the soccer, this team fills me with incredible pride. I've followed Canada's men's national team since their first World Cup in Mexico in 1986, when players like Bob Lenarduzzi, Dale Mitchell, Paul Dolan, and Igor Vrablic wore the maple leaf. I've attended two World Cups and watched countless Canadian friendlies over the past four decades. I remember the disappointment of so many near misses, which makes this moment all the more meaningful.
Watching Canada score its first-ever men's World Cup goal in Qatar four years ago was unforgettable. Seeing this team now earn its first World Cup victory, draw another match, and advance to the knockout stage feels like a dream come true. This team reflects the very best of Canada, not simply because of its diversity, but because of its talent, resilience, hard work, and determination. Canada is behind this team, and I don't think Canadians could be prouder.
Glad the Line is publishing this. There aren’t many things that I can put my hand over my heart and say that I truly believe that Canada is better than every other country in the world — but “multiculturalism that works” is one of them. I sometimes call it the Canadian Multicultural Miracle. We do immigration and integration at the scale/rate we do, better than anyone else. We should celebrate this more.
(Aside, this is the one thing I will never forgive Justin Trudeau for: Spiking the immigration rates so high that it broke our ability to integrate and house everyone. And maybe permanently breaking the immigration consensus and the Canadian Multicultural Miracle. We already took immigrants at 3x the rate the U.S. does, with better outcomes, but we had to go and jack the rates to 10x the U.S. Just a damn tragedy.)
If that "success" of multiculturalism holds through any significant upheaval or material hardship that requires people to put the group before themselves, maybe then it's worth bragging about. Until then, I don't think people living side-by-side (not necessarily together) in relatively good economic times with little incident--happy with the deal they get as individuals--means we're not eating away at social resources and a reserve of trust we didn't recognize we ever had.
Thank you for an excellent illustration of the cumulative effects of public policy meant to facilitate greater good. Greater good is quantifiable and it’s important to do so in the face of 4 of 10 immigration questions on Alberta’s October referendum, and timely because Premier Smith recently implored Albertans to vote yes to restrictions on immigrant support. Albeit Alphonso Davies and his teammates are outlier examples of what’s possible, I’m sure most ‘newcomer to citizenship’ family stories could be framed in this way of cumulative effects of public policy that facilitate successful newcomer integration into Canada. We are not survival of only the ‘fittest’ that is the US melting pot approach.
I'd rather have a terrible soccer team but have the Humboldt Broncos still alive. But maybe that's racist.
I'm not sure why this has to be framed as an either/or choice. The Humboldt Broncos tragedy has nothing to do with Canada's men's soccer team. We can honour the memory of those young men and still celebrate one of the greatest achievements in Canadian soccer history.
The Broncos, and many other Canadian deaths, are a direct consequence of mass immigration. Which has bad consequences that vastly outweigh the benefit of a better national soccer team.
The Humboldt Broncos tragedy was exactly that—a tragedy. It was not an act of hatred or violence, and it wasn't caused by immigration. It was a catastrophic traffic accident caused by one man's terrible mistake.
The driver accepted responsibility, served his prison sentence, and has expressed profound remorse from the beginning. You can believe his driving was negligent while also believing that someone who has accepted responsibility and paid his debt should not face perpetual punishment. I strongly disagree the CBSA's decision to seek deportation for this man.
Reasonable people can disagree about immigration policy—I certainly think Canada needs to manage immigration far better than it has in recent years. But using the deaths of the Humboldt Broncos to argue that immigrants as a group are responsible for the tragedy is neither fair nor accurate. That's not justice, and it's not the Canada I want to live in.
Mass immigration has brought a vast number of incompetent and corruptly licensed truck drivers into Canada. The driver who killed the Broncos was one of them. Without mass immigration, those deaths would not have happened.
At this point you're no longer analyzing evidence—you're fitting every tragedy into a worldview you've already decided is true.
An applied epistemologist follows the evidence wherever it leads. An ideologue starts with the conclusion and works backward. Your comments suggest the latter.
But you are correct though, based on your further comments, I can confidently advise that your first statement was "racist".
I would add, You describe yourself as an "Applied Epistemologist," yet you're drawing a sweeping causal conclusion from a single tragic event without demonstrating the connection. That's not applied epistemology; it's simply asserting a conclusion.
To enumerate all the bad consequences of mass immigration would take a lot of time. The deaths of the Broncos is merely one such consequence. But one which, in my opinion, by itself outweighs the benefits of a better national soccer team. YMMV
Aftab...."Hockey will always be the headline sport here, but Canada’s win over Qatar was, arguably, one of this country’s finest international sporting achievements, on par with the men’s hockey gold medal at the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics." This is a long stretch for sure!
The win over Qatar was great! Writing it is on par with the 2010 hockey gold medal win is pretty divorced from reality, in my estimation.
An average of 16.6 million Canadians watched the 2010 men's gold medal hockey game between Canada and the U.S., making it the most-watched television broadcast in Canadian history. The viewership peaked at 26.5 million, meaning roughly 80% of the entire Canadian population tuned in to watch at least some part of the game.
To compare that with a victory of Qatar in the group stage of the World Cup disqualifies you as a commentator.
And that game in 2010 was not the most important game in Canadian history. If you have to ask what was, you were not alive then.
I remain thoroughly disinterested in sports, but I do love the idea that Canada is succeeding at something we barely even engaged in before because the dynamism of our population made it possible.
Despite how immigration has been mismanaged in recent years, and despite it being a bit unfashionable to say so, I still really do feel that our diversity is a true strength. We just forgot that diversity works best when it's paired with competence.
Hopefully we internalize that this can apply to much more, and start doing more things differently, making newer and better things instead of relying too much on past strengths that no longer drive us forward. We have so much potential to grow and change.
Immigrants playing a sport that's primarily popular among immigrants is not reminding Canada of itself, surely. People will have to judge whether they like the changes immigration brings on its own merits (and this one at least is a positive contribution), but it doesn't help Canada remember itself to pretend like it has a history than started in WII (or worse, 1988) either.
Refugees on average are not net contributors, which is fine because this is not the purpose of asylum. This should of course not take away from any individual's success in difficult circumstances. But individual success should also not convince us to blur the lines between asylum as a shared humanitarian obligation and economic immigration as a benefit to us, or ignore that so many attempt to use asylum as a backdoor to economic immigration that our current asylum system might as well be a regular immigration stream that happens to admit a few refugees.
I enjoyed reading this article because it reminds us that Canada has benefited enormously from immigration and multiculturalism. I live in one of the most diverse parts of Mississauga, and my family and I have been enriched by getting to know people from so many different cultures. I truly believe Canada is a stronger and richer country because of that diversity.
At the same time, I think there is an important part of this discussion that cannot be ignored. During Justin Trudeau's time in office, the federal government increased immigration levels faster than our housing, health care, schools, and other essential services could keep pace. In doing so, it unintentionally damaged the broad public support that Canadians had long shown for immigration and multiculturalism.
Supporting immigration and expecting it to be well managed are not contradictory positions. In fact, they go hand in hand. If we want Canadians to continue embracing immigration, we must ensure that newcomers have a realistic opportunity to succeed and that our infrastructure and public services can support both new arrivals and those already living here. Responsible immigration policy should strengthen public confidence, not erode it.
As for the soccer, this team fills me with incredible pride. I've followed Canada's men's national team since their first World Cup in Mexico in 1986, when players like Bob Lenarduzzi, Dale Mitchell, Paul Dolan, and Igor Vrablic wore the maple leaf. I've attended two World Cups and watched countless Canadian friendlies over the past four decades. I remember the disappointment of so many near misses, which makes this moment all the more meaningful.
Watching Canada score its first-ever men's World Cup goal in Qatar four years ago was unforgettable. Seeing this team now earn its first World Cup victory, draw another match, and advance to the knockout stage feels like a dream come true. This team reflects the very best of Canada, not simply because of its diversity, but because of its talent, resilience, hard work, and determination. Canada is behind this team, and I don't think Canadians could be prouder.