Blame Canada for… Part 2: Europe

Much like Canada is responsible for the fall of Africa, Canada should also be blamed for the fall of Europe.

Europe is in shambles. From the rape epidemic, to terrorism, to welfare leeching, Europe is being rocked to its very core by a group of people who do not share European values, and are entirely antithetical to the European way of life.


No. No. Fuck Off. No.

Now, the way that the European media and politicians have dealt with this situation is by ignoring it and covering it up. That is perhaps the easiest thing to do, they simply stick their head in the sand. The far right, in Europe and elsewhere, get closer to the truth. They acknowledge that there are severe issues, and they see who it is that’s causing the problems. But they only see one solution to the problem: The complete expulsion of the offending groups. I will admit that this would certainly work, but I would also argue that, barring some entirely unforeseeable sea-change in public opinion, this is not a solution that will be carried out any time soon. So what can be done?

Well, as a percentage of the population, Poland has around as many Muslims as Finland. Switzerland has around as many Muslims as the UK. And Singapore has a greater Muslim percentage of their population than Sweden, Germany, and Denmark combined. Why are Poland, Switzerland, and Singapore so safe compared to countries with similar Muslim populations?

I argue that the difference is the fact that Poland, Switzerland, and Singapore have not been infected by Canada.

Multiculturalism has been a part of Canada since its founding. Don’t confuse the kind of multiculturalism Canada has now with the one we started with. As I have argued previously, Canadian multiculturalism was originally a matter of survival. The English got along with the French and the Natives because, occasionally, each group needed the others in order to survive. You didn’t fight the guy down the street for being a papist because he might be the guy with the last spare blanket when winter rolls around. Unlike America’s Melting Pot, the groups in Canada were separate, and there was little insistence that any group should assimilate to be more like any other (Besides some stuff with the Natives, but that’s a can of worms I have no interest in getting into.)


Maybe just a little bit. They skipped it, but Vikings set up camp in Newfoundland around 1000 AD, meaning Vikings were in Canada before the Thule (Proto-Inuit) people were. “First” Nations my ass.

Some time in the 1960’s, a pair of communists managed to give Canadians a bait-and-switch. They convinced Canadians that Canadians didn’t just tolerate the cultural differences in Canada, that the cultural differences were what was important and unique about Canada. This led to the insistence that the multiculturalism in Canada not just be the tri-culturalism of English, French, and Native, but absolutely any culture. So Canada became the multicultural salad bowl that it is today, where all cultures are “equal” and everyone belongs and “Canadian” culture doesn’t exist and everyone self-segregates into miniature versions of the countries they came from and why the hell would anyone want to move to a different country if it wasn’t for that country’s culture unless it was for the money what the hell.

So, this Salad Bowl multiculturalism, where there is no insistence that anyone assimilate at all, originated in Canada. But it didn’t stay here. Take a look at that last Wikipedia article. It’s absolutely beside itself with how amazing Canada is for instigating the movement that is “Modern Multiculturalism.” Canada was the first to have multiculturalism as an official policy, but many other countries have since adopted it, especially places like Sweden, the UK, Germany, and France. This policy, rather than America’s Melting Pot, was adopted so widely because the purpose of multiculturalism is not social cohesion, or the betterment of a nation, but the importation of voters. Melting Pot places a burden on the incoming people to assimilate to the host country. You can fit in, but you have to work for it. Salad Bowl places no such burden. Everyone gets to come and do whatever they want.

This is important because it points to a little-understood flaw in representative democracy. Everyone knows the famous Tytler quote about democracy:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy–to be followed by a dictatorship


In my head he pronounces it “Dimo-cra-say”, rhyming with “play”

Well, I’m sure that’s true of some kinds of direct democracy. But in representative democracy, there’s a second failure model. Politicians want to get voted back into office. So, they can either bribe the current set of voters, or simply import more. Immigration is the one policy regarding which politicians don’t really have to care about public opinion, because it amounts to importing new voters to replace the old.

So, why are Switzerland, Poland, and Singapore safe from this type of multiculturalism? I’m not sure. But I have some guesses. Switzerland has its own type multiculturalism, which I believe acts as a bit of an inoculation against the more deadly, Canadian strain. Poland, after decades of Soviet control, cherishes its culture more than most other white countries. “You don’t know what you got ’til it’s gone.” They’re the frog that managed to escape from the boiling pot, no way are they going back in. And Singapore, like Switzerland, has its own form of authoritarian multiculturalism that inoculates it from the deadly Canadian virus that is The Salad Bowl.


The Salad Bowl is not the only virus to come from Canada.

Maybe, if those two communists hadn’t changed Canada from tri-cultural to multicultural, Europe wouldn’t have adopted multiculturalism at all, or adopted the less devastating American version.

Maybe then Sweden wouldn’t have one of the highest rape rates in the world.

Maybe Rotherham wouldn’t have happened. Or Malmo. Or Cologne.


But we’ll never know.

Because of Canada.

I’ll end this the same way I end each of the Blame Canada For… posts.

I’m Sorry.


3 thoughts on “Blame Canada for… Part 2: Europe

  1. I will clarify a point with regards to “salad bowl” you are talking about. In the 1950s and 1960s Canada had treaties with many commonwealth countries promoting immigration and eventually citizenship. For example – the British West Indies. I will use Trinidad as an example. In Trinidad, the better educated (high) schools in the 50s and 60s were largely Catholic and Protestant and this is where a portion who immigrated to Canada came from. I’ve seen one of the Gospel Study Guides used by students, and they make our school books look shallow in comparison. So when people arrived, they already had some educational grounding in Western Culture regardless of them being Trinidadian. I know of ones who went to a British Columbian Secretarial School or to UBC to Study Law. So it was easier for them to integrate. Sure, they had their own community to a certain degree – but so did the Italians, Chinese, etc. Just look at the Main in Montreal.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. There needs to be not only better naming of these various forms of mixed culture ‘nations’ but clearer rules of engagement between cultural groups. this has to be done regionally in the long term. Neighbourhood by neighbourhood is ridiculous, especially if you are going to have different people living under different systems of law. The whole MultiCulti project seems to be an exercise in applied passivity though. Al least for the founding English stock of the country.

    But I don’t think the scion of the first MUltiCUlti Emperor of Canada has a plan greater than public fapping over what a supper Prog hero he is.

    I remember when I moved here in the mid 80s and first heard the term Multiculturalism, I thought hmm what does that mean? By the 3rd time I heard it, always said in those days on the CBC with a supercilious sweetness, I felt like I had immigrated into some kind of national cult.

    Now every time I hear the word it makes me want to punch a kitten.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s