> collectively our greatest fear
Citation very much needed. This sounds like _your_ concern that you're trying to launder through projecting onto the rest of the country.
Citation very much needed. This sounds like _your_ concern that you're trying to launder through projecting onto the rest of the country.
So we just let racists determine national policy now? I wonder how that's working out in the US.
Racism is a serious allegation. Let's not cry wolf when there is a reasonable explanation here.
> will only drive people towards right-wing extremists
The right talks a big game about personal responsibility, but somehow their worst beliefs are always someone else's fault. Funny, that.
> naturally become associated
Now see, that's exactly what I'm talking about. It's _not_ natural or inevitable.
My point is is that if leftists cannot talk about immigration policy in a nuanced way, right-wing extremists (for there are no other kinds of right wingers these days) will be the only game in town, and people who want to talk about immigration policy will therefore be drawn towards them.
Humans see patterns in everything, that's how we work. You can be a naive idealist all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that people will inevitably associate the effects of a bad policy with the policy itself.
Does nuance mean agreeing to your framing of a situation? If so, I guess not. That's not what it means to me.
> a naive idealist
Insults aren't helping your case.
> associate the effects of a bad policy with the policy itself.
What are the effects you're referring to here?
> Humans see patterns in everything, that's how we work.
Here's a pattern I see: American-owned propaganda networks take over Canadian news and trying to drum up racist sentiment and lots of people falling for it.
It sucks that you started with them then by calling people who disagree with you racist.
>What are the effects you're referring to here?
Drastically reduced wage bargaining power in various sectors and also for general unskilled labour typically done by students and the like. Straight up displacement in some areas. More strain on a housing supply that's already incredibly overvalued. Hell I'd argue that the migration was incentivized by the canadian local governments tax dependence on housing prices going up.
Safe to say that the 1990s "End of History" theory has been proven wrong. It may be that the ~1960s-2010s "post-national" political consensus was actually just a historical aberration that is still in the process of being unwound.
Wild sequence of sentences.
> is now widely agreed has contributed to a noticeable decline in the quality of life for all.
Citation very much needed.
I'm skeptical that an increase in so called "low skill" workers are even a problem considering that the country is experiencing labour shortages that have contributed to construction costs being so out of whack that building new buildings is unviable.
Now we've "solved" that problem by turning immigration down to zero but that is a kludge and not an actual long term solution to systemic problems.
It's pretty hard be critical of the need for supposed "low skill" immigration when pretty much all of our settler ancestors were penniless dirt farmers.
We do need immigration long term for sure! Canada is and will always be an immigrant country. That said, I also don't think an appeal to the past (the fact that almost all of our ancestors came as penniless farmers) should enter into the conversation. To my view, this is a dispassionate conversation about politics. Concerns over hypocrisy are irrelevant.
I'm skeptical that those migrants helped add more to the housing pool than their own needs.
It is one of the top 5 issues for ALL Canadians.