Immigrants Must Integrate, But Not Under the Threat of Bigotry

I just saw a video someone took on his phone that was shown on a CTV News Toronto broadcast. In the video, which you can view here, a woman is seen berating Chinese employees at a food market because they didn't speak English, telling them, "Go back to China!" My stance has always been that any immigrants who come to Canada and want to live here need to do their best to integrate into Canadian society. Part of that integration means learning to speak English or French, depending on where in the country you live. I really resent the fact that there are some people who come to this country, live here for years, and still can't communicate effectively in either official language. That being said, what this woman in the video did was way out of line.

For one thing, she appears to have been looking for a confrontation, assuming witnesses to the whole thing gave an accurate account of how everything transpired. Still, the video itself doesn't lie, and judging by that alone, what she did was unbecoming of a Canadian, at least in my opinion. Telling people who don't speak your language to go back to their country of origin doesn't help anyone. If anything, it makes things worse for people who are trying to integrate into Canada, because a new immigrant who encounters racism may become discouraged from taking steps to integrate and retreat into isolation within his or her own community.

There are a lot more constructive ways of promoting the successful integration of immigrants into Canadian society and they certainly don't involve berating people for not speaking English. For example, instead of yelling at employees in a grocery store and telling them to "go back to China," perhaps the woman in video should instead protest our federal government's easing of language requirements for potential new citizens. Whereas the old rules required people aged 14 to 64 wanting to become Canadian citizens to demonstrate language proficiency, the Trudeau Liberals have shrunk that group to people aged 18 to 54. This recent change means that more immigrants to Canada are going to become citizens without even being able to speak either of the country's official languages effectively. Now how can we blame immigrants for not integrating when we have a government that discourages them from integrating in the first place?

Ah, the Joys of Parenting!

Today, I read a news story about a 9-year old girl in New Brunswick who was hospitalized after drinking vaping fluid called "Unicorn Milk", believing it was candy. Now the child's mother wants government regulations to ban the use of "child-friendly" names on such products. My first reaction to this was to ask, why didn't the mother think to keep her vaping fluid out of the reach of her young child? Many if not most product-makers already have labels on their products advising buyers to keep them out of reach of children. I obviously don't know if this "Unicorn Milk" had such a label, but even common sense tells me or any other rational person that you shouldn't keep such a potentially harmful product within the reach of a young child. Now of course, no person is perfect and parents make mistakes like any other human beings. But my sense is that this mother needs to be more careful in protecting her child rather than asking government to do it for her.

Now just to be fair, I'm not a parent. I have no children of my own, so it's very easy for me to tell parents how they should go about looking after their children when I don't have any myself. Nevertheless, I was a child once too, just like every other adult in the world. And I was fortunate enough to be raised by two loving parents, so I know what it's like to be parented. We live in age where it seems that more and more parents are demanding that governments at all levels do more to protect their children when they as their children's parents are the ones that should be doing the protecting. For example, some streets have a seemingly endless number of speed bumps and stop signs because of parents concerned about speeding cars hitting their children. This is certainly a legitimate concern. I've heard too many stories about children being hit by cars and sometimes killed. At the same time, however, I think that some parents need to do a better job of making their kids streetwise. I don't know about you, but when I was a kid, I was taught to look both ways before crossing the street. I was also forbidden from crossing the street alone when I was young. Perhaps if parents drilled these rules into their kids' heads a little more, we wouldn't need so many speed bumps and stop signs that when overused can result in traffic jams that lead to road rage, which could ultimately end catastrophically with an angry, frustrated driver accidentally running over a small child.

Sometimes, however, I can't help but feel sympathy for people who are parents nowadays. The reason is that parenting isn't like what it was when I grew up. For one thing, it's a lot harder. When I was a child, families where one parent worked and the other stayed home did reasonably well in the economy. Unfortunately, that's not the case today. The economy of 2017 is one in which even when both parents work full-time jobs, they still might have trouble providing for their children and making ends meet. And if you're a single parent with kids, the odds are really stacked up against you. So if you're wondering why parents want government to do more for their kids, maybe it's because after a long, hard day at the office, they have a lot less time and energy to be parents.   

Terrorism is Terrorism, No Matter Where It Takes Place

Just over a week ago, a suicide bomber blew himself up at a concert in Manchester, England, killing 22 people. People all over the world expressed their anger, sadness and grief at this heinous act of terrorism all over social media. Some even held vigils for the innocent people that lost their lives in the attack. Fast forward to yesterday, when a terrorist blew up a large truck bomb in the centre of Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan, killing 90 people; a death toll more than four times higher than that of the Manchester attack. You would think then that the Kabul bombing would get at least just as much attention in the international press and social media as the attack in Manchester did. But you'd be wrong.

Whereas the attack in Manchester was front and centre in the press and social media for days, the attack in Kabul barely merits a mention only hours after it took place. I obviously don't see everything people post on Facebook, Twitter, or other social media, but I still have yet to see anyone post something conveying their solidarity with the victims of the Kabul attack. No words of condolences, no hashtags, no anything. Even Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, which are news outlets based in the Muslim world, seem to have relegated the Kabul massacre to the sidelines. Why is this?

Why is it that when Islamist terrorists launch attacks in the Western world, there's a huge outcry, but when Muslims kill other Muslims in great numbers, there's a deafening silence? The fact of the matter is that many people who post condolences and hashtags of solidarity for the victims of the Manchester attack won't do the same for the victims of the terrorist attack in Kabul. And I hate to say it, but I'm just as guilty of this double standard as many others are. It's time we ended this double standard and express the same level of support to all victims of terrorism, wherever they may be. Because terrorism is terrorism, no matter where it takes place.

Berbers Resist the Tyranny of Their Arab Rulers

A prominent leader of the Berber (Amazigh) community in the Rif region of Morocco was arrested today (see: Morocco arrests Rif protest leader Nasser Zefzafi). As the Aljazeera news story states, the people of the Rif region have a long history of resisting the control of their Arab rulers, namely the Alaouite dynasty that has ruled the country since the 17th century. Unlike the people of the Rif, who are descendants of the country's original population, the Alaouites are descendants of foreign Arab conquerors. Hence, the Alaouites are simply another part of the Arab occupation that spans North Africa and the Middle East.

As Aljazeera notes, the people of the Rif region were instrumental in getting the current king, Mohammmed VI, to give up some of his powers, but it's not enough. The Alaouites must be stripped of their power entirely. Only then will Morocco's native Berber inhabitants have any hope of regaining their freedom from Arab tyranny.

Update, May 30, 2017: Scores arrested in connection with Morocco Rif protests

Click here for video about Rif protests.

Morocco: What is fuelling unrest in the Rif?

Update, June 4, 2017: Authorities stifle women's protest in Morocco's Rif

Update, July 19, 2017: Morocco's al-Hoceima gears up for 'million-man march'

Update, July 30, 2017: Moroccan king pardons more than a thousand protestors

Mideast and North African Ethnic and Religious Minorities Must Fight to Liberate Themselves From Arab Muslim Occupation

This past week, the so-called Islamic State terrorist group attacked a bus in Egypt full of Coptic Christian worshipers and killed nearly thirty of them. It was just another attack in the seemingly endless wave of assaults on the remaining ethnic and religious minority communities in North Africa and the Middle East. The Egyptian Copts are the direct descendants of the original Egyptian population, unlike the current Arab Muslim majority that rules the country today. They are the descendants of the Arab Muslim conquerors that swept through North Africa and the Middle East in the seventh and eighth centuries, exterminating many of the peoples, cultures, languages and religious traditions in these regions. The savage and horrific attacks by ISIL and other Islamist terrorists are just a continuation of the centuries' old campaign to purge the Middle East and North Africa of all non-Arab and non-Muslim elements once and for all.

So what are the remaining non-Arab, non-Muslim people in countries like Egypt to do? I think it comes down to two options. They can abandon their homes and their lands to seek a better life elsewhere. Or, they can stay and fight for their lands and their rights. Over the last century, the overwhelming majority have chosen the first option. I think this is very tragic and sad, because they're basically giving the Muslim Arab occupiers what they want - a region free of non-Arab and non-Muslim people. There is one notable exception - Israel - the nation-state of the Jewish people. Israel's existence proves that it is possible for a country's original inhabitants to take their land and their freedom back from the Muslim Arab conquerors. And I see no reason why the other communities that represent the original inhabitants of North Africa and the Middle East can't do what the Jewish people did. Hence, I don't see why it isn't possible for Egyptian Copts, Assyrians, or any other ethnic or religious minority to reclaim their independence from their Muslim Arab overlords. The Jews are not unique in their ability to overcome overwhelming odds. History is littered with examples of the weak defeating the strong and taking back what is rightfully theirs.

In fact, as I write this, some of the region's minority people are fighting back against Arab, Muslim domination and tyranny. The Kurds of northern Iraq, for example, have managed to gain a wide degree of autonomy for themselves. They are also on the front lines of the war against ISIL. I think it's only a matter of time before they gain full independence. Indeed, I sincerely hope that in the near future, the Kurds, Assyrians, (Coptic) Egyptians and Phoenicians (Lebanese Christians) will join the Jews as peoples who have regained their independence from the Arab Muslim occupation.

See also: End the Arab Occupation        

Don't Waste Your Time With Political Parties in Canada

The federal Conservative Party is electing a new leader today. And you know what? I don't give a damn. I actually used to be a member of the party, but thinking back on it, I don't know why I wasted my time with them. In fact, I wouldn't recommend that any Canadian waste their time with the Conservatives or any other political party in this country.

If there's one thing I hate about politics in Canada just as much as our first-past-the-post electoral system, it's the way parties operate in this country. Party discipline is more excessive in Canada than in any other modern, industrialized democracy that I know of. No MP or MPP dares criticize the leader of his or her own political party in public, lest they be turfed from caucus. This goes especially for MPs or MPPs who are members of the governing party, because here in Canada, every vote is treated like a confidence vote; ie. a vote that could bring down the government and force new elections. Everyone is expected to simply shut up and tow the party line, whether they like it or not. This makes for a very unhealthy democracy.

Contrast this with Israel, the other democracy with which I am most familiar. In Israel, not only is political infighting commonplace, it is very widely publicized. No member of Israel's parliament keeps his or her views a secret, regardless of what the leader of his or her party thinks. And although each political party in Israel has a basic ideology, they don't maintain an ironclad party line that every party member must follow to the letter under threat of expulsion.

Canadian political parties could learn a great deal from how their Israeli counterparts conduct themselves. But as it stands now, Canada's political parties are ruled with iron fists. They're more like armies where soldiers march in lockstep behind their commanding officers. Take this country's excessive party discipline, combine it with an antiquated and undemocratic first-past-the-post electoral system that tends to produce majority governments without the accompanying popular support, and what you usually get is one-party dictatorships with term limits. This doesn't sound like real democracy to me.  

It's Not Warm Enough, So Put Those Shorts Away

I don't understand, why is it that once spring comes and the temperature squeaks just above ten degrees, some people are already breaking out the shorty-pants? Now of course, Canada is a democracy and people can wear just about whatever they choose to. Thank goodness for that. Quite frankly, however, I think that people who insist on wearing shorts when the weather isn't even warm enough to ditch your jacket are just plain silly.

Yes, I understand people who think winter is too damn long. I'm one of them. But just because the daytime high finally reaches double-digits doesn't mean it's time to break out the summer wardrobe. Have some common sense, people. Dress for the weather. Face the fact that it's not quite summertime yet. Otherwise, you're in denial. And you know you're in denial, too. That's why you're probably sporting a sweater and maybe even a jacket at the same time you're presenting your bare legs to the world.

Now I understand where you folks are coming from. Believe me, I want summer to come just as much as you do. It's my favourite season. But it's not here yet, so don't try and pretend it is. Unless you're jogging or working out at the gym, don't break out the shorts just yet. You're just making yourself look silly and you'll probably catch a cold.