After the Trump ban on the visa-approvals of the seven countries which have spent the vast majority of the last eight years being bombed, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau went to Twitter to air his thoughts and sentiments on what rapidly became a controversial issue. His sentiment was just that; raw, unbridled and useless sentiment.
For some background, the #MuslimBan, as it is coming to be massively misrepresented by people who have already made up their minds without reading the text of the Executive Order, is linked here.
Essentially, the executive order bans the acceptance of travel visas and immigration attempts by people from a set of countries that the Obama administration labelled as “countries of concern,” which he had been bombing for the majority of his presidency.
There are a series of exceptions already included.
Of course, no mention is made of the banned peoples being Muslim. I looked at the entire text, then also used a search function. No appearance is made. While this is discrimination, it is not particularly effectual as if one is to ban radical terrorism, one would have to ban everyone who has even the slightest chance of being radical. That is, everybody from every nation with the slightest amount of religion or ideology. That is, every person, in every country, everywhere; particularly America itself.
So clearly, this ban, in that light, makes no sense at all according to its stated cause. That cause? To provide increased levels of international security by not importing potential militants with anti-American causes.
That is impossible to do for a number of reasons, not least being that given the trend of grassroots radicalisation which we have come to associate with ISIL and other terrorist attacks, there’s probably no way to effectively limit the number of casualties or perpetrators except by continuing to do the law enforcement work currently so vital to saving your everyday person’s life without them ever knowing it was done; monitoring criminal networks, counter-intelligence, fiscal anomalies, and so forth.
If you want to be able to “concentrate law enforcement resources” on domestic terror, then this does make sense.
If you look at the escalating crime statistics in the messy, sharia-law ridden migrant camps which exist in France, Germany, and particularly in Sweden (as its absolute worst case) a few things become quite rapidly clear.
Sweden’s police force is so taxed with the migrant crime-rates and the quadrupling of the rape-rate that has blossomed since the mass importation from the same Middle-Eastern countries which President Trump has banned immigration from that it has (last I checked) considered calling in its national armed forces and declaring martial law just to try to keep the peace and order that is the hallmark of Western-style democracies.
That means massive resource depletion, and that the normal civil system has actively failed.
If the essence of this move is to halt the mass importation of what has become, fairly obviously, a low-IQ, low-utility font of welfare-dependent poor who have a demonstrated an extremely anti-societal effect at least across the relatively short term of a few years, then it’s a good move—particularly as conditions continue to worsen, which implies no ability or willingness on the part of these economic migrants to either assimilate or adapt.
So yes, the ban is discrimination in that sense, but it’s the type of conservative politics which makes perfect sense on any particular level except the one where you’re no longer thinking logically or rationally or with the C-average Principle in mind, or without the Finite Resources principal in mind.
If crime escalates and welfare burden (and therefore taxes) increases per person, a conservative politician is not going to vote for it unless they think that enough resources exist that the society can handle the burdens—or they’re getting a bunch of kickbacks.
A brief look at France, Germany and Sweden’s intensifying civil unrest and total resource expenditure on the importation of migrants from the Middle-East (whom, let’s be totally obvious and just say it, are probably as Muslim as most Christians are Christian—not very) tells us in no uncertain terms that this is a bad move for collapsing, convalescent Western economies which have to sort out their debt crises and unemployment rates (anecdotally, black employment in America is 50%) before they decide to add massive numbers of unemployed, untrained, unskilled and illiterate-in-English peoples to their populations.
This executive order, therefore, is not a “racist” move, or even discriminatory in terms of identity politics. It’s a conservative move, and therefore naturally discriminatory on socioeconomic grounds—much like evolution itself. The most useful and capable flourish, where others are discarded.
I have, just like the reader, heard the stories of the immigrant working eighty hours a week to bring their children over and all that type of thing, but a basic look at welfare usage by immigration status and country of origin puts the lie to it. There are people like that, yes. I’ve met some. You’ve met some. But they’re usually one person in a household of several—many of these cultures, for instance, don’t even allow women to work or go to school, and do tend to allow polygamy.
A brief reminder here that children or dependents warrant, in the eyes of the welfare state, extra redistributed income from the rest of the population per head.
Let’s remember that the same essential move as excluding people because they are Muslims would be including people because they are Muslims despite their usefulness or interests. Don’t be C-average; don’t let racism steer your decision-making, because it has always been a veneer for the actual arguments underlying most issues; that stupid, banal, easy-to-use cliche which can cause the cattle to begin to stampede toward the voting booths.
So what is our Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau doing?
With a few tweets, he’s managed to prove to the entire world (or at least that portion of it which follows him on Twitter) that he doesn’t read the Executive Orders from the President of the United States either. His first tweet went, “To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada”.
Is that an admirable sentiment? Certainly! The problem with him expressing it in contrast to President Trump’s “ban” is that it doesn’t mean we’re actually letting those people into Canada on a permanent basis. Canada does not have an immigration problem; its immigration policies are extremely strict and the vetting process is very intensive. In Canada’s case, we actually have imported populations here in small numbers as refugees. In America, of course, one can immigrate via anchor babies or other fairly simple means. The United States, of course, has historically prided itself on being a country of immigrants and its policy does tend to reflect that at least when compared to countries which don’t—like Canada, Japan, or Israel, as examples.
Expressing this in contrast to President Trump’s “ban” and mentioning about faith and diversity is meant to send a message to the world that Canada continues to uphold and be ruled by Liberals with a liberal agenda. This isn’t a surprise, of course, but how ham-fisted, badly enunciated and ridiculously obvious it was displays the total lack of political acumen in the person who is the leader of the entire Canadian political system.
He then posted about having his National Security Advisor talk with his American counterpart to establish that Canadian citizens where Canada is not one of the countries of concern in the Executive Order would still be allowed to travel to the United States.
Daniel Jean, the Canadian NSA, must have rolled his eyes so hard that he gave himself a headache. American National Security Advisor Flynn must also have done so. Both men can probably read, and therefore were already familiar with President Trump’s executive order and its wording. Trudeau’s actions and statements in this particular case remind me a lot of the kid who still sticks up his hand to ask to go to the washroom when he reaches the workforce after graduating high school.
To introduce that message, he issued the statement, “#ACanadianIsACanadian.”
There are two immediately observable subtexts which caught my attention. One is that while counting himself a member of the globalist community, Trudeau continues to emphasise that nationalism is still important, as though “being a Canadian” had some importance to the text and thrust of the Executive Order.
It tries to fly in the face of the conservative executive order, but used conservative tactics to do so. This is hypocritical, and probably an attempt to associate the Left with blooming populist movements, which I will go into below.
This is also a fear-mongering move against Trump, who is heading a geopolitical movement which has to be likened to the French Revolution in that the political “royal” class is not only terrified of what’s going on in the United States, but also apparently underway in France and Germany with the Front Nationale and the AfD—middle-class, populist movements that are beginning to break with the idealistic and easily manipulated image- and identity-based politics that characterised politics to their parents and grandparents in the decades after the Second World War.
People can do math. They are seeing what’s happening in their streets and to their economies, and they are starting to choose against it; against liberalism and social justice and toward conservative and fiscal responsibility. Trudeau, in this case, has demonstrated that he and probably his leadership cartel in Canada are steadfastly against it.
Ironically, though, his embrace of Twitter as a method of personal expression and statement-making closely mirrors that of… yes, you guessed it. Trudeau, in his method, has begun to sound a lot like the forty-fifth President of the United States: Donald J Trump.
They know, you see? They know the electorate is beginning to break along new lines, absorbing new information through new means. They can see the popularity and the massive social engines which Trump’s campaign was able to mobilise during the 2016 Presidential Elections, and now everyone wants a piece of it.
You can only hope that as the method of delivering their message changes, so too does the message itself. Elements of the Presidential Campaign of 2016, between Hillary Clinton and Donald J. Trump, has become a trailblazing moment for politics in the information age, and even a relatively inexperienced newcomer like Justin Trudeau has started to adapt.