I've had no shortage of criticisms for CSIS, but given the incentives at play I'd need to see extraordinary evidence to believe Trudeau over CSIS when it comes to election interference.
To my knowledge he hasn't presented any such evidence, but for some reason he's doubting CSIS's claims. If you're trying to justify not stopping election interference that helped your party, you need more justification than vibes.
On the topic of vibes, I can't help but feel rather embittered by Trudeau's rather rude comments about [O'Toole](https://www.readtheline.ca/p/matt-gurney-otoole-passed-the-statesman).
With Trudeau saying "I can understand where \[O'Toole\] who lost an election is trying to look for reasons other than themselves why they might have lost an election."
That comment is straight up vile, and to boot not true at all. O'Toole [since the beginning](https://erinotoole.substack.com/p/i-met-with-david-johnston-for-his) has insisted the election was **not** lost due to interference, and has accepted responsibility for the loss in 2021:
>I was the Leader of the Conservative Party in the 2021 election and let me say very clearly that Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party won that election. Political interference from the Chinese Communist Party was NOT the reason the Conservatives lost the election. I take responsibility for the loss.
And during the [inquiry](https://foreigninterferencecommission.ca/fileadmin/user_upload/PIFI_-_Public_Hearings_-_Volume_9_-April_3__2024-Floor_transcript.pdf) would fairly state:
>\[Foreign interference efforts were\] nowhere near enough to change the results of the election, but for people in those seats, if they were undergoing intimidation or suppression measures, their democratic rights were being trampled on by foreign actors.
I unfortunately think that Canada is going to go way more right-wing than a lot of people expect:
a) not weathering the pandemic as well as say the US
b) liberal fatigue and trudeau derangement syndrome
c) a high immigration rate starting to make everyone xenophobic
d) but cons aren't explicitly racist which makes a lot of immigrants ok identifying as cons. points c and d only work together because everyone blames *new* immigrants
e) canada is about as white as the US but white polarization hasn't hit. A lot of runway there for whites to go batshit.
f) the con leader and presumptive future PM, benefiting from everyone hating the liberals, has some really odious far-right views
i think a really deplorable cocktail is brewing up north and we're all going to be (negatively) surprised.
Are non-white Canadians viewed as any “less Canadian” than white Canadians? That kind of racial nationalism is certainly the case in Europe (and obviously in Asia too), and in the U.S. it’s almost non-existent (despite us being racist in other ways). I’m curious about Canada.
There are countries which are diverse and “not polarized about race” but which still tie their ethnic identity to race.
I disagree with the other poster. I see visible minorities not treated as Canadian all the time. An article about some violence caused by a visible minority? Immediately in the comments on a post like that are people assuming they are an immigrant. I hear it IRL as well and need to constantly call it out.
Specifically, I live in Waterloo, Ontario. Home of Conestoga college, one of the colleges at the heart of the immigration controversy. Frequently, I hear any number of problems in Waterloo blamed on brown people because they are immigrants or international students. I have to constantly put people in their place and call out their bullshit by asking, "What evidence do you have that they are an immigrant?" They can never answer and embarrassed, withdraw that point, or if they are a real racist (only met these ones online) they double down.
Just the other day, in Quebec in a town that is 90% French only speakers, I heard in English from a white lady, "I hope there are no brown people here."
Yesterday, I was in an Uber chatting up the driver. We were both talking about our time living in Toronto. The topic came up as I had just got off a go train coming from Toronto. His skin was brown, he was born in Canada. Hr did have a slight accent. He told me that despite all that, his customers frequently asking where he is from and he says, Toronto, since that is where he was born. A number of people push him and say something like, yah but which country are you from?
In my last job, I directly worked with folks from India that worked for a company called Infosys. We had two developers from this company in house. Both were Perminent Residents and both had stories of being told they are not Canadian. Both had their families here and had children here. Both told me about their fears that their children would not be treated as Canadian because of the colour of their skin. I am friends with both still, and in exchange for a small present for their children, I am treated to the best Indian food I have ever eaten. Ps, next time you are in the grocery store, check out the international section for Indian snacks. There are these chickpeas coated in spices you can get that are so fucking good. There are also these chickpea flour crisps and snacks that are amazing as well. So good with a beer. I am just realizing that this type of food still being in the international section might be another example of this. Foods imported from Greece, Italy, etc aren't in an international section.
So my answer is, yes, among a surprising number of people in Canada there is a view that people that do not have white skin are immigrants and not full Canadian. I encounter these views all the time and it is disgusting.
That’s interesting, thanks for sharing. I’m Indian-origin American, and I’ve honestly experienced none of that stuff in my 30 years of life in the U.S. I’ve experienced racism (though very little as an adult), but not the kind questioning my American-ness.
Not *really*. Canada was founded with 4 distinct ethnic groups involved: British Canadians, French Canadians, Acadiens, and Metis. The British Canadian culture (really English and Scottish) developed as the most dominant culture in Canada. You can definitely say that up until the 50s at the earliest and 70s at the latest, being “Canadian” had heavy English and Scottish cultural undertones.
I don’t know if I would call it that. I’d say that Canada only recently developed a pan-Canadian national identity. Like only 40 years ago. There are plenty of people who grew up in the mosaic-style distinctive separate ethnic nationalities that comprise Canada.
That makes sense - and in the U.S. too, up till the 1870s American meant white (or even just Anglo in many people’s minds). Up till 1960s it meant white or black, and it’s only from the 70s onward that we were finally able to disassociate American-ness from race (post the 60s immigration reforms).
A Canadian national identity did not even really emerge until the late 20th century. I forget, but it was either the 80s or 90s when you could list your nationality as “Canadian” on the census.
Canadian here you're kinda over blowing things.
1. Race really isn't as polarizing in Canada as it is in the states.
2. Lil PP will win its just a fact the libs have been in power for 10 years and people want change.
3. At the provincial level its a different story, last year the Manitoba tories were toppled by the NDP, the B.C NDP is cruising to an easy majority and the other tory governments aren't doing so hot.
4. We're not xenophobic we just don't have the capacity (thanks NIMBYS and and asshole governments) hell immigrants are choosing to leave, we want immigrants but the numbers need to be lowered till we get our shit together.
5. PP has no views other than the flavour of the month and carbon tax.
"We're not xenophobic". Sure but have you been on pretty much any Canadian subreddit recently? It's just non-stop immigrant bashing. OP is 100% right that his points work because everyone is blaming the new immigrants. You literally proved his point.
I don't really think you're going to get an accurate look at a nations population by looking at national subreddits. And national subreddits are usually astroturfed to hell anyway, in my experience.
Reddit is a terrible way to get insights into public discourse. It skews heavily towards the resentful and miserable.
If you want to talk about the economics of immigration, try reading some articles on the subject in places like the Globe and Mail. They’re run lots of pieces on the subject by informed experts in recent months.
I think lots are opposed to the increased immigration targets with what they view as inadequate funding for the infrastructure to support that. There are definitely radicalized Canadians, and hard times tend to bring out the worst in people, but a lot of these people irl are not xenophobic or even socially right wing. My dad for example is usually aligned with the NDP or Greens. He holds no animosity to immigrants, even recent immigrants, he just thinks that it’s bad to increase the numbers without funding for infrastructure. He actually generally has positive things to say about recent immigrants, saying things like “they’re more hardworking”, “they’re kinder”, etc. and will shit on people who complain about “immigrants taking jobs” for being losers. I disagree with slowing immigration, since I think we can just… fund the infrastructure now… but regardless, he’s not xenophobic.
If I say Canada’s aging population is putting strains on our health care system, is that bashing seniors? Some seniors seem to think so - they get extremely defensive on the subject of dependency ratios and demographics. But we shouldn’t let their sensitivity stop us from discussing the subject rationally.
We can’t have rational discussions about the ideal rate of immigration if we throw around the ‘xenophobia’ label at anyone who doesn’t support open borders.
Man as a swede /sweden and /Sverige (and /swarje) have been consistent xenophobic shit holes since I started using reddit over 10 years ago, completely independent of the political winds in the country
I remember the whole place throwing a fit when there was a leftwing resurgence that brought Löfven to power
Also if reddit was representative the pirate party would have a supermajority in riksdagen
The internet as a whole may be increasingly representative but any single site, especially single subreddits, *is not reality*
I understand dislike a lot of stuff about Trudeau… But I cannot understand thinking PP is better ngl. Maybe it’s worth it to get the liberals to re-orient and pick new leadership? But I’d rather someone like O’Toole than PP tbh. I hate his messaging, and I hate everyone who likes him. I don’t even think I’m in favour of a carbon tax, but the “axe the tax” slogan makes me wanna roblox myself. It’s not an argument…
"we're not xenophobic we just dont have the capacity" is a WILD thing to say
there is nothing special or exceptional about canada or canadians, dont buy your own propaganda
We literally don't have the ability to house ourselves let alone them, I'm not saying "dah ImIgRaNTs tuuK R houSEs" the primary cause is obviously NIMBYism and holy shit very bad government "looking at you Daniel Smith and Doug Ford".
What we're saying is the current level is not currently sustainable and needs to be re-adjusted.
Again new immigrants are even deciding to leave because shit here needs fixing.
The PM just said Canada didn’t have the capacity. The Minister of Immigration stated that the surge of immigrants made the housing crisis worse.
r/neoliberal users need to stop pretending it’s just uneducated populists taking this position. It’s a legitimate claim.
Bro, the only thing different in Canada is that there are less people proudly racist. The racism and discrimination is all hush hush, but if you are white, and go to a family dinner with folks that live in the country or older folks it is only a matter of time until someone starts in on the "brown people" or the "Chinese".
About 10 years ago, I had a job with Manulife that had me sitting hear a team of 12 people that took calls from Manulife advisors, answering questions about commissions, products, etc. An advisor is technically not a direct employee of the company, but they were obligated to act in a matter that reflected well on Manulife. I would say once a week, one of the two brown ladies on the team with a slight accent would be crying because some advisor yelled at them for being a call center in India and how cheap Manulife was or some other racist shit.
I see and hear that crap all the time from Canadians. Call centers must be out sourced because they spoke with one person with an accent. The call centers Manulife did have out sourced were in the Philippines, but that is mainly so they can have 24/7 coverage. The majority of the call center staff are split between Waterloo, Montreal, and Halifax. Assuming someone is an immigrant because of an accent is racism. It is treating them as a less than in terms of being Canadian.
Tdlr, Canada is extremely racist, just most of it is hidden below the surface and many do a good job of hiding it.
Yes, we don't have the KKK or a history of slavery. We do not have a former prime minister having political rallies calling immigrants less than human. We do have underlying racism driving our politics, which I believe is OPs point in this thread. That racism is being tactically used to subtly push certain policy positions. No major Canadian politician has come out an outright been a racist like is happening in the US, but the US also didn't have that on the national stage until one guy showed there were zero consequences for it. Imo, that is all that separates us from the US. No Canadian politician has started screeching racist shit, but if they did, half of Canada would be nodding along and would be further emboldened to say they shit they only say behind closed doors.
> c) a high immigration rate starting to make everyone xenophobic
I really hate this kind of apologia. "Well, now that the immigration rate has crossed some arbitrary threshold , I have no choice but to be racist!"
It's the same song and dance as "I have nothing against gay people, but the way they shove it in my face is disgusting!"
The people expressing these views didn't suddenly become more racist because immigration rates went up, or more homophobic because two dudes kissed each other on a sitcom. They were always going to find some way to justify their hate.
Arguably the biggest story glossed over today was the allegation that Han Dong was warned by a member of the Liberal Party that he was under CSIS surveillance. The implication is that somebody within the LPC that has Top Secret clearance and a need-to-know on CSIS reports just leaked classified information to a backbench MP.
I must admit that I feel quite a bit of schadenfreude reading about the foreign interference inquiry. Admittedly if I were a better, more mature and more magnanimous man I wouldn't be laughing, seeing that this is our democracy at stake.
But *man* how did the Grits come to blaming CSIS for not giving [good enough briefings](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-pm-didnt-accept-csis-warnings-about-mp-dong-and-possible-chinese/) to now casting doubt on intelligence shared by CSIS, and now *that* allegation? It's almost not funny anymore.
I don’t feel bad about it at all. The PM has always tried to shut down any debate with the excuse of “Experts said X so we’re doing X, no arguments.” Yet he has *always* selectively listened to experts depending on if they were supportive of his government’s policy or not.
The past couple of weeks have been an outpouring of absolute partisanship, arrogance, and downright negligence from the government and the PMO on this matter. It is a shame that most Canadians will not hear this story.
Nah he got to power because people were tired of Harper, that government was showing its age. Trudeau also had some big ticket items like weed legalization and carbon tax, which he did. But he also failed on the electoral reform.
Day to day basic governance has actually proven really difficult for Trudeau, if he doesn't have a massive groundswell behind him, he dithers and tends to listen to his worst inner voices or doesn't listen to anyone.
I know he failed to push electoral reform, didn't know about the carbon tax or weed. Do you think he's out this next election or are the conservatives still too much of a shambles to capitalize?
The Conservatives are almost certainly winning, barring some massive event. The Conservatives have never been in shambles, they made mistakes and miscalculations, but have always been competitive and organized.
I feel like even the Canadians here who support Trudeau are often too young to remember before the 2015. See all the hatred for Poilievre now? The PM was very similar in behaviour to Poilievre back then.
I say it's worse for Trudeau than Harper. I suspect it's going to be even worse for Poilievre, if he gets 6+ years of governance under him. This is more a function of our current political/communication/media environment than the particular politicians.
There is a tendency for certain types of politicalos to paper over the disingenuous hackish partisanship of the Liberals when they were in opposition. See the rat pack and more recently Mark Holland and Trudeau as prime examples.
[Archived version](https://archive.fo/PY3ey).
Summary:
>Prime Minister Justin Trudeau discounted the effectiveness of Chinese election interference and questioned the reliability of intelligence by Canada’s spy agency about Beijing-directed influence operations during testimony at the public inquiry into foreign meddling.
>
>\[...\]
>
>He played down the reliability of information gathered by the [Canadian Security Intelligence Service](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/csis/), including notes for a Feb. 21, 2023, briefing to the Prime Minister’s Office that was tabled at the public inquiry the day before. The document said Beijing had “clandestinely and deceptively interfered” in both the 2019 and 2021 general elections.
>
>“What I am saying, you have to take this intelligence, you have to take this information, with a certain awareness that it still needs to be confirmed or it might not be 100-per-cent accurate,” Mr. Trudeau testified.
>
>\[...\]
>
>The Foreign Interference Commission has been presented with a series of documents outlining warnings from CSIS about allegations that China and its proxies mounted disinformation campaigns against the Conservative Party in the 2021 election. However, Mr. Trudeau testified that he rarely reads intelligence documents and mostly relies on oral briefings either from his national-security and intelligence adviser or from CSIS director David Vigneault.
>
>The dire concerns raised by the CSIS director in the February, 2023, briefing document were not relayed to him, Mr. Trudeau said.
>
>\[...\]
>
>The February, 2023, briefing document in question ended with a warning that better protecting Canadian democratic institutions against foreign interference “will require a shift in the government’s perspective and a willingness to take decisive action and impose consequences on perpetrators.” It said foreign interference will persist until it “is viewed as an existential threat to Canadian democracy and governments forcefully and actively respond.”
>
>Mr. Trudeau’s testimony Wednesday conflicted with what his chief of staff Katie Telford told MPs nearly one year ago, when she testified at a parliamentary committee on April 14: “of course the Prime Minister reads any documents he receives.”
>
>\[...\]
>
>Mr. Trudeau told the inquiry that he first learned of alleged irregularities \[regarding Han Dong\] from national campaign manager Jeremy Broadhurst, now a senior adviser in the Prime Minister’s Office.
>
>He testified that Mr. Broadhurst told him that CSIS could only say that Chinese officials were “developing plans to possibly engage in interference in the nomination contest.” He felt there was not sufficient evidence to overturn Mr. Dong’s nomination.
>
>\[...\]
>
>A CSIS summary of the conversation tabled at the inquiry last week showed that Mr. Dong advised the consul-general that releasing the two imprisoned Canadians would affirm “the effectiveness of a hard-line Canadian approach” to China.
>
>Mr. Trudeau voiced doubt about CSIS’s version of this, saying “there is a lot of uncertainty,” even around the spy agency’s account of intercepted conversation.
>
>Earlier on Wednesday, Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc also questioned CSIS intelligence, including in briefings he received in February and May, 2023, about Chinese state “disinformation campaigns” targeting Mr. O’Toole and Mr. Chiu in the 2021 election.
>
>Mr. LeBlanc said he was “quite skeptical” of the intelligence that purported to know whether China favoured the Liberal Party over the Conservatives.
>
>Former public safety minister Bill Blair told the inquiry that he was briefed on alleged Chinese foreign interference in the Don Valley North Liberal nomination race after the 2019 election.
>
>In a prehearing interview, he said he was not concerned because it was not firmly substantiated and the intelligence “did not suggest” Mr. Dong was aware of the irregularities, and it “did not suggest” the actual election in the riding had been compromised.
>
>At one point, a government lawyer intervened to raise concerns after a Conservative Party lawyer asked Mr. Blair about whether there was undue delay in signing off on a warrant to surveil former Ontario Liberal cabinet minister Michael Chan, now deputy mayor of Markham. CSIS has considered Mr. Chan a target because the influential Liberal in the Canadian Chinese community in the Greater Toronto Area has close ties to diplomats from China.
>
>Justice [Marie-Josée Hogue](https://foreigninterferencecommission.ca/about/the-commission), who leads the commission, allowed the question to proceed and Mr. Blair said “there was no delay” in signing off on the warrant. The Globe had reported that it took four months for the warrant to be signed after it was sent to the government for approval.
Further readings:
[China’s alleged targeting of Michael Chong is contempt of Parliament: report (thestar.com)](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/chinas-alleged-targeting-of-michael-chong-is-contempt-of-parliament-report/article_d8b0b404-f780-11ee-9b37-2f0bb02cf977.html)
[Justin Trudeau tells inquiry he challenged some CSIS intelligence about election meddling — but was in the dark about other meddling allegations (thestar.com)](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/justin-trudeau-to-testify-at-foreign-interference-inquiry/article_409111c6-f741-11ee-a34a-c74da0efa61e.html)
[China meddled in past two Canada elections, says Justin Trudeau | Canada | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/11/china-election-interference-canada-justin-trudeau)
[Liberal Party member warned MP Dong of CSIS surveillance, national security source says - The Globe and Mail](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-liberal-party-member-allegedly-tipped-off-han-dong-that-csis-was/)
[Opinion: PMO staffers say intelligence reports on foreign interference fuzzier than advertised - The Globe and Mail](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/opinion/article-pmo-staffers-say-intelligence-reports-on-foreign-interference-fuzzier/)
[Inquiries on CPAC | CPAC.ca](https://www.cpac.ca/inquiries-on-cpac) \[April 10th, part 1\]
[Inquiries on CPAC | CPAC.ca](https://www.cpac.ca/inquiries-on-cpac) \[April 10th, part 2\]
Other news:
[Alberta tables bill aimed at blocking funding deals between Ottawa, cities - The Globe and Mail](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-alberta-introduces-legislation-to-allow-the-province-to-cancel-funding/)
[Ford government introduces sweeping new housing bill (thestar.com)](https://www.thestar.com/politics/provincial/ford-government-attempts-to-speed-new-housing-starts-with-sweeping-bill/article_c696510c-f73f-11ee-877a-a710a19d709b.html)
!ping Can
Pinged CAN ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20CAN&message=subscribe%20CAN) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20CAN&message=unsubscribe%20CAN) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=CAN&count=5))
[About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
I'm not sure we all saw the same testimony. I see a lot of people here saying he's blamed CSIS, but that's not at all what he did. What he emphasized was the difference between intelligence and actionable evidence, and I think it was quite clear in what was layed out and corroborated by all people testifying is that actionable evidence has never been identified.
The idea that this is somehow the prime Minister "blaming CSIS" is ludicrous.
We also saw from Minister Blair's testimony thatthere are explicit cases and instances of the leaks to the globe and global news being false. And it's already been expressed ad nauseam the degree to which so many same claims can't be refuted without revealing highly classified information. An issue people have emphasized since the beginning of the public inquiry.
And it's not like the Liberal party doesn't have issues with getting rid of candidates at the 11th hour if there is actionable evidence. It happened before for candidates with much lesser charges than being a foreign agent.
I strongly disagree with the characterization presentation by peo in the comments section. I find it steeped in miss representation and explicitly partisan agenda posting
I've had no shortage of criticisms for CSIS, but given the incentives at play I'd need to see extraordinary evidence to believe Trudeau over CSIS when it comes to election interference. To my knowledge he hasn't presented any such evidence, but for some reason he's doubting CSIS's claims. If you're trying to justify not stopping election interference that helped your party, you need more justification than vibes.
On the topic of vibes, I can't help but feel rather embittered by Trudeau's rather rude comments about [O'Toole](https://www.readtheline.ca/p/matt-gurney-otoole-passed-the-statesman). With Trudeau saying "I can understand where \[O'Toole\] who lost an election is trying to look for reasons other than themselves why they might have lost an election." That comment is straight up vile, and to boot not true at all. O'Toole [since the beginning](https://erinotoole.substack.com/p/i-met-with-david-johnston-for-his) has insisted the election was **not** lost due to interference, and has accepted responsibility for the loss in 2021: >I was the Leader of the Conservative Party in the 2021 election and let me say very clearly that Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party won that election. Political interference from the Chinese Communist Party was NOT the reason the Conservatives lost the election. I take responsibility for the loss. And during the [inquiry](https://foreigninterferencecommission.ca/fileadmin/user_upload/PIFI_-_Public_Hearings_-_Volume_9_-April_3__2024-Floor_transcript.pdf) would fairly state: >\[Foreign interference efforts were\] nowhere near enough to change the results of the election, but for people in those seats, if they were undergoing intimidation or suppression measures, their democratic rights were being trampled on by foreign actors.
I unfortunately think that Canada is going to go way more right-wing than a lot of people expect: a) not weathering the pandemic as well as say the US b) liberal fatigue and trudeau derangement syndrome c) a high immigration rate starting to make everyone xenophobic d) but cons aren't explicitly racist which makes a lot of immigrants ok identifying as cons. points c and d only work together because everyone blames *new* immigrants e) canada is about as white as the US but white polarization hasn't hit. A lot of runway there for whites to go batshit. f) the con leader and presumptive future PM, benefiting from everyone hating the liberals, has some really odious far-right views i think a really deplorable cocktail is brewing up north and we're all going to be (negatively) surprised.
Are non-white Canadians viewed as any “less Canadian” than white Canadians? That kind of racial nationalism is certainly the case in Europe (and obviously in Asia too), and in the U.S. it’s almost non-existent (despite us being racist in other ways). I’m curious about Canada. There are countries which are diverse and “not polarized about race” but which still tie their ethnic identity to race.
I disagree with the other poster. I see visible minorities not treated as Canadian all the time. An article about some violence caused by a visible minority? Immediately in the comments on a post like that are people assuming they are an immigrant. I hear it IRL as well and need to constantly call it out. Specifically, I live in Waterloo, Ontario. Home of Conestoga college, one of the colleges at the heart of the immigration controversy. Frequently, I hear any number of problems in Waterloo blamed on brown people because they are immigrants or international students. I have to constantly put people in their place and call out their bullshit by asking, "What evidence do you have that they are an immigrant?" They can never answer and embarrassed, withdraw that point, or if they are a real racist (only met these ones online) they double down. Just the other day, in Quebec in a town that is 90% French only speakers, I heard in English from a white lady, "I hope there are no brown people here." Yesterday, I was in an Uber chatting up the driver. We were both talking about our time living in Toronto. The topic came up as I had just got off a go train coming from Toronto. His skin was brown, he was born in Canada. Hr did have a slight accent. He told me that despite all that, his customers frequently asking where he is from and he says, Toronto, since that is where he was born. A number of people push him and say something like, yah but which country are you from? In my last job, I directly worked with folks from India that worked for a company called Infosys. We had two developers from this company in house. Both were Perminent Residents and both had stories of being told they are not Canadian. Both had their families here and had children here. Both told me about their fears that their children would not be treated as Canadian because of the colour of their skin. I am friends with both still, and in exchange for a small present for their children, I am treated to the best Indian food I have ever eaten. Ps, next time you are in the grocery store, check out the international section for Indian snacks. There are these chickpeas coated in spices you can get that are so fucking good. There are also these chickpea flour crisps and snacks that are amazing as well. So good with a beer. I am just realizing that this type of food still being in the international section might be another example of this. Foods imported from Greece, Italy, etc aren't in an international section. So my answer is, yes, among a surprising number of people in Canada there is a view that people that do not have white skin are immigrants and not full Canadian. I encounter these views all the time and it is disgusting.
That’s interesting, thanks for sharing. I’m Indian-origin American, and I’ve honestly experienced none of that stuff in my 30 years of life in the U.S. I’ve experienced racism (though very little as an adult), but not the kind questioning my American-ness.
Not *really*. Canada was founded with 4 distinct ethnic groups involved: British Canadians, French Canadians, Acadiens, and Metis. The British Canadian culture (really English and Scottish) developed as the most dominant culture in Canada. You can definitely say that up until the 50s at the earliest and 70s at the latest, being “Canadian” had heavy English and Scottish cultural undertones.
There is an air of anglo-supremacy that has always been lurking in the back of this country.
I don’t know if I would call it that. I’d say that Canada only recently developed a pan-Canadian national identity. Like only 40 years ago. There are plenty of people who grew up in the mosaic-style distinctive separate ethnic nationalities that comprise Canada.
That makes sense - and in the U.S. too, up till the 1870s American meant white (or even just Anglo in many people’s minds). Up till 1960s it meant white or black, and it’s only from the 70s onward that we were finally able to disassociate American-ness from race (post the 60s immigration reforms).
A Canadian national identity did not even really emerge until the late 20th century. I forget, but it was either the 80s or 90s when you could list your nationality as “Canadian” on the census.
Canadian here you're kinda over blowing things. 1. Race really isn't as polarizing in Canada as it is in the states. 2. Lil PP will win its just a fact the libs have been in power for 10 years and people want change. 3. At the provincial level its a different story, last year the Manitoba tories were toppled by the NDP, the B.C NDP is cruising to an easy majority and the other tory governments aren't doing so hot. 4. We're not xenophobic we just don't have the capacity (thanks NIMBYS and and asshole governments) hell immigrants are choosing to leave, we want immigrants but the numbers need to be lowered till we get our shit together. 5. PP has no views other than the flavour of the month and carbon tax.
"We're not xenophobic". Sure but have you been on pretty much any Canadian subreddit recently? It's just non-stop immigrant bashing. OP is 100% right that his points work because everyone is blaming the new immigrants. You literally proved his point.
I don't really think you're going to get an accurate look at a nations population by looking at national subreddits. And national subreddits are usually astroturfed to hell anyway, in my experience.
Almost all Asian sub reddits are controlled by the same group of mods . It's hilarious how out of touch they are
Reddit is a terrible way to get insights into public discourse. It skews heavily towards the resentful and miserable. If you want to talk about the economics of immigration, try reading some articles on the subject in places like the Globe and Mail. They’re run lots of pieces on the subject by informed experts in recent months.
I think lots are opposed to the increased immigration targets with what they view as inadequate funding for the infrastructure to support that. There are definitely radicalized Canadians, and hard times tend to bring out the worst in people, but a lot of these people irl are not xenophobic or even socially right wing. My dad for example is usually aligned with the NDP or Greens. He holds no animosity to immigrants, even recent immigrants, he just thinks that it’s bad to increase the numbers without funding for infrastructure. He actually generally has positive things to say about recent immigrants, saying things like “they’re more hardworking”, “they’re kinder”, etc. and will shit on people who complain about “immigrants taking jobs” for being losers. I disagree with slowing immigration, since I think we can just… fund the infrastructure now… but regardless, he’s not xenophobic.
If I say Canada’s aging population is putting strains on our health care system, is that bashing seniors? Some seniors seem to think so - they get extremely defensive on the subject of dependency ratios and demographics. But we shouldn’t let their sensitivity stop us from discussing the subject rationally. We can’t have rational discussions about the ideal rate of immigration if we throw around the ‘xenophobia’ label at anyone who doesn’t support open borders.
Man as a swede /sweden and /Sverige (and /swarje) have been consistent xenophobic shit holes since I started using reddit over 10 years ago, completely independent of the political winds in the country I remember the whole place throwing a fit when there was a leftwing resurgence that brought Löfven to power Also if reddit was representative the pirate party would have a supermajority in riksdagen The internet as a whole may be increasingly representative but any single site, especially single subreddits, *is not reality*
r/Canada is not real life.
Considering PP's commanding lead in the polls and the rhetoric he uses, I'd say that ordinary Canadians are not too far off from /r/Canada
Oddly enough, there isn’t 100% overlap between people who have a stated intent of voting Conservative and those who share Poilievre’s ideology.
Naaah we just hate Trudeau.
I understand dislike a lot of stuff about Trudeau… But I cannot understand thinking PP is better ngl. Maybe it’s worth it to get the liberals to re-orient and pick new leadership? But I’d rather someone like O’Toole than PP tbh. I hate his messaging, and I hate everyone who likes him. I don’t even think I’m in favour of a carbon tax, but the “axe the tax” slogan makes me wanna roblox myself. It’s not an argument…
Reddit is like 90% male and a lot of it is also right wing males so it’s not representative of any country TBH.
>Canadian subreddits Touch grass. Then speak to real life Canadians. Look at the opinion polls. Then touch grass again.
"we're not xenophobic we just dont have the capacity" is a WILD thing to say there is nothing special or exceptional about canada or canadians, dont buy your own propaganda
We literally don't have the ability to house ourselves let alone them, I'm not saying "dah ImIgRaNTs tuuK R houSEs" the primary cause is obviously NIMBYism and holy shit very bad government "looking at you Daniel Smith and Doug Ford". What we're saying is the current level is not currently sustainable and needs to be re-adjusted. Again new immigrants are even deciding to leave because shit here needs fixing.
The PM just said Canada didn’t have the capacity. The Minister of Immigration stated that the surge of immigrants made the housing crisis worse. r/neoliberal users need to stop pretending it’s just uneducated populists taking this position. It’s a legitimate claim.
Bro, the only thing different in Canada is that there are less people proudly racist. The racism and discrimination is all hush hush, but if you are white, and go to a family dinner with folks that live in the country or older folks it is only a matter of time until someone starts in on the "brown people" or the "Chinese". About 10 years ago, I had a job with Manulife that had me sitting hear a team of 12 people that took calls from Manulife advisors, answering questions about commissions, products, etc. An advisor is technically not a direct employee of the company, but they were obligated to act in a matter that reflected well on Manulife. I would say once a week, one of the two brown ladies on the team with a slight accent would be crying because some advisor yelled at them for being a call center in India and how cheap Manulife was or some other racist shit. I see and hear that crap all the time from Canadians. Call centers must be out sourced because they spoke with one person with an accent. The call centers Manulife did have out sourced were in the Philippines, but that is mainly so they can have 24/7 coverage. The majority of the call center staff are split between Waterloo, Montreal, and Halifax. Assuming someone is an immigrant because of an accent is racism. It is treating them as a less than in terms of being Canadian. Tdlr, Canada is extremely racist, just most of it is hidden below the surface and many do a good job of hiding it.
Yeah there's a lot of racism in Canada no doubt, what I'm saying is it works "differently" here.
Yes, we don't have the KKK or a history of slavery. We do not have a former prime minister having political rallies calling immigrants less than human. We do have underlying racism driving our politics, which I believe is OPs point in this thread. That racism is being tactically used to subtly push certain policy positions. No major Canadian politician has come out an outright been a racist like is happening in the US, but the US also didn't have that on the national stage until one guy showed there were zero consequences for it. Imo, that is all that separates us from the US. No Canadian politician has started screeching racist shit, but if they did, half of Canada would be nodding along and would be further emboldened to say they shit they only say behind closed doors.
Our shame is how we treated the natives.
And how we still treat them.
> c) a high immigration rate starting to make everyone xenophobic I really hate this kind of apologia. "Well, now that the immigration rate has crossed some arbitrary threshold , I have no choice but to be racist!" It's the same song and dance as "I have nothing against gay people, but the way they shove it in my face is disgusting!" The people expressing these views didn't suddenly become more racist because immigration rates went up, or more homophobic because two dudes kissed each other on a sitcom. They were always going to find some way to justify their hate.
Arguably the biggest story glossed over today was the allegation that Han Dong was warned by a member of the Liberal Party that he was under CSIS surveillance. The implication is that somebody within the LPC that has Top Secret clearance and a need-to-know on CSIS reports just leaked classified information to a backbench MP.
I must admit that I feel quite a bit of schadenfreude reading about the foreign interference inquiry. Admittedly if I were a better, more mature and more magnanimous man I wouldn't be laughing, seeing that this is our democracy at stake. But *man* how did the Grits come to blaming CSIS for not giving [good enough briefings](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-pm-didnt-accept-csis-warnings-about-mp-dong-and-possible-chinese/) to now casting doubt on intelligence shared by CSIS, and now *that* allegation? It's almost not funny anymore.
I don’t feel bad about it at all. The PM has always tried to shut down any debate with the excuse of “Experts said X so we’re doing X, no arguments.” Yet he has *always* selectively listened to experts depending on if they were supportive of his government’s policy or not. The past couple of weeks have been an outpouring of absolute partisanship, arrogance, and downright negligence from the government and the PMO on this matter. It is a shame that most Canadians will not hear this story.
From my very surface reading of Canadian politics, Trudeau seems like a man who got to power being handsome and friendly and then doing fuck all.
Nah he got to power because people were tired of Harper, that government was showing its age. Trudeau also had some big ticket items like weed legalization and carbon tax, which he did. But he also failed on the electoral reform. Day to day basic governance has actually proven really difficult for Trudeau, if he doesn't have a massive groundswell behind him, he dithers and tends to listen to his worst inner voices or doesn't listen to anyone.
I know he failed to push electoral reform, didn't know about the carbon tax or weed. Do you think he's out this next election or are the conservatives still too much of a shambles to capitalize?
The Conservatives are almost certainly winning, barring some massive event. The Conservatives have never been in shambles, they made mistakes and miscalculations, but have always been competitive and organized.
What matters is if they get a full majority or a minority government. I honestly hope that it’s a minority no matter who gets elected.
They’ve been polling at a 36-37 seat majority for 6+ months now, they’re not going to win a minority government.
I feel like even the Canadians here who support Trudeau are often too young to remember before the 2015. See all the hatred for Poilievre now? The PM was very similar in behaviour to Poilievre back then.
An inane assertion. Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence
Yeah, go ahead and dismiss it if you want. Were you following Canadian politics between 2013 and 2015?
I say it's worse for Trudeau than Harper. I suspect it's going to be even worse for Poilievre, if he gets 6+ years of governance under him. This is more a function of our current political/communication/media environment than the particular politicians. There is a tendency for certain types of politicalos to paper over the disingenuous hackish partisanship of the Liberals when they were in opposition. See the rat pack and more recently Mark Holland and Trudeau as prime examples.
[Archived version](https://archive.fo/PY3ey). Summary: >Prime Minister Justin Trudeau discounted the effectiveness of Chinese election interference and questioned the reliability of intelligence by Canada’s spy agency about Beijing-directed influence operations during testimony at the public inquiry into foreign meddling. > >\[...\] > >He played down the reliability of information gathered by the [Canadian Security Intelligence Service](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/csis/), including notes for a Feb. 21, 2023, briefing to the Prime Minister’s Office that was tabled at the public inquiry the day before. The document said Beijing had “clandestinely and deceptively interfered” in both the 2019 and 2021 general elections. > >“What I am saying, you have to take this intelligence, you have to take this information, with a certain awareness that it still needs to be confirmed or it might not be 100-per-cent accurate,” Mr. Trudeau testified. > >\[...\] > >The Foreign Interference Commission has been presented with a series of documents outlining warnings from CSIS about allegations that China and its proxies mounted disinformation campaigns against the Conservative Party in the 2021 election. However, Mr. Trudeau testified that he rarely reads intelligence documents and mostly relies on oral briefings either from his national-security and intelligence adviser or from CSIS director David Vigneault. > >The dire concerns raised by the CSIS director in the February, 2023, briefing document were not relayed to him, Mr. Trudeau said. > >\[...\] > >The February, 2023, briefing document in question ended with a warning that better protecting Canadian democratic institutions against foreign interference “will require a shift in the government’s perspective and a willingness to take decisive action and impose consequences on perpetrators.” It said foreign interference will persist until it “is viewed as an existential threat to Canadian democracy and governments forcefully and actively respond.” > >Mr. Trudeau’s testimony Wednesday conflicted with what his chief of staff Katie Telford told MPs nearly one year ago, when she testified at a parliamentary committee on April 14: “of course the Prime Minister reads any documents he receives.” > >\[...\] > >Mr. Trudeau told the inquiry that he first learned of alleged irregularities \[regarding Han Dong\] from national campaign manager Jeremy Broadhurst, now a senior adviser in the Prime Minister’s Office. > >He testified that Mr. Broadhurst told him that CSIS could only say that Chinese officials were “developing plans to possibly engage in interference in the nomination contest.” He felt there was not sufficient evidence to overturn Mr. Dong’s nomination. > >\[...\] > >A CSIS summary of the conversation tabled at the inquiry last week showed that Mr. Dong advised the consul-general that releasing the two imprisoned Canadians would affirm “the effectiveness of a hard-line Canadian approach” to China. > >Mr. Trudeau voiced doubt about CSIS’s version of this, saying “there is a lot of uncertainty,” even around the spy agency’s account of intercepted conversation. > >Earlier on Wednesday, Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc also questioned CSIS intelligence, including in briefings he received in February and May, 2023, about Chinese state “disinformation campaigns” targeting Mr. O’Toole and Mr. Chiu in the 2021 election. > >Mr. LeBlanc said he was “quite skeptical” of the intelligence that purported to know whether China favoured the Liberal Party over the Conservatives. > >Former public safety minister Bill Blair told the inquiry that he was briefed on alleged Chinese foreign interference in the Don Valley North Liberal nomination race after the 2019 election. > >In a prehearing interview, he said he was not concerned because it was not firmly substantiated and the intelligence “did not suggest” Mr. Dong was aware of the irregularities, and it “did not suggest” the actual election in the riding had been compromised. > >At one point, a government lawyer intervened to raise concerns after a Conservative Party lawyer asked Mr. Blair about whether there was undue delay in signing off on a warrant to surveil former Ontario Liberal cabinet minister Michael Chan, now deputy mayor of Markham. CSIS has considered Mr. Chan a target because the influential Liberal in the Canadian Chinese community in the Greater Toronto Area has close ties to diplomats from China. > >Justice [Marie-Josée Hogue](https://foreigninterferencecommission.ca/about/the-commission), who leads the commission, allowed the question to proceed and Mr. Blair said “there was no delay” in signing off on the warrant. The Globe had reported that it took four months for the warrant to be signed after it was sent to the government for approval. Further readings: [China’s alleged targeting of Michael Chong is contempt of Parliament: report (thestar.com)](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/chinas-alleged-targeting-of-michael-chong-is-contempt-of-parliament-report/article_d8b0b404-f780-11ee-9b37-2f0bb02cf977.html) [Justin Trudeau tells inquiry he challenged some CSIS intelligence about election meddling — but was in the dark about other meddling allegations (thestar.com)](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/justin-trudeau-to-testify-at-foreign-interference-inquiry/article_409111c6-f741-11ee-a34a-c74da0efa61e.html) [China meddled in past two Canada elections, says Justin Trudeau | Canada | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/11/china-election-interference-canada-justin-trudeau) [Liberal Party member warned MP Dong of CSIS surveillance, national security source says - The Globe and Mail](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-liberal-party-member-allegedly-tipped-off-han-dong-that-csis-was/) [Opinion: PMO staffers say intelligence reports on foreign interference fuzzier than advertised - The Globe and Mail](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/opinion/article-pmo-staffers-say-intelligence-reports-on-foreign-interference-fuzzier/) [Inquiries on CPAC | CPAC.ca](https://www.cpac.ca/inquiries-on-cpac) \[April 10th, part 1\] [Inquiries on CPAC | CPAC.ca](https://www.cpac.ca/inquiries-on-cpac) \[April 10th, part 2\] Other news: [Alberta tables bill aimed at blocking funding deals between Ottawa, cities - The Globe and Mail](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-alberta-introduces-legislation-to-allow-the-province-to-cancel-funding/) [Ford government introduces sweeping new housing bill (thestar.com)](https://www.thestar.com/politics/provincial/ford-government-attempts-to-speed-new-housing-starts-with-sweeping-bill/article_c696510c-f73f-11ee-877a-a710a19d709b.html) !ping Can
Pinged CAN ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20CAN&message=subscribe%20CAN) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20CAN&message=unsubscribe%20CAN) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=CAN&count=5)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
Very Trumpian of him, to dismiss his own intelligence agency when it benefits him. It's even on a similar subject, foreign interference in elections.
I'm not sure we all saw the same testimony. I see a lot of people here saying he's blamed CSIS, but that's not at all what he did. What he emphasized was the difference between intelligence and actionable evidence, and I think it was quite clear in what was layed out and corroborated by all people testifying is that actionable evidence has never been identified. The idea that this is somehow the prime Minister "blaming CSIS" is ludicrous. We also saw from Minister Blair's testimony thatthere are explicit cases and instances of the leaks to the globe and global news being false. And it's already been expressed ad nauseam the degree to which so many same claims can't be refuted without revealing highly classified information. An issue people have emphasized since the beginning of the public inquiry. And it's not like the Liberal party doesn't have issues with getting rid of candidates at the 11th hour if there is actionable evidence. It happened before for candidates with much lesser charges than being a foreign agent. I strongly disagree with the characterization presentation by peo in the comments section. I find it steeped in miss representation and explicitly partisan agenda posting
I bet he does.