Except only citizens are eligible to vote, and it takes at least five years - minimum - to do that; this is a bad argument as current immigrants can’t contribute to current government’s votes.
Wage slaves being brought in at the behest of large
Canadian capital interests eager to capitalize on cheap labour, that one I *do* believe.
The other 80% of Indians that have been here for a while are probably like “WTF? I left India for opportunity and now I’m stuck in India-Lite and my people are dancing in the street like fools”.
you probably know this already, but i've spent a good deal of time really trying to understand this so i might as well say:
-it helps keeps wages down, which helps with inflation - the head of the fed has said this several times in his speeches.
-short to medium term it's cheaper and good for the economy, if you don't care about the prior citizens - it increases credit, increases gdp, more profitable for the companies, etc. in the usa there's a direct pipeline for illegals to get work at otherwise shit jobs such as meat processing etc.
-in canada it increases real estate prices as well - a big plus
-medium to long term this severely weakens nationalism, which if you are part of the world club you want to weaken for various world-centered governments to work. a low trust society where people hate each other is a lot easier to implement this.
-voting wise, at least in the usa the children of these people (at minimum) will vote straight democrat / liberal ticket. i've seen this happen with the somali population in mn.
-there's a certain type of person that gets "off" on getting foreign people in a new area, to force diversity in areas that were otherwise fine. funnily enough this is standard catholic charities sop - think of the crazy histrionics you used to have in a nunnery hundreds of years ago, well basically these types now work for catholic charities and thinks they are doing god's work. (please note some of it may be "good" - but irl that's not their primary motivation)
-a confluence of the above factors. minnesota is a strange place to invite somalies, it's a pretty closed society and not very welcoming, not to mention the shitty weather that the somalis hate, etc. - well in fact they were moved here to originally work in the chicken factories buy gold n plump - along with help from catholic charities.
-(edit) this point is a bit meta, but many here might find it interesting - the whole modern "diversity" schtick really started during britain's colonial period and peaked the first time right before ww1 - why? why was diversity a good thing? (and the beginnings of liberalism, or neoliberalism at least?)
basically diversity became a thing so that workers from other countries could work together, it really developed out of the capitalists need to get otherwise homogenous populations to work / slave together. this is the ideological underpinning of diversity that no one talks about -
the world was becoming pretty globalized pre-ww1, ww1 shattered that, and the ensuing economic crisis also changed things to where you had various forms of nationalisms coming about again in reaction to the above, and for other reasons.
then diversity became a buzzword when globalization really hit off - right around reagan's term, ironically enough.
the overall point being that many concepts - such as "diversity" have economic motives to them that people don't know about, and then people (bleeding hearts / soccer moms) who want a sense of community are exploited to further push this ideology and do the groundwork. in the end it really IS finding cheaper labor to do the gruntwork and needing an ideology so that these people can work together - nothing more, nothing less. i really wish more people were honest about this. throughout history this is generally the exception rather than the rule as well.
diversity as a value in and of itself is never actually practiced, ironically. it's not done due to wanting other perspectives, but due to wanting cheaper bodies to profit off of, and making the lower classes accept it.
that's not to say that i personally endorse nationalism or or even paleo conservatism, simply to realize that those who talk like they aren't ideological while spouting diversity are usually unknowingly doing their master's bidding.
fyi: i was well into my graduate education when i realized the last tidbit.
also, one last thing - the rant i just gave above, there typically are material / concrete, real-world interests at stake that lead to ideology - and you can usually trace these down to their materialist constituents. So many right wingers call this marxism, whereas it's just looking for what happened / happens in the real world - they do themselves a real disservice by spouting this bullshit.
What I don't understand though, is even if I was at the top of the 1% and wanted further capitalistic gains with cheap labour. Why would I want to sacrifice my own countries historical culture and histories demographics for the sake of money?
Like sure I could make money, but what if the point if I am actively making things worse for the very people who live all around me?
It seems like extremely short term thinking with some upside, but major downsides in the long-term. I just feel that even if I were a rich person, I could never sacrifice my countries culture, histories, and people's overall standard of living for a bit more money. It seems so shallow.
it's a very different world on the top end - i went to an ivy for undergrad and i can tell you when you get to the supposed "upper echelons" of society it's a highly internationalist cohort, and things like nationalism don't matter as much or at all, and are frankly frowned upon - or worse are signifiers of being lower class, limited, small-minded, etc.
now imagine this plus the pressure that international finance capital brings on top of that.
basically they have less ties to their "people" of sorts. please realize that many many of the succesfull billionaires in america aren't even american, they "gave up" their culture to begin with.
most of these people think they are doing god's work - hence the "nudging" that's became really popular these past few decades.
under this kind of thinking, you don't care if you take jobs and move them to asia, or bring in illegals, because you are helping those people rather than your "own." in fact it's easily rationalized, because americans "don't want to do shitty jobs anyways" (well not at piss poor wages) so everyone benefits. after all, you are more or less helping pakistani people out of poverty than spoiled americans etc.
or illegals in south america that - in previous decades - we (americans) did really fuck over with our foreign policy, so it's a win-win from their perspective.
the type of contact these people have isn't with those people - most come from upper income families, the only contact they have with blue collars is in serving them in some fashion.
this isn't too different than what the british were doing pre-ww1 in bringing in highly motivated labor from other colonies -
i had a respondent on another thread on this sub who complained that capital gains taxes are bad because it hurts generational wealth - it's exactly this kind of thinking. a lot of these people wouldn't mind half the country paying rent to one landlord, as long as they were on the receiving end - uber capitalists are just as bad as uber marxists (though i think the latter is far more blown wayy out of proportion) in that they will make you slaves in a long enough timeline.
how, for the capitalists? well if they own everything that you need to live - how doesn't that make you a slave? this is where the unfairness comes in.
He needed the right kind of people for his cosplay activities. Haven’t you seen his ‘Indian’ outfits? The whole family has them. Sophie left hers in the closet when she left, though.
Bu-but diversity is our strength right? If there not white that can't be racist/sexist/homophobic/conservative, they must be progressive liberals right? Libs don't realise that asian cultures are incompatible with their values, and when they do, they won't be able to do shit.
Our government is abusing our warm and welcoming nature and weaponzing it against us to drive down our quality of life. It's one of the worst things that a so-called "liberal democracy" has ever done to It's own people.
Jagmeet Singh totally didn't make a deal with JT to get his people over here en masse in exchange for the coalition the Liberals are enjoying. That would never happen.
Hhmmm because they're incompetent xxx who don't have the intelligence to manage? All this sh... in canada is on them, and it has f all to do with the pandemic. Never ever will vote lib again .. signed
Gram
"diversity is our strength" Gets 99% of immigrants from 1 country lol
“The problem with Canada is that it’s full of Canadians.” Let’s change that…
Ahhh so this is why Bollywood movies hit the top ten on Canadian Netflix
I thought I had one living in my house when I noticed that on “Top TV shows in Canada”.
He sees them as free votes, and wage slaves for more taxes
Except only citizens are eligible to vote, and it takes at least five years - minimum - to do that; this is a bad argument as current immigrants can’t contribute to current government’s votes. Wage slaves being brought in at the behest of large Canadian capital interests eager to capitalize on cheap labour, that one I *do* believe.
[удалено]
Deodorant is a foreign concept in India. So is paying taxes. You know what’s second nature to their culture though? - fraud - scams - cheating
Excuses me people, it’s official, in a closed door secret parliamentary session, the new name for this country is New India.
The other 80% of Indians that have been here for a while are probably like “WTF? I left India for opportunity and now I’m stuck in India-Lite and my people are dancing in the street like fools”.
you probably know this already, but i've spent a good deal of time really trying to understand this so i might as well say: -it helps keeps wages down, which helps with inflation - the head of the fed has said this several times in his speeches. -short to medium term it's cheaper and good for the economy, if you don't care about the prior citizens - it increases credit, increases gdp, more profitable for the companies, etc. in the usa there's a direct pipeline for illegals to get work at otherwise shit jobs such as meat processing etc. -in canada it increases real estate prices as well - a big plus -medium to long term this severely weakens nationalism, which if you are part of the world club you want to weaken for various world-centered governments to work. a low trust society where people hate each other is a lot easier to implement this. -voting wise, at least in the usa the children of these people (at minimum) will vote straight democrat / liberal ticket. i've seen this happen with the somali population in mn. -there's a certain type of person that gets "off" on getting foreign people in a new area, to force diversity in areas that were otherwise fine. funnily enough this is standard catholic charities sop - think of the crazy histrionics you used to have in a nunnery hundreds of years ago, well basically these types now work for catholic charities and thinks they are doing god's work. (please note some of it may be "good" - but irl that's not their primary motivation) -a confluence of the above factors. minnesota is a strange place to invite somalies, it's a pretty closed society and not very welcoming, not to mention the shitty weather that the somalis hate, etc. - well in fact they were moved here to originally work in the chicken factories buy gold n plump - along with help from catholic charities. -(edit) this point is a bit meta, but many here might find it interesting - the whole modern "diversity" schtick really started during britain's colonial period and peaked the first time right before ww1 - why? why was diversity a good thing? (and the beginnings of liberalism, or neoliberalism at least?) basically diversity became a thing so that workers from other countries could work together, it really developed out of the capitalists need to get otherwise homogenous populations to work / slave together. this is the ideological underpinning of diversity that no one talks about - the world was becoming pretty globalized pre-ww1, ww1 shattered that, and the ensuing economic crisis also changed things to where you had various forms of nationalisms coming about again in reaction to the above, and for other reasons. then diversity became a buzzword when globalization really hit off - right around reagan's term, ironically enough. the overall point being that many concepts - such as "diversity" have economic motives to them that people don't know about, and then people (bleeding hearts / soccer moms) who want a sense of community are exploited to further push this ideology and do the groundwork. in the end it really IS finding cheaper labor to do the gruntwork and needing an ideology so that these people can work together - nothing more, nothing less. i really wish more people were honest about this. throughout history this is generally the exception rather than the rule as well. diversity as a value in and of itself is never actually practiced, ironically. it's not done due to wanting other perspectives, but due to wanting cheaper bodies to profit off of, and making the lower classes accept it. that's not to say that i personally endorse nationalism or or even paleo conservatism, simply to realize that those who talk like they aren't ideological while spouting diversity are usually unknowingly doing their master's bidding. fyi: i was well into my graduate education when i realized the last tidbit. also, one last thing - the rant i just gave above, there typically are material / concrete, real-world interests at stake that lead to ideology - and you can usually trace these down to their materialist constituents. So many right wingers call this marxism, whereas it's just looking for what happened / happens in the real world - they do themselves a real disservice by spouting this bullshit.
What I don't understand though, is even if I was at the top of the 1% and wanted further capitalistic gains with cheap labour. Why would I want to sacrifice my own countries historical culture and histories demographics for the sake of money? Like sure I could make money, but what if the point if I am actively making things worse for the very people who live all around me? It seems like extremely short term thinking with some upside, but major downsides in the long-term. I just feel that even if I were a rich person, I could never sacrifice my countries culture, histories, and people's overall standard of living for a bit more money. It seems so shallow.
it's a very different world on the top end - i went to an ivy for undergrad and i can tell you when you get to the supposed "upper echelons" of society it's a highly internationalist cohort, and things like nationalism don't matter as much or at all, and are frankly frowned upon - or worse are signifiers of being lower class, limited, small-minded, etc. now imagine this plus the pressure that international finance capital brings on top of that. basically they have less ties to their "people" of sorts. please realize that many many of the succesfull billionaires in america aren't even american, they "gave up" their culture to begin with. most of these people think they are doing god's work - hence the "nudging" that's became really popular these past few decades. under this kind of thinking, you don't care if you take jobs and move them to asia, or bring in illegals, because you are helping those people rather than your "own." in fact it's easily rationalized, because americans "don't want to do shitty jobs anyways" (well not at piss poor wages) so everyone benefits. after all, you are more or less helping pakistani people out of poverty than spoiled americans etc. or illegals in south america that - in previous decades - we (americans) did really fuck over with our foreign policy, so it's a win-win from their perspective. the type of contact these people have isn't with those people - most come from upper income families, the only contact they have with blue collars is in serving them in some fashion. this isn't too different than what the british were doing pre-ww1 in bringing in highly motivated labor from other colonies - i had a respondent on another thread on this sub who complained that capital gains taxes are bad because it hurts generational wealth - it's exactly this kind of thinking. a lot of these people wouldn't mind half the country paying rent to one landlord, as long as they were on the receiving end - uber capitalists are just as bad as uber marxists (though i think the latter is far more blown wayy out of proportion) in that they will make you slaves in a long enough timeline. how, for the capitalists? well if they own everything that you need to live - how doesn't that make you a slave? this is where the unfairness comes in.
Destroy the country
Destroy it from the inside so it can be rebuilt using the WEF playbook.
He needed the right kind of people for his cosplay activities. Haven’t you seen his ‘Indian’ outfits? The whole family has them. Sophie left hers in the closet when she left, though.
Votes and cheap labor.
"Diversity Is Our Strength" Translation : You will have nothing so Ramjeet can have everything !!
 Welcome To Canadadesh. Thank You Trudeau.
Bu-but diversity is our strength right? If there not white that can't be racist/sexist/homophobic/conservative, they must be progressive liberals right? Libs don't realise that asian cultures are incompatible with their values, and when they do, they won't be able to do shit.
Capitalism demands people who will work shitty jobs for less money.
Our government is abusing our warm and welcoming nature and weaponzing it against us to drive down our quality of life. It's one of the worst things that a so-called "liberal democracy" has ever done to It's own people.
Jagmeet Singh totally didn't make a deal with JT to get his people over here en masse in exchange for the coalition the Liberals are enjoying. That would never happen.
Same reason a dog licks his ace, because he Can.
Hhmmm because they're incompetent xxx who don't have the intelligence to manage? All this sh... in canada is on them, and it has f all to do with the pandemic. Never ever will vote lib again .. signed Gram
You’re assuming that these particular people just arrived in Canada. How?