How many newcomers to Canada have anything to do with what the country’s federal government calls rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples?
The answer: not one.
Which, quite obviously, is the reason why The Honourable Marco E. L. Mendicino, P.C., M.P., Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, announced that Canada’s Oath of Citizenship will change forthwith.
If the NDP continues supporting the Liberal government, a Bill to amend the Citizenship Act will pass basically uncontested.
According to words put into the minister’s mouth by some politically correct officials, the newest idea is to insert a few words into the Oath of Citizenship about the rights of Indigenous Peoples.
It happened elsewhere, too
Following the example of South Africa, Canada has put together something it calls the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. That unusual group has produced something now known as Calls to Action. One of those, known as Call to Action number 94, fits the bill, according to the politically correct crowd.
Of course, who cares what havoc the Truth and Reconciliation Commission wrought on South Africa.
Based on the idiotic assumption that all blacks are blacks, ignoring the inconvenient fact that there are more than a few different tribes (or nations) of black people there, the new South African race-based crime rates have been at their highest for the last several years.
Most of the world is not aware: politicians and mainstream media who fought for the end of the apartheid regime and hailed the arrival of convicted Communist terrorist Nelson Mandela into the highest office in his country, would not imagine exploring what their efforts had helped to create.
What’s all this got to do with Canada?
The most infamous allegation made by Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission involved what is known as residential schools. These institutions, the learned members of the commission said for the record, used some awfully violent coercion to teach their students that they must forget their heritage and accept the white invaders’ ways.
True, violent coercion used to be the accepted method of education. Not only in the residential schools: giving kids the cane treatment was an accepted way in all schools. Indeed, it used to be considered a perfect way for the parents to teach their children manners. After all, in the King James translation of the original Bible it said (verbatim): He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. Take it for granted that this view included daughters, too.
This is not to argue whether a bit of occasional good hiding was or was not a proper method of advanced education. This is to state nothing more than that residential schools were no exception to the rule.
Myths or legends?
The other angle accuses the bloody white-faced invaders of robbing the indigenous peoples of their heritage.
Well, you either want to use modern life amenities, or you don’t. Most indigenous people were keenly interested in improving their lot. But: to be able to get ahead, one has to learn how to achieve that. While this does not automatically mean that people simply must forget their history, it does automatically mean that they must learn their present and future.
Another fallacy promoted by Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission held that indigenous peoples were as peaceful as peaceful can get. The indigenous peoples’ own legends about the numerous wars among the many individual tribes (now known as nations) put this kind of delusion to a stern test.
The wars and conflicts used to be described as based on differing faiths and similar rot, just as history books teach us about any wars anywhere else in the world.
They were about economic advantage, of course, just as any other wars anywhere else in the world.
Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission has also held that the indigenous peoples have been the best guardians of nature. They have been at one with nature all along, and that we must respect that.
Perfect nonsense, of course.
According to their own history, the indigenous peoples of Canada were nomads: when they depleted an area of all (or most) edible growth and animals, they would move to greener pastures.
After all, most of the conflicts and wars between individual tribes (nations, if you insist) happened when one group thought another group was residing somewhere where they would want to be themselves.
All of this is one angle.
The other one is more important.
The new Oath of Citizenship, according to the government’s announcement, should sound: “I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada, including the Constitution, which recognizes and affirms the Aboriginal and treaty rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples, and fulfill my duties as a Canadian citizen.”
This is a perfectly racist statement.
Just as the acceptance of different rights for different people is not inclusive, as the government claims it is, the new oath can hardly be more divisive.
The government, in announcing the proposed change, argued that it is taking these steps to “fundamentally transform the nature of our relationship with Indigenous Peoples by encouraging new Canadians to fully appreciate and respect the significant role of Indigenous Peoples in forming Canada’s fabric and identity.”
Sheer and utter nonsense.
With all due respect for those who had lived in what would become Canada, history tells us that the government is pandering to special interests, attempting to divide and conquer.
Just as newcomers to Canada should be asked to forget the wars, conflicts and disagreements that had existed in their home countries, more often than not forcing them to leave, so we all should remember that we are Canadians, without any hyphens.
Forcing newcomers to swear an allegiance to a lie is too cynical for words.