UBC STUDY IMPLIES DISCRIMINATION AGAINST ASIANS. STUDY ON WIDESPREAD DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WHITE CANADIANS Long OVERDUE
Philip Oreopolos, the UBC Economics Professor whose recent study concluded that job seekers with Asian names face discrimination, should immediately conduct another much more significant research project. Its objective should be to count the number of white Canadian males who have faced job discrimination. That project is long overdue.
Over the past few years, the media have provided a number of high profile examples of white Canadian males who have been denied jobs because of federal Employment Equity rules. Some Employment Equity rules are intended to promote the hiring of immigrant visible minorities. However, no academic research has been done to calculate the number of white males who have been victimized. A similar count should be done for white Canadian females. Critics speculate that the total number will be very high and dwarf any results that Mr. Oreopoulos has found.
Employment Equity rules (often called Employment Inequity rules) were implemented in the mid-1980's. These rules have pressured both the public and private sector to grant employment, etc. to visible minority immigrants. Supposedly, this was done because visible minority immigrants faced discrimination in numerous sectors of the Canadian economy. As a result of Employment Equity pressure, many public institutions such as the CBC and the RCMP as well as governments at all levels have made significant changes in their hiring. The private sector has done the same. Both have done so almost as if they are assisting the downtrodden. Both hold up their work almost as if they feel they should be publicly congratulated for their actions.
However, Dr. Martin Loney has clearly demonstrated that the mid-1980's research which resulted in Employment Equity rules for immigrant visible minorities was carelessly done, that its conclusions were flawed and that those conclusions should never have been implemented. In other words, “systemic discrimination” and the ubiquitous “downtrodden” never existed. And efforts to “correct” discrimination against the “downtrodden” have created a real downtrodden in the majority white population.
Moreover, public institutions and private business who have been infatuated with this legislation should be recognized as panderers to ethnic groups. They do not deserve applause for their actions.
Unfortunately for visible minorities who have obtained their jobs legitimately, that is, through merit, Employment Equity laws have cast a cloud of suspicion over all visible minority immigrants who have been hired. The question that most Canadians ask is this: Did they get their positions primarily because of their skin colour?
Mr. Oreopoulos has been cautious about explaining why Asian job seekers received fewer callbacks about their job applications. True to form, Canada's immigration industry has not been so careful. It has used the study as one more opportunity to instill more guilt in Canadians. That industry's goal is to intimidate Canadians into continued silence on the key point which all Canadians should direct their attention to : Why is Canada's immigration intake, which includes many visible minority immigrants, so high?
In addition, the Oreopoulos study reinforces the misconception that many of Canada's immigrants have qualifications. However, the truth, which even Canada's Department of Citizenship and Immigration admits, is that most immigrants who come here every year have few, if any, qualifications at all.
Most Canadians will treat visible minority immigrants fairly, but most Canadians have no desire to be overwhelmed by high immigration or to be colonized. The fact is that Canadians did not need the senseless competition for employment, student spaces, health-care services, etc. from the 5 million who have arrived since 1990. Not much can be done about those who have arrived legally. But many Canadians remain angry that the massive, unjustified inflow occurred. Many workers are outraged that none of our political parties stand up for Canadian worker interests. Many ask why, particularly at this time when increasing numbers of Canadians are jobless, the immigration tsunami of 250,000 immigrants and 200,000 Temporary Foreign Workers per year continues. Why, they ask, have only a few politicians at all 3 levels of government spoken up or proposed cuts to immigration?.
In addition, many Canadian workers are dumbfounded that their unions are now fighting recent Canada Border Services Agency raids on businesses which employ illegal workers. To Canadian workers, illegal workers occupy jobs that jobless Canadians could have. To many workers, these illegals should be rounded up and summarily deported. However, Canadian unions which are heavily influenced by political correctness or the views of visible minority members are now saying that the illegals should be given a chance to become citizens and union members—-particularly the latter. The question that many Canadian workers ask is this: If our unions are betraying us as much as our governments, who can we turn to?
Mr. Oreopoulos and his academic colleagues who are involved in sociological research should consider the issues raised here before they move on.
Meanwhile, Canada's immigration minister, Jason Kenney should be looking at the federally-funded agencies which grant public money for academic studies.
He should be asking an important question : How much public money is being given each year to academics all across Canada to conduct sociological studies whose aim is to promote multicultural ideology and to further the objectives of Canada's immigration industry?
No one is objecting to solid research. However, most Canadians have no desire to have public funds used for research which promotes politically-correct ideology, supports a self-interested immigration industry and leads the majority population down Discrimination Road towards a destination called Self-Flagellation.