A call for inclusive self-deprecation and groveling

Have you noticed? It seems that students in a whole lot of countries are required to recite something that signals their compliance with the state ideology. American kids, for example, stand up, and with one hand on their heart and give a pledge of allegiance , while ours bleat out the cant of ‘tolerance’ that their school masters have taught them.
In the 50s and 60s, students in British Columbia, as elsewhere, were made to stand up in the classroom at the beginning of each day and repeat the Lord’s Prayer. But after the Christian God was booted out of our classrooms, Canadian kids today paid homage to the God of Diversity .
In other words, our rejection of the Lord’s Prayer didn’t represent an embrace of secularism, but a transition to a different religion, a religion whose claims have been debunked by a number of studies beginning with the seminal research conducted by Harvard’s Robert Putnam. Their conclusion? More ethnic “diversity” leads to a diminution of trust and civic participation, and voluntary segregation. Rather than “reach out”, ethnic groups of all stripes prefer to “hunker down”.
In our case, this new religion might be characterized as the inverse of Shintoism. Instead of worshiping our European ancestors as the Japanese worshiped theirs, we revile them. So now, more and more school boards begin the day with an acknowledgement that we are standing on First Nations land and an expression of gratitude to the natives for allowing us to share it.
It is a practice which is becoming more common across the country, not only in schools and city council meetings but in other venues as well. The last federal New Democratic Party leadership convention is a case in point. Not surprisingly, the election writ for the October 2019 federal election was no sooner dropped when NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, who has perfected virtue signalling to an art form, launched his campaign with an obligatory thank you to First Nations for allowing him to speak on this their ancient land.
It all sounds harmless enough, but I am given to wonder why this protocol has suddenly become the norm. I mean, we have been living on “stolen land” for a long time now—as have the aboriginal tribes who occupy land acquired by the ethnic cleansing of previous aboriginal occupants. So why did we choose to ostentatiously confess our sins now?
The answer is obvious to everyone but the naïve.  Politicians of all stripes and parties, save Bernier and his PPC, are cheerleaders for mass immigration, and are intent upon stifling so-called “anti-immigrant” narratives. The best way to do this of course, is to de-legitimize any claim that Canadians of European origin have the moral authority to pull up the drawbridge. Occupants of so-called “stolen land” have no right to claim sovereignty over land that is not theirs, right? So being the descendants of thieving white settlers and European immigrant interlopers, we have no moral basis for denying entry to anyone who would follow us. I guess that’s why they stack the parliamentary Committee for Immigration with foreign born Canadians.
As we are constantly told, the only ‘true’ Canadians are aboriginals. If you don’t believe that now, then you soon will. After hearing the introductory acknowledgments to First Nations a thousand times, eventually the idea that neither you nor I have a right to deny entry to prospective immigrants or refugee claimants will ultimately penetrate our thick heads.  Heck, indoctrinated Millenials internalized that standard rejoinder long ago. As Daniel Stoffman put it, immigration policy is about “Who gets in” and “How many”, and old stock Canadians should have no voice in the matter, so say our betters.
Andrew Scheer’s position is only slightly less absurd. He has stated that the formulation of federal immigration policy should not only take into account the needs of Canadians, but the needs of those who aspire to come here. Perhaps Scheer would delegate that task to the United Nations Assembly. No wonder the Conservatives have been keen to join in on the ritual condemnations of the exclusionary policies of the past. To atone for these crimes, we must open the floodgates and welcome the world. There are plenty of potential Conservative voters in them thar hills.
The trouble is that once the culture of abject apologies for perceived past wrongs picks up momentum, and public meetings of every sort become confessionals, identity groups who are left out of these habitual self-deprecating introductions might file human rights complaints, chewing up an even greater amount of public tax dollars in the grand PR effort to woo minority voters. It is clear then, that we must strive to be more “inclusive” and contrite in our grovelling.
Therefore I would propose that we should compose a comprehensive statement that would pacify all aggrieved factions whom our wicked ancestors exploited, humiliated or oppressed. It would amalgamate our denunciation of Islamphobia, our shame about the Crusades, our guilt for occupying former aboriginal land, our internment of Japanese-Canadians, our Residential schools, our turning away of the St. Louis and the Komagatu Maru, our presumptuous imposition of Western civilization upon hunter-gatherers, our Eurocentric arrogance in assuming that native peoples would benefit from antibiotics, visual imaging, vaccines, dentistry, written language and the wheel, plus our profuse apologies for everything our ancestors did that was not covered in the above. The statement would serve as an introduction to every congregation of people, be it in parliament, school board meetings, sporting events, churches—you name it. It would serve as a constant reminder that we are evil seeds who don’t deserve to breathe.
The only problem is that reciting such a statement would use up all of the time allotted for the meeting.
I think this prayer would be more economic :
“Our Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who art in Ottawa, hallowed be thy name. Thy Orwellian Multicultural Theocracy come. Thy will be done, in Canada as it is in Sweden. Give us our unfunded liabilities, and forgive us our white privilege, as we forgive those who lodge human rights complaints and lawfare against us; and lead us not to the Dark Web or alternative perspectives, but deliver us from xenophobia, Islamophobia, white supremacy, nationalism and hate-filled Internet propaganda into the arms of globalism and rootless cosmopolitanism. Amen.”
How’s that?
Tim Murray