Diversity’s Colour

Published by at 12:32 pm under Justice

“a Hue of uniformity ”
As Canada expands its diversity, we increasingly are cornering our minds into a collectivist cage of consensus, where vocabulary and reason is subtracted from public discourse. Immigration from other cultures ought to and will increase our knowledge and expand our perspective, but not when we hold our freedoms captive while opening the doors of morality to relativism.

The true meaning and value of diversity in Canadian society is being fraudulently coloured by politicians of all shades and tinted by our courts, schools and the media. Diversity is a many splendid thing, but when it is limited to multiculturalism or skin colours, languages, clothing and restaurants that are visible in society, it demeans and destroys its real value. Although we deem diversity of race, creed, colour, and gender as valuable and essential, we vilify diverse opinions and thought in Canada. Clearly, diversity of thought is being starved by our appetite for consensus and is costing Canadians practical public policy, individual freedoms, and an understanding of moral rights and wrongs in society.

It is a timeless and natural law that freedom of thought, ideas and opinions are the prime movers, and essential for human progress and prosperity. Each and every advance in
human history is the result of an individual’s opinion or idea and their subsequent challenge of the status quo and accepted view. History is but a portrait of people who battled for advancement with their ideas. People such as Galileo, Newton, Darwin or Einstein in science; Aristotle, Jefferson or Marx in politics, moved the yardsticks for mankind. They all battled conventional thought or policy with ideas and diversity of opinion and the test of time has proven them either right or wrong. Had they and others succumbed to the uniformity and consensus of the day, the sun would till be orbiting the earth.

Although society finds value in diversity of colour and creed we increasingly view diversity of thought and opinion as bordering upon criminal. Just ask Mark Steyn, Ezra Levant, MacLean’s magazine, or the many others who have faced the inquisition of our Human Rights Tribunals. What all these examples share in common is that a public challenge to the merit or validity of accepted edicts incurs the wrath and vengeance of the politically correct crowd and the progressive tribunals, and is stereotyped and marginalized. These same “progressive” people who jealously guard their own freedom of expression are first in line to attack others with their “legal” hypocrisy.

In addition while faulty public policies based on incomplete science and a collective misunderstanding of responsibility expands, our freedom to challenge these policies diminishes. To challenge the “crisis” of climate change is to blaspheme the green prophets of Gaia; to challenge the public monopoly on healthcare with private competition is a universal taboo; the only safe place to oppose polygamy or Sharia law is in a darkened closet; and, as we express endearment for racial inclusion we build segregated afro-centric schools.

It is indisputable that public policies now rely on the shields of political correctness because they cannot withstand the challenges of logic, experience and rational discourse.

As Toronto sees more killings per year than our losses in the Afghan war it is the gun that must be blamed and banned, not the culprits’ trigger fingers. Ontario’s government is waging a phony war on poverty, and excuses street violence because it is due to poverty not immorality. While police must create special “guns and gangs” units to combat the real war politicians refuse to recognize, the government issues another welfare cheque to buy more bullets for the impoverished combatants. The war on drugs parallels the poverty war offering government sponsored safe injections sites, crack pipe giveaways, and free needles, while the courtrooms fill with those who can buy their own drugs but get caught. Of course only racists and bigots would speak with such frankness on this subject. By deduction we can see that governments’ promotion of diversity leads to a universal policy of contradictions and hypocrisy.

It surely is the ultimate hypocrisy of all progressives, that they demand open hearts for a multitude of people from various backgrounds, ethnicities and faiths but demand closed minds to contrary opinions and opposing views. All public policies and opinions must be freely challenged from all corners and come under the scrutiny of millions of free and inquisitive minds, and should they withstand this assault of reason we will have certainty that the opinion is fact and the public policy is the best that mankind can attain at the time. Only then will we have the certainty that Canada is on the path to freedom, justice and prosperity and not just painting a surreal political landscape without perspective.

29 The Landowner Magazine – October/November 2008
By Randy Hillier, MPP