Unfortunately, it is the same kind of rambling speech that he made at the conference "Preserving Western Civilization."
One of my criticisms of the latter speech was that he was too familiar and personal, and pulled his audience unnecessarily into infightings and bitterness that he had experienced within the conservative movement. I would think that he has some new, young conservatives whom he would like to recruit into this "new majority." The kind of speech he made at "Preserving Western Civilization" wouldn’t have convinced me to join, if I were one of them.
Well, this time his speech is less acrimonious, but no less rambling. He manages to propose many possibilities for "building the new majority", but his 2,600-word speech makes detailed cases for none.
Nonetheless, there was one ingenious point he brought up, although he quickly lost track of it. He says, "I think it’s important that we start thinking about legal immigration too," (but I thought that was a major issue at Vdare since its inception, and not some new "thought" he's just recently had), then adds:
Legal immigration is as much out of control as illegal immigration, because of the "family unification" policy, which basically means that foreigners who have relatives in America have a sort of civil right to come here, and ultimately it has the same effect. The tremendous cross-subsidization from the American taxpayer to illegal and legal immigrants in this country just makes no sense from an economic point of view.I think he rightfully describes legal immigration, through its family unification policy, as having evolved into some kind of civil right (translate that as a human right by the U.N., which certainly views refugee claims in that manner). An immigrant may come to the U.S. (and to Canada) as a skilled worker, and then proceed to have various family members join him as part of his life's requirements.
Now, the Human Rights Commissions in Canada, which are an off-shoot of the Multiculturalism Act, the Immigration Act (now called Immigration and Refugee Protection Act), and the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, are a fraudulent court system which are in the process of getting dismantled.
Yet, if immigrants, and their advocates, view their entry into Canada (and the U.S.) as part of their civil/human right, dismantling one fraudulent system will only generate another fraudulent system, unless the root of the problem is addressed. Witness the Hate Crimes legislation, which is getting serious attention in the United States.
Brimelow could have expanded on the point a good deal, especially since he and his writers at Vdare are uncontested experts on this.
His small bit of genius was lost in his 2,000+-word rambling, losing his chance to address legal immigration in a logical and unique way.
I suggest that Ezra Levant take this into consideration. Unless he understands the fundamental problems of the HRCs, dismanteling them will produce the same kind of fraudulent legislations that the U.S. is now proposing, and all without the HRCs.
-------------------
N.B. If you see "Read More..." after this, there is nothing more to read. I'm working on fixing this problem.