The Promised Land

 

An Igbo bride.

Canada’s manifest destiny is to be a home for refugees.

That is more or less how it all began, with the UE Loyalists; and continued, with the Highland Clearances and the Irish famine. Even Loius Riel, contrary to popular misinformation that he was trying to keep the land for the aboriginals, had exactly this vision: Canada as a home for refugees. It is the great thing Canada, with its expanses, can do for the world. In so doing, we not only help end the suffering, but also reduce tensions in the land from which the refugees come, since they do not want them. Often, their home countries would be happy to cooperate with “getting them off their hands.”

Imagine, for example, the good Canada could have done if, in the 1930s, we had opened our doors to Jews coming from Germany. 

This is best for Canada as well. Those who come from places they are welcome are most likely to make a firm commitment to Canada and its culture and development. They have no divided loyalties. 

In order to do so, we should stop squandering our immigration quota on mere economic migrants. We should get back to huddled masses yearning to breathe free.

We should favour Christians coming from non-Christian countries. In absolute numbers, Christians are the most oppressed religious group on Earth. At the same time, favouring Christians makes economic and cultural sense. Churches are falling empty and needing to be repurposed or knocked down, the religious art lost or destroyed. This is an economic blow, and a destruction of a significant part of our heritage. Immigrant Christians from other countries could gratefully fill those pews, and keep the structures in good condition.

We should also give absolute preference to all Jews. They are and always have been discriminated against everywhere, and are not safe, as recent events demonstrate, in Israel. This too is to our benefit: Jews are good for the economy and the culture wherever they go. And beautiful old synagogues are also falling empty.

Smaller religions lacking a homeland generally are worthy of unrestricted immigration: the Yazidis, Bahai, Sikhs, Falun Gong, and Parsis.

Muslims are a special case. Although persecuted in many countries, Islam is also uniquely constitutionally prone to persecuting other faiths when it can. No other faiths are legal, for example, in Saudi Arabia. Allowing large-scale Muslim immigration can threaten the security of other faiths in Canada.

There is also ethnic persecution. Tigrayans from Ethiopia; Hakka Chinese from Southeast Asia; Igbo from Nigeria. One group in obvious jeopardy, although it is unfashionable to say so, is “white” South Africans. 

We should not be opening doors to refugees from wars, as opposed to genocides or persecutions. Admitting refugees from both sides, who are simply fleeing the carnage of war, is likely to import the tensions that led to war, and extend the violence to Canadian soil. Admitting refugees from just one side drains it of fighting men to defend it; and those disloyal to their original country in time of need cannot be expected to become model Canadians.

Canadian embassies around the world could be assigned the task of determining what local groups might deserve such special immigrant status; and even coordinate with the local government to remove these “undesirables” without conflict.

Canada would be the richer for it.