THE MISSING Friday September 6th Vancouver Sun editorial – it’s been deleted but it still can be found
Hugely controversial, the
Editorial / Opinion commentary in the Friday Vancouver Sun has been scrubbed
from all online media locations where they had it located. It still can be found however, although it
does take a bit of work.
One source, archive.today
(webpage capture) is where I found the following.
Please do share your thoughts, BUT, I will not accept anything that ridicules, denigrates, or derides any culture in it’s entirety. We are all individuals, and all of use are responsible for our own actions. That is not something exclusive to any culture or ethnic group.
Now ... here is that scrubbed commentary:
Please do share your thoughts, BUT, I will not accept anything that ridicules, denigrates, or derides any culture in it’s entirety. We are all individuals, and all of use are responsible for our own actions. That is not something exclusive to any culture or ethnic group.
Now ... here is that scrubbed commentary:
Mark Hecht: Ethnic
diversity harms a country's social trust, economic well-being, argues professor
OPINION:
Canada should say goodbye to diversity, tolerance and inclusion to rebuild
trust in one another and start accepting a new norm for immigration policy —
compatibility, cohesion and social trust.
Updated: September 6, 2019
Sometimes they get too much publicity, but can you blame them? The Danes
just seem to get things right. But even the Danes can make mistakes.
A
decade ago, the fundamental belief among Danes toward Muslim immigrants was
that these newcomers would see how wonderful Denmark was and naturally want to
become Danish as quickly as possible.
This
turned out to be naively wrong. At least half of all Muslims polled across
various western European countries believe today that their Shariah law is more
important than national law, according to the Gatestone Institute. In other words, a not
insignificant proportion of Muslim immigrants have no intention of assimilating
into any western society, including Denmark.
Danes
have pushed back. Losing the integrity of their society — one of the best in
the world by all measures — was on the line. Requirements to obtain citizenship
increased. A new insistence that immigrant children go to Danish public schools
instead of religious schools was implemented. Social benefits were rescinded
for those who didn’t comply. This was only the beginning. But the Danes are not
alone.
Many
western nations assumed that increasing ethnic and cultural diversity through immigration
would be beneficial. The dogma of diversity, tolerance and inclusion assumed
that all members of the society wanted to be included as equal citizens. Yet,
instead of diversity being a blessing, many found that they’ve ended up with a
lot of arrogant people living in their countries with no intention of letting
go of their previous cultures, animosities, preferences, and pretensions.
Let’s
give the devil his due. Diversity, tolerance and inclusion was actually a
commendable perspective. It assumed the dominant society was leaving people out
of full participation.
It was
a valid critique. In response to inequalities, real or otherwise, measures were
taken that would include everyone. Affirmative action, political correctness
and anti-bias training became the tools for inculcating tolerance and
inclusion. Helpful? Somewhat. Yet, the most important question was overlooked:
What if some did not actually want to be included?
Denmark
recognized this problem long ago, and is now finding practical solutions. It
knows what it was — a country that worked very well when it was homogeneous,
where everyone wanted to be and was a part of the society. They spoke the same
language, understood the same customs and traditions, and held the same
beliefs. The result was that people trusted each other and the economy
flourished.
In
fact, social trust corresponds more closely than any other factor to predicting
economic prosperity. Harvard economists Alberto Alesina and co-authors from a
paper titled, Fractionalization, argued that greater diversity leads
to stunted economic growth. In other words, diversity is a weakness as far as
the economy is concerned.
In
1981 The World Values Survey began an investigation into
cross-cultural beliefs, values and motivations, and has since shown that
societies with high social trust are not only more economically productive but
also happier. The most successful are homogeneous countries, not the diverse
ones.
Denmark
and the rest of Scandinavia is always at the top of those rankings. They, shine
a beacon on the fact that trust is what makes society great. Interestingly,
Scandinavian countries are becoming even more trusting. Canada, Great Britain,
the U.S. and Australia are all going in the opposite direction. In Canada, we
are becoming less trusting of one other.
If a
society wants high social trust and the benefits of stability, productivity,
and happiness, there are apparently two factors that stand out. According to
macrosociology researcher Jan Delhey at Otto von Geuricke University in
Magdeburg, Germany — Protestantism and low ethnic diversity — are the top two
criteria.
Setting
aside the part about Protestantism, low ethnic diversity as a single factor
fits Denmark, Japan and Hungary quite well. Social trust is, unsurprisingly,
relatively high in all. But not all those countries are Protestant. There are
other factors at work.
So, is
it possible for a country to have diversity and social trust at the same time?
Studies
by researchers Hooghe, Reeskens and Stolle in a 2008 paper indicate that ethnic
diversity in and of itself is not inherently destabilizing, at a national
level. A country can indeed have multiple ethnicities and still have high
social trust. But there is a catch.
It is
at the neighbourhood scale where high ethnic diversity erodes trust, according
to researchers Peter Thisted Dinesson and Kim Mannemar Sønderskov from 2015.
The more direct the interaction with diversity, the more social trust drops.
This accounts for why people segregate themselves into ethnic enclaves. People
like to be around others who are the same as them. Those overwhelmed by
newcomers that are not like themselves, lose trust and soon move out.
This
is quite a paradox. Diversity at a national level does not necessarily erode
trust but at the neighbourhood level it does. How can this be?
Switzerland
is a good example of this paradox in action. With four recognized ethnicities —
German, French, Italian and Romansh — they also have high levels of social
trust. How? It’s simple. Each ethnicity has its own geography and government.
It does not mix ethnicities, nor does one try to control the others.
If a
country wants diversity, expect enclaves to form. This may work out fine in the
long run, as it has in Switzerland. Or it may turn into a bloody mess, as it
repeatedly does in the Balkans. The other option is low diversity.
Denmark
had the latter. It worked well. Now, it wants it back again and that will
require its immigrants to integrate. Those who don’t will have to leave.
So, is
excluding certain people from one’s society a requirement? The short answer is absolutely.
The long and more reasonable answer is if you do let people into your country
then make sure they hold similar values — compatibility. Make sure they want to
fit into your society fully and completely — cohesion. With these two
requirements satisfied, and with a sprinkle of Protestantism, the country will
be well on its way to generating high levels of social trust.
Can
Canada learn from Denmark? The jury is out. But the minimum requirement is that
we say goodbye to diversity, tolerance and inclusion if we wish to be a society
that can rebuild the trust, we used to have in one another and start accepting
a new norm for immigration policy — compatibility, cohesion and social trust.
Mark
Hecht teaches human, political, and conservation geography at Mount Royal
University in Calgary and has written extensively on issues of national
identity and resource conflict.
Comments
Post a Comment