Anti-White Buzzwords And Codewords

Article Types

Thursday, 9 October 2014

Adrienne Clarkson: The Greatest Mind of Our Times

by Ricardo Duchesne

Adrienne Clarkson, Belonging: The Paradox of Citizenship, CBC Massey Lectures
The 2014 CBC Massey Lecturer is Adrienne Clarkson, former Governor General of Canada. The purpose of the Massey Lectures is to "enable distinguished authorities to communicate the results of original study on important subjects of contemporary interest." They were created in 1961, an annual five-part series of lectures on an intellectual topic given in Canada by a "noted scholar". The CBC Radio website informs us that the Massey Lectures have brought Canadians "some of the greatest minds of our times". The earlier lecturers, I agree, included important scholars in their own right, particularly if you focus on the male names; among the first five speakers were Northrop Frye, Frank Underhill, C. B. Macpherson, and John Kenneth Galbraith. But many were included because they were leftists, and, more recently, the lecturers have been authors of titles such as Black Berry, Sweet Juice: On Being Black and White in Canada.

Adrienne Clarkson's has had some notable career-oriented accomplishments as a journalist for CBC, President and Publisher of McClelland and Stewart, writer of a bestselling autobiography, a biography of the Communist Norman Bethune, as Companion of the Order of Canada, and as Governor General of Canada. But does she really "stand alone", as CBC claims, "when it comes to providing compelling insights into Canadian culture"? Yesterday, October 8, she gave her first lecture at Montreal, with the other four parts of the series to be continued each in different cities in Canada through the month of October. The CBC program "Ideas" will broadcast the lectures on the week of November 10, 2014.

What original thoughts will she offer connecting the topic of Lecture I, "The Glory that Was Greece", to "Ubuntu", the topic of Lecture IV? Ubuntu is a "philosophy" from South Africa about "human kindness", "humanness, virtue, goodness". What have we Canadians to learn from the humanity of South Africa, a country with some of the highest murder rates, assaults, rapes, and car hijackings in the world; 66,000 rapes each year, many due to tribal witch doctors who claim that having sex with a virgin will cure AIDS, of babies and children — 5-year-olds, 3-year-olds, 2-year-olds? We will have to wait for Adrienne's lectures.

Peter Mansbridge's Interview with Adrienne

We can get a pretty good sense of what is about to come in future lectures from Peter Mansbridge's recent interview of Adrienne (September 28th, 2014) intended as a preamble for the lectures. I will redact statements by her from the interview, and then offer comments. Mansbridge first asks, "Define what a Canadian is?", and then asks her to answer first "Why is it so hard for us to answer that question?" This question is really the main theme of the interview. It will be the focus of my comments. Mansbridge is right, Canadians seem to have a great difficulty identifying themselves as a people with a particular heritage, leaders, beliefs, and folkways — other than to contrast their public healthcare to the private health care of the United States and other public services. Why is this? I will offer an answer below.

Adrienne: One of the reasons we don't define ourselves is that we don't tend to be people who talk a lot, or are verbal, we are people who act, who behave in a certain way, who have a certain attitude, and a stance. We have the luxury of living in a wonderful country, which has been a land of deliverance for many of us. Most people who come here have come because they were wretched and poor or unwanted in other places.

Ricardo Duchesne: Throughout the interview she uses the word "we" whenever she expresses her views about Canada. This usage of the word "we" is common in liberal elite circles. They believe that their thoughts, feelings, and experiences embody or represent the view of most Canadians, not as Canadians are, but as they should be, and as they are being made to be, as members of a universal country belonging to humanity, devoid of nationalism, ethnic ancestry, religious identity, historic pride and greatness. Adrienne projects the "we" of this universal belonging. She is Canada in her highest moral aspirations. Ordinary Canadians don't have a full grasp of the ethics and goals of this "we". She stands for the "we" humanity has always longed for. Ordinary Canadians need to enlarge their "circle" of "belonging" by including the whole world inside Canada. The cosmopolitan Adrienne from Hong Kong has already accomplished this task. Her aims now is to educate Canadians to embrace the "we" of the human race and the cultures of the world Adrienne images herself to be.

Canadians do talk a lot about their identity. Adrienne has spent her entire career talking about her Canadian identity. Canadians often ask this question. The reason they can't define what it means to be Canadian is that their elites have prohibited them from expressing their true ancestral feelings. The elites of Canada have been committed to the complete alteration of Canada's national heritage from an Anglo-French-European nation to a multicultural and multiracial immigrant nation. This effort to destroy Canada's European identity has been going on for some five decades, and it is in this context that we should address this question and appreciate why Canadians are having such difficulties answering it.

Not long ago Canadians knew they were British. Stephen Leacock's identification of Canada as British, in opposition to central, southern, and eastern European and Oriental immigration, was typical of intellectuals in Canada during the first decades of the 20th century. The French were extremely self-conscious of their identity as "Quebecois" until some years ago when the "ethnic vote" defeated their nationalist aspirations and their nationalist leaders watered down the meaning of "Quebecois" by equating this identity with the French language alone. Welcome Haitians and French Africans. Why did Canada come to be viewed officially as a nation founded by the British and the French if not because of the strong identification of Canadians with these nationalities? Gradually, as Europeans immigrants came, and willingly assimilated to this nation, immigration restrictions policies were instituted identifying the country as "White". Prime Minister William Mackenzie King, Canada's longest serving prime minister at 21 years, had the full support of the Canadian population when he announced in 1947 that:
Canada is perfectly within her rights in selecting the persons whom we regard as desirable future citizens [...] There will, I am sure, be general agreement with the view that the people of Canada do not wish, as a result of mass immigration, to make a fundamental alteration in the character of our population. Large-scale immigration from the Orient would change the fundamental composition of the Canadian population.
He knew, and so did the majority of Canadians, that Canada was an Anglo-French nation, overwhelmingly populated by Whites, over 96 percent of the population, when he confidently made this announcement. He knew what to answer to the question what is a Canadian.

For Adrienne Canada is simply a "wonderful" place for immigrants, a country without historical identity other than its effort to become a nation that belongs to the races and cultures of the world. After Adrienne's initial reply, Mansbridge goes on to say that "for most of my professional life" the major political stories he covered boiled down to "who we are" without anyone ever offering a clear answer. His professional career, be it noted, began precisely around the time multiculturalism was in full swing in Canada in the 1980s, when the borders were being opened to the Third World — that is, when Canada's identity was set to be radically transformed and Canadians who questioned the ideology of immigrant multiculturalism, or showed the slightest identification with their European heritage, would be ostracized from "polite" society.

Adrienne: We don't have a country-making myth, and by that I mean myth in both senses, one is an overarching story and the other one is that is made-up, we haven't made anything up [Mansbridge: "we don't have an overarching story?"]. What we have is reality, and we are a colonial people...we were a colony of Great Britain, and now we have a mental attitude towards the United States which makes us feel colonized by them.

RD: All nations have country-making myths, so why is Canada lacking one? For a leftist the foundational stories of nations are myths in the bad sense of the word; as she adds, Canadians have not "made up" any artificial stories about their origins. The unsaid or hidden awareness behind Adrienne's words (there is no further elaboration in the interview) is that Canadians no longer have an over-arching story because the traditional foundational story was thoroughly discredited by liberal elites as a history of expropriation of native lands, Anglo "conformity" and immigration restrictionists. Canadians are simply not allowed to celebrate the making of Canada as Europeans. They can only define themselves as "immigrants", no different from newly arriving immigrants, everyone equally important in the making of the nation.

When Adrienne says we have not "made up any stories", she is really surmising that current Canadians no longer "make up" stories as they did in the past when they believed — the English and French — that they had created the country. That is a myth, in her judgment. It does not matter to her that the institutions, economic infrastructure, and values of Canada were all created by the Anglos and the French, the legal system, parliamentary democracy, the school curriculum, architecture, the arts, rule of law and individual rights — no, that is a myth! And she is right that we no longer refer to those "myths".

Any Canadian today who asserts with pride that the country was created by Europeans will be accused of making up a story; never mind that, as of 1971, when multiculturalism was introduced, the population of Canada was 96 percent ethnically European and the country had already been created from east to west. We are all immigrants! It does not matter what the truth is: that
  1. 90 per cent of all immigrants who came to Canada before 1961 were from Britain,
  2. at the time of Confederation in 1867, despite the large numbers of European immigrants in the preceding decades, 79 percent of the European population had been born in Canada,
  3. the French-speaking population numbered about 70,000 in the 1760s, and thereafter, until the 1950s, the population expanded rapidly, not through immigration but through the high fertility rates of the French natives.
This is all passé for Adrienne, "colonial history", the history of a people under the tutelage of Britain. We are no longer a colony, we may have a "mental attitude" of excessive American influence, but, as she quickly adds in the interview, "Canadians know who they are, I never doubted when travelling across Canada that I was in Canada...We can tell ourselves apart". We are not Americans, is that our identity? Not quite; this is what Canada is about:

Adrienne: We are a country like no other country. No other country is like us, taking the number of immigrants that we do, acculturating them the way we do, with the different backgrounds, religious, and so on....We are able to accept things. That's one of the things about Canada is we have been accepted and we accept. There are blips along the way, I mean it is really very ugly having treated the Japanese the way we did, really, really ugly.

RD: What it means to be Canadian, apparently, is that we accept more immigrants than any other country from different backgrounds. But this is plain ignorance of the state of affairs in the European world. The United States and Australia also ended their white immigration policies in the 60s and 70s, respectively, both pursuing extremely active policies dedicated to diversifying their populations, with similar affirmative action and multicultural programs.The population of Australia in 1945 was overwhelmingly descended from the British and Irish, and in the 1980s it was mostly European. Today, more than a quarter of Australia's population is of non-European origin, compared to about 20 percent in Canada. The founding European population of the United States is set to become a minority by 2043. England, Spain, France, and Sweden have similar multicultural programs, some emphasizing assimilation more than in Canada, but the end result in all these countries is the promotion of diversity, the prohibition of European ethnocentrism, and the relentless acculturation of millions of immigrants from Africa, Asia, and the Americas.

Mansbridge: You are an immigrant. I was an immigrant. We are a country made up of immigrants from different parts of the world. Sometimes you get the sense that immigrants who become Canadians have a better sense of who we are than those of us who have been native born in Canada.

RD: Newly arrived immigrants have a keener sense of what it is to be Canadian than Canadians with centuries-old ancestries in this land. And they do, since the whole institutional network of the country, media, government, schools, churches continually promotes the idea that Canada = immigrant. European Canadians, the actual makers of the nation, born in the country, are prohibited from saying anything other than "I am an immigrant", and since they are not immigrants, they are perforce unable to answer this question.

Adrienne: What is Canada is things we [immigrants] don't think about because we [immigrants] think other people have them. We don't define ourselves by our public education system and its excellence. Because it is by world standards, and certainly by comparison with American standards, for it is free paid through our property taxes. We don't define ourselves through our medical system which is a single tier system that is available to everyone.

RD: Canada's identity = Immigrant + Public Systems. Adrienne is clearly way off repeating over the phrase "we don't define ourselves" for she is stating platitudes expressed every day in Canada about our unique public health care — as if there are no European countries with better medical systems and far higher rankings in education achievements. But it gets worse by the seconds:

Adrienne: We don't define ourselves by the way in which we pick immigrants to be citizens in the future. No other country really says to people you know we are really picking you in order to become citizens in 4 to 6 years. We don't understand that we are the only country in the world that does this.

RD: Of course, we define ourselves by the way we pick immigrants, but for Adrienne we need to be more emphatic about it, squashed any remaining dissent.

Mansbridge: Are we really the only country in the world that does this?

Adrienne: We are, we are; Peter, we are, think of any other, the States does not do it that way, we have in Canada, when you come to the country, you become a permanent resident, when you go to the United States, you become a resident alien. You know those to phrases make all the difference.

RD: After all this it has come down to a trivial phrase differential between Canada and the United States over immigrants. Permanent resident — that's what Canada is about, what makes her unique. This low level of intellectual debate is common in Canada. Adrienne then goes on to emphasize, yet again, Canada's public system, and how Canadians are "complacent" about them, but immigrants appreciate it. Then comes her final statement on immigration before the interview moves into similar intellectual platitudes about aboriginals.

Adrienne: You know when you go to a school that's a, you look at the class in the assembly and you don't know what is the country you are in, you look down at one of those little faces, you know, from grade one to six, and you don't know what country they are from, it could not possibly be any other country except Canada.

RD: There you have it, Ladies and Gentlemen, Canada is the country where you don't know what country you are in because you don't know where people are from. This is increasingly the case in many European-created countries. Adrienne does not explain what makes Canada a nation different from other immigrant nations with public services. This is the point, for the ideology she advocates is one in which European countries will become increasingly alike in their diversity, no one knowing where they are from, what their roots are, and what is the identify of their nation except to say: Immigrant with Public Systems.


  1. From Hegel to Adrienne Clarkson. That's quite a slide.

    Adrienne still has a poker up her a*se because of the head tax on Chinese lo these many aeons ago.

    Regarding the Massey Lectures, I understand that it came down to two: Her Majesticness and Conrad Black.

    If you turned me on a spit I would not listen to her opine on anything. But back in the 1970s, just for a lark, I and some other young office girls attended a talk she gave. We didn't know what this was all about or what to expect: we just knew she was some kind of TV star whom we'd seen on the CBC.

    Well, Herself was late for the lecture, which was held in a large hall in a beautiful old hotel. She kept us waiting and waiting; there were TV cameras from some TV stations (I think) and the room was just bulging, with standees all along the walls and the back of the room. After quite some time, as I recall, there was a murmur at the back, then a hush...I turned and saw this Eminence, its head held very high, a tall beehive kind of hairdo on its head, sashay like a queen down the center aisle in its aqua coloured dress and high heels.

    I don't remember too much of Herself's speech except that it was mostly feminist blather.

    - Daizy.

  2. Canada, simply put, is a hotel, with its citizens as the guests (clients) and the government as the hotel staff. It is defined by the services that it provides and the highest values within its confines are, of course, security and comfort for its clientele (and of course, profit). Obviously the hotel does not discriminate among whom it serves as that would be bad for business and public relations. The owners of this neat little business are corporations, who benefit from globalization, the reduction of the value of labour, and the academic elites who serve as the guardians and spokespersons for this booming industry. European Canadians should learn that they have no nation, and that their home was sold out from under them long, long ago by wiser and more powerful men.

    1. " There you have it, Ladies and Gentlemen, Canada is the country where you don't know what country you are in because you don't know where people are from. "

      Only the most 'intelligent' cultural marxists can make sense of their own twisted logic. And sadly, most people who will watch this tripe on the CBC (a.k.a. Communist Broadcasting Corporation) cannot read between the lines, which is what this great article does - exposing the liberal double-speak. I really like the methodology applied in this article, thank you Dr. Duchesne.

    2. "What have we Canadians to learn from the humanity of South Africa, a country with some of the highest murder rates, assaults, rapes, and car hijackings in the world; 66,000 rapes each year,"

      It's strange how they forget the reality of the situation...

    3. I agree with you JK. It is the same here in Australia. God help us as no one else can.
      (Elizabeth Verhoeff) Australia.

      Below is a letter from John John (age 92 and a 39-45 war veteran) John John being Welsh (UK) as many Welsh have same Christian name and Surname.

      "Attention, attention!" The United Nations has declared that their 'New World Order' has been established. Every person is now a citizen of the New World Order. Your personal identity has now been expunged, your country no longer exists, your Parliament obsolete. Every country and its people are now under the control of the United Nations. Your defence forces and police have been placed under the control of that organisation. Resist and you will be dealt with.
      "We shall have World Government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent." (James Warburg-Council for Foreign Relations, February 17, 1950)
      I pose the question, who would willingly say yes to the surrender of their liberty and the aforementioned? The only way that the United Nations New World Order can materialise is by 'TREASON' by our government; that has been blatantly obvious by the signing of many treaties surrendering our 'sovereignty and independence to the United Nations. By conquest or consent, what is meant by conquest? That statement alone is full of fear and foreboding. For matters to reach such a state of concern, without question, is due mainly to the people themselves, this apathy and indifference to the reality, the seriousness of the situation, should the United Nations New World Order evolve.
      Crystal gazing? A dream? No! I quote directly from the United Nations Charter for World Government which I have had in my possession for many years. But slumber on 'Aussie' and other peoples, for as blithely you sleep, your enemy has always been inside the keep. Your own treacherous governments! "The enemy within the gate." (Cicero)

      It is noticeable that Marxist Fabians are in the forefront to create world communism....
      British born babies will now have "European" on their birth certificate instead of the land of their birth.

      One of John John's poems:

      Whatever happened to Mr. & Mrs.?
      For now 'tis partner we hear.
      Whatever happened to Mr. & Mrs.,
      Partner is not made quite clear.
      Is it tennis, cards or dancing?
      Merely prancing.
      Are they two males, or females
      Shacked up,
      Or living apart?
      If wed, in love; then with kisses,
      Use the correct term, Mr. & Mrs.
      But what of the children of these partners,
      What is their role in life?
      If their father does not call their mother his wife?

    4. I completely concur with John John's sentiments. While reading his comments about the New World Order, I kept thinking about the Hegel article. This is to say, "who would willingly surrender ..." only people who have not come to the point of realizing that true consciousness consists of the awareness of freedom. From this point, would follow, creating a rational society where logic, reason and truly opened minded science could exist. I guess, Lyndon Larouche put it best in his discussions of Promethean Man versus the Oligarchical Zeus!

      However; as the master/slave relationship points out, it is a matter of prestige, between two equals. To sum, if one is bogged down in apathy, stupidity, desiring only to be left alone. Then maybe, just perhaps, self esteem and confidence are missing, or no awareness of freedom, to assert pride, in one's national history. Always, preferring to be a consumer, but never a citizen!!!


  3. A few years ago a Filipino coworker was most surprised when she learned that I knew who I was. "Nobody seems to know that now," she exclaimed.

  4. Someone should ask why immigrants' racial kinsmen have created societies so poor and wretched that their citizens flee into countries built by Europeans - in many cases their former colonializers and "oppressors"? If these immigrants are "unwanted" by their racial kinsmen what is their value to us?

    Maybe Canadians can atone for their treatment of the Japanese in WW II by diverting immigrants to Japan where diversity is sorely lacking.

  5. proud east europeanMonday, 13 October, 2014

    What a hack. When else in history could such an intellectual peon be courted for an opinion. Who cares.

  6. This is white Genocide, not enrichment.

    IT is exploiting the structures and institutions built by English and French to subsidize the third world and grow government.

    White taxpayers of many generations are being manipulated to support this.

    These 'multiculturalists' never ask the European founding base what they think or want. They are careful not to.

    I want out of this. I want no part of it. I will not subsidize it.

    I want those who have done this held accountable with jail. There are MANY bureaucrats, industrialists, politicians and 'social change agents' who need to account for this and parasitizing the taxpayer to do it for 40 years.

    Enough. Maclean's magazine wants 100 million Canadians --and paints a picture of an all non-white future. That is genocide.

    We already have countries like that. None are suitable for the survival of Europeans as a race and society.

  7. "..The elites of Canada have been committed to the complete alteration of Canada's national heritage from an Anglo-French-European nation to a multicultural and multiracial immigrant nation..."

    Simplified version: The hostile elites of Canada have been committed to the complete alteration of Canada's White European heritage to a Yellow, Brown and Black dominated gulag.

  8. I really find the articles/essays on this blog to be extremely interesting. I can't get over how much I seem to get from them, they broaden my understanding of the world around me immensely. This article is just another case in point.

    To cite one example, the discussion about the word "we". To think that this simple pronoun, could be loaded with so much ideological meaning, opens up another way, by which one can identify and decode propaganda. This to me is so important, because the word propaganda (which is a form of mind control) was changed by Bernays to what is now commonly referred to as public relations. In fact, I kept thinking about Bernays approach to propaganda/public relations, in particular his approach called "Plain Folks". This is when a person, usually of high political office or wealthy means, wishes to have the "common people" identify with them or their agenda. For a fuller discussion about this go here.

    Furthermore, it is interesting to reflect on the fact, that constant repetition ( "we") in the context of globalism and cultural Marxist utopian socialism ( see the earlier blogs on this site about the Frankfurt School and the Fabian Society) is intended to form an association in the mind, as regards mental processing; again public relations as mind control rears it's ugly head. In short, I see a Rosetta stone of sorts, gelling in my mind, which is helping me to decode or see through the propaganda of the Liberal /Leftist/Cultural Marxist brain washing.

    Yet interestingly enough, I find myself becoming increasingly more and more tolerant of the people themselves who come to Canada. I don't see them as my "enemy "as it were. Rather, I see them as pawns in a game that they have no comprehension of. Of course, on the other hand, my perspective of government and our so called "political leaders" continues to be vetted with greater and greater contempt and disdain. Is there anything more useless and more damaging to the people than government and it's leaders.

    I mean just think about it, Obama, a complete and total farce(" You've got a successful business, you didn't build that, some one else built that" )

    How about Stephen Harper, " Canada has no greater friend than Israel" a political Zionist lickspittle. Let's not forget David Cameron, an EU stooge/lackey and all around Chicken Hawk, if ever there was one. Of course, all the while hiding in the shadows, as the saying goes, are the wealthy elites who continually take more and more of the nation state for their own avaricious and grasping rapacious desires.We need a new renaissance of western civilization now - Cheers!!!!

  9. Sorry about the mistake above, I posted the same video twice. The one below is the one I intended to be watched first - Cheers!!!

  10. Why are Whites the only race funding and celebrating diversity as they become minorities in their own nations? LUNACY.

    Why are Whites tolerating themselves becoming a minority in nations founded and built by Whites? LUNACY.

    Every race fights to prevent itself becoming a minority in its own nation except Whites. Why? LUNACY.

    Why are many Whites willingly giving up their money and power to other races? Would other races do the same? NOPE. Where’s the proof?

    Do non-Whites flock to White majority nations because Whites build the most desirable societies? YES. Will those societies be as desirable when Whites become a minority?

    Many multi-culti loving Whites are smart enough to PRETEND diversity is a strength. They fear being labelled ‘racist’ if they go against multiculturalism. At the moment it’s trendy and feels good to be ‘anti-racist’.

    Multi-culti loving Whites think ‘good intentions’ are more important than results.

    Hint: You can't build 1st wold nations with races that have never built one themselves.

    1. I really like the points you make, but you never answer the question of "Why". So what lets this Lunacy continue? Please understand, I am genuinely interested in hearing what you have to say as regards "Why" Cheers!!!

  11. I appreciate the candor on both sides but have to agree that since we are mainly English and French along with many European nationalities, the many other cultures who are now arriving from Muslim (Arabic) Chinese to Indian make it a difficult place to define what a Canadian is. My main problem with anymore immigrants coming to this country deals with the economics of the matter which allows for far too much money being giving to them as opposed to many of our original seniors, vets etc.being forced to live on far less and having what little money is owed to them (pensions etc.) being reduced in lieu of this fact. With a nation that is the largest single country land mass and has the most natural resources on the planet, there should be no such thing as Canadian poverty and homelessness (much worse than a mere identity problem). This is a country owned and run by corporations and banks along with a crooked government who make LAWS to keep it this way. Whatever glory you think you see in this country is not shared by many and I'm one who stands alongside of them. Time to change the game plan and the rules and help the people who live here and not bring more in, Steve Vasseur. (Religious importing can be left to the wayside as well since it is another problem which has no support in the world of reason, logic and true love of a kindred spirit without the need for any supernatural definition)


The opinions of our commenters do not necessarily represent the opinions of CEC or its contributors. Please follow the netiquette.

Our Facebook Our Twitter Our Gab Our Google+ Our Youtube Our RSS feed