Century Initiative in Canada. | GTAMotorcycle.com

Century Initiative in Canada.

GP_RZ

Well-known member
Interesting read on whats happening in Canada and Europe and what Trump is fighting in the United States.
[h=1]Century Initiative: Make Canada a "Global Nation" through a Massive Increase in Immigration[/h]
by Ricardo Duchesne

The "Goal" is 100 Million by 2100


Check this out: in 2016 Century Initiative (CI) was started by a group of corporate managers (with the assistance of academics, journalists, Muslims and feminists) solely for the purpose of bringing about a 50-per-cent hike in immigration to Canada (from the current annual level of 300,000 to 450,000) by 2021. CI is calling for a "permanent" increase until the end of this century with the "goal" of "transforming" Canada into a "global nation" of 100 million inhabitants "unified by diversity and prosperity."

We must not underestimate the power of CI in pushing through this goal, or at least persuading Canadians that their country must be totally diversified. The founders of CI are members of the global business elite, and their associates are well established in the media, in the three main political parties, and in the conformist academic world, which should not be surprising since CI is merely pushing for the intensification of the already established ideology of immigrant multiculturalism.

In a series of upcoming articles, I will be dissecting and exposing the many unfounded, poorly researched, and deceptive arguments employed by CI to manipulate "ordinary" Canadians into believing that their nation was never good enough and will decline irreversibly if the doors are not totally opened to third world mass immigration.

First, a few words about two of the main characters behind this plan to destroy Canada's European heritage.

[h=3]Dominic Barton[/h]
One key founder of CI is Dominic Barton, director of McKinsey & Co, considered "the most prestigious" worldwide management consulting firm. This is a firm dedicated to the nullification of national identities in order to create deracinated generic humans with no identity other than the "lifestyles" they purchase in global stores. McKinsey's alumni have been appointed as CEOs or high-level executives at Google, American Express, IBM, Westinghouse Electric, Sears, AT&T, PepsiCo, and Enron. Be it noted that Rajat Gupta, the first non-American-born partner to be elected as the firm's managing director, was convicted in 2010 of insider trading.

Barton is best described as a globalist, not a Canadian. He is currently based in London and has spent most of his business life outside Canada as McKinsey's Chairman in Asia from 2004-09, based in Shanghai, and in Korea from 2000-04. Among his titles, he is currently the chair of the Seoul International Business Advisory Council, a trustee of the Brookings Institution, and an adjunct professor at Tsinghua University in Beijing.

We should not confuse globalism with globalization. Globalists, as I wrote in a recent article, purposely encourages this confusion, but globalization is factual account about the accelerating interactions of nations since the discovery of the New World and the creation of international markets, shipping and railway communications networks. Globalism, in contrast, is an ideology that advocates open borders, mass immigration, and the liquidation of (Western) national identities.

Barton wittingly promotes this confusion from the opening salvo of his justification for permanently high levels of immigration. He says that increasing Canada's population to 100 million via immigration is the only way "to counteract challenges associated with our aging population."
If Canada's population continues to grow at its current rate — 1.2 percent per year — we will see a significant decline in our productivity growth as we have less people participating in the workforce. We will become a nation of about 53 million people by 2100, outside the top 50 countries in the world by population. As our population relative to the rest of the world shrinks, so will our economic prospects and influence in global affairs.
He admits that "the challenges that Japan faces from its aging population are even more dramatic than Canada's."
Coupled with Japan's low birthrate, based on current trends, the size of their workforce will be nearly cut in half in the next fifty years.​
Which should lead any reasonable person to ask: Why then is Japan's leadership looking for solutions that do not entail any change in the country's zero immigration policy? Answer: Japan's leaders are not interested in destroying the nation of Japan. They are for globalization, not for globalism.

Barton, however, would have Canadians believe that the Japanese leadership is implementing policies akin to what the CI is calling for. He writes about how "Prime Minister Shinzo Abe launched an advisory panel on the issue in 2015 and set a key policy goal of maintaining Japan's population at 100 million people." Then he says:
There are two things that Canada can learn from Japan and other advanced countries faced with similar demographic challenges; first, building the necessary support systems that make it easier for families to have children (e.g., child care, tax policy) and second, maximizing workforce participation (e.g., by investing in training programs).​
Actually, what Barton should be telling Canadians is that we can learn from the Japanese leadership that there is no reason to increase immigration in the degree to which we institute policies encouraging Canadian women to have more children. The Japanese leadership is not calling for immigration, it is calling for a boost in the birthrate of Japanese women, "by pledging more public support for households raising children and increasing welfare facilities to eliminate instances of family members quitting jobs to care for elderly relatives."

Why the double standard, Barton, why do you identify Canadians who are against massive immigration as "xenophobic and racist" while praising the Japanese leadership for their pro-Japanese ethnic-oriented plans?

It gets worse than this. CI does call for support for family leave policy, a national daycare system; however, there is nothing in their program about encouraging Canadian women to have more children; rather, the wording is that this is "especially important for new arrivals who may not have the same access to childcare options" as Eurocanadian women. In other words, the aim is to create a national daycare system for immigrants, as a way of encouraging immigrants to have children in Canada.

[h=3]Goldy Hyder[/h]
Goldy Hyder (left) meeting with Ahmed D. Hussen MPA to convene Century Initiative

Another founder of Century Initiative is Goldy Hyder, President and CEO of Hill + Knowlton Strategies. Hyder is a Muslim linked with the Association of Progressive Muslims of Canada. He was the Keynote Speaker at the 20th Annual Parliament Hill Eid-ul-Adha Celebrations in 2014. The basic message of his speech was that the "true Muslim faith is based on the values of peace, equality, respect and understanding — but that is not the message being shared with Canadians." The "Muslim community are not doing enough to paint a positive picture" of Islam to combat the "distorted image we see on television."

Hyder never explains why it is "distorted" to inform Canadians that Muslim immigrants have been responsible for almost all the terrorist attacks in Europe. Here is a list of Islamic terror attacks in "non-Muslim" Europe since 9/11. He does not tell us either what's so distorting about informing Europeans that Muslim migrants have been responsible for a rape epidemic across Europe. The fact is that, contrary to Hyder's claim, the Canadian media has been suppressing data about the thousands of rapes and hundreds of thousands of crimes committed by Muslim migrants in the last few years across Europe.

Let it be known that the Association of Progressive Muslims of Canada has interesting ties to big donations from the embassies of Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Hyder, in a rather odd, but very revealing, article published in The Globe and Mail on January 16, 2017, complained against the use of the word "elitist" on the grounds that this word inculcates Canadians
to be inherently distrustful of experts, to presume that a person is less ethical because they have a higher or lower net worth, or to believe that those with global outlooks aren't patriotic.​
The globalist elitist Hyder also complained that this term "risks creating an 'us versus them'" psychology that discourages ordinary Canadian, get this, from being "inclusive" of global millionaires!

This is the state of pathological thinking that now permeates the left-corporate alliance. Ordinary, lower income, Canadians who suffer from the importation of cheap labour and the degradation of their heritage are now the perpetrators of exclusionary labels.

Speaking of mistrust, in upcoming articles about the Century Initiative, I will make it amply clear why ordinary Canadians should mistrust elitists like Hyder. I will demonstrate that almost all the economic, demographic, historical, and ethical claims made by CI cannot be trusted one bit, but should be seen for what they are: a globalist effort to transform Canada into a mere shopping mall without any national identity that is uniquely Canadian, but simply a place like all the other European nations where the same mass immigration globalist agenda is being pushed without democratic debate but enforced with extremely deceptive, "us versus them" labels about "racists" and "xenophobes" against ordinary indigenous Europeans.
 
We do have the 2nd largest country (land pass) on the planet.
I guess they are using the empty space or maximizing geography.
 
We do have the 2nd largest country (land pass) on the planet.
I guess they are using the empty space or maximizing geography.

Empty space my ***, everyone is gonna pile into the GTA.

I'm game. We technically have lots of room to grow - maybe spring up some new industries in the process. Keep the gravy train going.
 
It's alright....Global Warming will make the rest of Canada more habitable year round.
 
Considering north central ON is at the same latitude of most of the rest of southern Canada(Manitoba west and half the Maritimes), it should be filled up the same already...but it's not.
 
We do have the 2nd largest country (land pass) on the planet.
I guess they are using the empty space or maximizing geography.

I firmly believe that we should enforce immigration to other parts of Canada. You want to come here, then I'm sorry but you can't just all pile into the GTA, Vancouver, Montreal etc, etc...

Give them an incentive of some sort to move into less population dense areas, ie: NWT and the Yukon
 
"First, a few words about two of the main characters behind this plan to destroy Canada's European heritage."

Anybody else reading that in General Jack D. Ripper's voice?

I firmly believe that we should enforce immigration to other parts of Canada. You want to come here, then I'm sorry but you can't just all pile into the GTA, Vancouver, Montreal etc, etc...

Give them an incentive of some sort to move into less population dense areas, ie: NWT and the Yukon

Yes, we need more people to move into places with high costs of living and poor employment prospects
 
Maybe not nwt and yukon.... how bout winterpeg and Edmonton for starters
 
"The next batch of numbers from the 2016 census, due Wednesday, is expected to show that thanks to aging baby boomers, there are as many seniors in Canada as young people, if not more — the first time in Canadian history that has been the case."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/census-boomers-seniors-young-1.4094160

We need fresh meat or we as a country are doomed.

We simply need to be very careful and choosy about the immigrants we allow in.
 
I saw a Syrian refugee at the local grocers this morning. She was very well appointed. They can be very lovely people totally at odds with the whores often skanking about the neighbourhood. Maybe there should be some sort of screening at the border.* More of one kind, less of another if you get my drift. Employable would be nice.

*not a question
 
You think the immigrants are coming in without any screening? Or you mean the current screening should be more in-depth on what they can or cannot do once they get here?
 
Empty space my ***, everyone is gonna pile into the GTA.

That is unfortunately true ... but If you have a feasible solution, pls raise your hand, because it would certainly be worthy a Nobel prize.
 
That is unfortunately true ... but If you have a feasible solution, pls raise your hand, because it would certainly be worthy a Nobel prize.

No, Im cool with it. It benefits me financially for this city to continue to grow.
 
You see I wish the opposite. My dream is that GTA freezes its population and rather starts improving current crumbling infrastructure and services for its current population. I see no benefit in increasing the population beyond the levels it is already now. None whatsoever ...
 
You see I wish the opposite. My dream is that GTA freezes its population and rather starts improving current crumbling infrastructure and services for its current population. I see no benefit in increasing the population beyond the levels it is already now. None whatsoever ...

Can't tell people where to live. The market is pricing folks out though, so that should help. Also, increased assessments across the board means more income to the city... maybe they can start fixing potholes and what-not.
 
As far as locking immigrants into a region...Quebec has a free (or freer) hand on immigration than the rest of Canada. Much less "points" are required to be greenlit to come to Quebec (lower standards, at least partly run by the province). I know more than a few people that came to Quebec (because the bar was lower) and hopped on the train to Toronto day one, perfectly legit. We allow free movement, restricting it will likely fail and charter challenge.

I have spent significant time in Whitehorse and Yellowknife for work and most would be surprised (I was) how ethnically diverse these places are, with lots of immigrants. There is work up there for people willing to work, and they are willing to work.

As for the need. We have more people over 65 than kids these days. It is called a Constrictive Population Pyramid, this can be a very bad thing for long term sustainability. We need to have way more kids or we need way more immigrants.... Take a look at Japan.

Some other food for thought. With the automation revolution putting so many out of work in the not so distance future, maybe a constrictive pyramid helps with things like guaranteed min income??? We just need to listen to Bill and tax the robots to pay for it.
 
Last edited:
funny how no one talks about making it easier for the locals to have more children or put programs in place to help the locals have more kids e.g. cheaper daycare etc...
we will spend billions importing ppl but not millions on the ones we have:confused:
 
funny how no one talks about making it easier for the locals to have more children or put programs in place to help the locals have more kids e.g. cheaper daycare etc...
we will spend billions importing ppl but not millions on the ones we have:confused:

ummm, Quebec has pretty cheap daycare (they are doing exactly this) and the NDP (and to a lesser extent Liberals) have tried as a policy point (federal and provincial)--full day kindergarten was supposed to help but it made it worse (typical ON Libs). Usually they are met with huge cries from the right about money and taxes of course. Why if I have no kids should my taxes go to....because those other people's kids will be paying for your care through their taxes when you are old, drooling and pooping in your pants... In short QC has it, everywhere else does not because of the perceived costs (insert short sighted rightwing tears).

Even lefty Harper had that $60 per month per kid ($100 under 6) subsidy. In the end WAY too small to make a dent in the actual costs, really was a waste of taxpayers money. It was also one of those better for stay at home moms than working moms things. More women in the work force (choosing to work and have kids) is the third way to help alleviate the impact of the constrictive population pyramid, at least in the short term--they should not be discouraged by policy. Solution, subsidize daycare for two working parents (or single parents), not for stay at home parents that do not need it.

Another problem here, is the wrong people are having kids. Well educated, working adults with high paying jobs tend to have less children. Poorly educated lazy house on wheels crowd tend to have more. Problem is, people (children) tend not to move from the second group to the first (could be nature or nurture???) in large numbers. So we have additional challenges from a tax base perspective.

There was in the past also things like baby bonuses, etc.

On another note... one seldom talked about benefit of immigration is education cost. Assuming the "points" system and not out and out refugees (although this does apply there as well). Many come here with university degrees paid, or at least secondary school. That is a huge tax burden relief for us. Secondary is paid outright and university is usually at least half paid for by the tax payer. Say 100K to 180K per Canadian young adult spent on education by the taxpayer, how much does it cost to import one? Not saying this should be the motivation but it all adds to the cost benefit analysis.
 
Last edited:
Thank feminists for their contribution to upside down social engineering. What man in his right mind would chance marriage/kids/slavery now? Roll the dice much?
 

Back
Top Bottom