466-471 THE INTEGRITY OF RACE

http://jacquesclouseau.free-forums.org

by Jud Cyllorn
(British Columbia)
I am the son of a soldier, a taxpayer, a risk taker and an unauthorized guardian of what my Dad perceived as the 'collective good' in our society. From paying his bills on time, to never living beyond his means, an honest day's pay for an honest day's work, to respecting people as well as the law - these were the principles that I saw respected each and every day.

Throughout the 160-year history as Upper Canadians as well as Canadians, my ancestors cleared land, financed and built docks, barns, bridges, roads, municipal halls, lobbied railway companies to build a station in their small town, volunteered as policemen and firemen, sat on school and church building committees and, like my own father, volunteered as soldiers when patriotism came knocking.

With each year that passed, a greater sense of permanence was created than the year before. A progressive ethic dominated the times that enabled pre-confederation Canadians to continually see the fruits of their labour before them. They were truly the 'Sons of Progress.' These people asked for little tolerance from society, yet generation after generation they earned much respect.

This is my Canadian heritage and for my insistence on the achievements of my ancestry and their peers being justifiably recognized, rather than today's relentless condemnations, I am called a Racist.
In the last thirty years, the philosophy of those individuals that built this country has been found guilty of 'Sins of Progress', and there has been an obvious lack of recognition for any of the benefits of this philosophy. Those who shared no part in the progress of Canada becoming a nation present themselves as victims of the peculiar sin of nation-building. Thus today's media-driven society continually demands that these Nation-building Canadians ignore their progressive heritage and make amends for their 'sins.'

My ancestral heritage has historically defied the natural environment, thus creating the progressive changes from building landing docks to financing and building railroads that future generations of immigrants from the old world immediately benefited from upon their arrival to Canada. My defiance of the natural environment is no different from my Great-Great-Great Grandfather's in 1832. His goal upon landing in the Bay of Chaleur in New Brunswick was to create, not destroy. It was to build, to forge and to grow, not to destroy something of anyone else's. He sought to develop a society that mirrored his own beliefs, that protected people of any race, that insisted on freedom of the press, that protected children under the legal age and strongly believed that every man was due a fair trial.

Individually and collectively through a common ethic these early Canadians established a social order that was different than that of both Britain and the neighbouring United States, yet similar to all at the same time. Foreign immigrants, after Confederation, witnessed a combination of Britain's family class and the American's monied class upon their arrival to Canada. Thus the British family class provided the institutional order (e.g. the common law / court system) and the American monied class provided the opportunities to the early Canadian social order.
This made assimilation easier in Canada than in the rest of the colonies. Each individual as well as social group earned their own respect as they marked out their own social territories. Irish, Finns, Norseman, Swedes, Poles, Ukrainians, French or Jews they all had their own level of assimilation; individually or in concert.

When someone called a newly-arrived immigrant a name, defaming their race, in actuality, it was pointing out their naivete or indifference to the social laws of the land. There were no Human Rights Tribunals to run to, nor was the media a sympathetic ear to voice one's complaints. Records of newspapers published in British Columbia 100 years ago will prove that there was a higher disregard for the non-assimilating immigrants by the media than we've been led to believe. Prior to 1960, immigrants to this continent either adopted the social laws of the land, lived in isolation or faced being ostracised in the more urban areas.
But that's all gone now.

Today, I'm to respect everyone else's heritage but my own. I have the only heritage scarred by the 'Sins of Progress.' There are societies within the new Canadian culture that consume but don't progress. And apparently, according to our courts, these societies are not responsible for any of the 'Sins of Progress.' Our courts demand tolerance of other societies' social codes without examination or debate, while I witness standards of my own heritage being crushed under the weight of judicially controlled morality.

The word Racist has now become the all-encompassing word that shrieks out the names of the Politically Incorrect, those 'responsible' for the bad and the evil deeds of history. It gives the accuser an unrelenting position, aided by a morally-rudderless society and a righteous media - the accused has no defence. He must stand trial before the media court that, like his heartless accusers, will prosecute and sentence the accused in absentia, to a political and/or financial death.

TOLERANCE

The people who share the Western Culture are being attacked by a politically funded army of 'Culture Crushers' whose religion is power and whose fuel is fear. These 'Culture Crushers' have demanded, in the name of equality and rights, that I stand trial for the sins of my heritage. Now that I realize that the progressive philosophy of the Western Culture carries a large Reparation Tax, passed by law, to pay off those who claim to be the victims of that progressive philosophy, I find that I cannot accept this as being fair.

For those persons who share the bond of the Western Culture, all must now begrudgingly carry a larger tax load because of these 'sins'. If we protest, we will be tried by the political/ media courts for Racism and sentenced by the court of controlled public opinion to a political death. My ancestral heritage is that of resisting plutocratic oligarchies (e.g. Magna Carta). Resisting such oppression - socially, economically and politically - is part of my culture, an inherent right built into the societal code of my own people.

Remember, Western man said everyone was equal before the eyes of God and the law. They were not equal in any other way, thus the philosophy of respect for each other as individuals rather than a legislated form of equality. I come from a heritage of self-governing people and the overlying tone to the laws they created was Fairness not equality. What courtroom do I stand before and argue that my heritage is being vandalized by placing someone's political rights ahead of what is fair for all?

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Today's politicians and our forever righteous media laud those still suffering from historical wrongs and ruthlessly condemn any one who dares challenge politically acceptable interpretations of historical events. My response to this dogma was, in the beginning, to acquire more knowledge. Based on what I discovered, I now find myself in a state of aggressive contempt for those who, because of their self-serving beliefs, gender, sexual preference or skin colour, have beneficial status in the new quota system called 'Affirmative Action.'

This is our own version of 60s bussing, but for adults not school children.

Rather than swapping urban ghetto kids for suburban kids like the Americans, Canadians affirmatively displace some people and replace them with different people based on their sex, skin colour, etc. Any who dares question the logic of this special, largely racial 'quota system' will be tried as a Racist and sentenced within 48 hours. When American legislators are asked today about bussing, they all conveniently find nice politically correct places to hide by saying,'We meant well but how were we to know?'

Those accused of racism by special interest groups, or by our pervasively righteous media, have no access to the 'People's Court' (television or print). Thus the death sentence proceeds with the accused not even being allowed to address the charge. Having no medium for defence, the accused is guaranteed a
quick death and no funeral.

Would a philosophical mind not ask the accusers just how adequately equipped are they to judge the racist acts or thoughts of others? Are they ready to sentence someone to a political / financial death, ignoring the consequences of being wrong? Did they have to write a qualifying exam? Is there a racist identification program at some redundant college that certifies graduates as having 'Racist Identifying Privileges' (R.I.P.s)? Is there a quota on who gets in the program? Finally, is it funded by a 'special' federal program?

I think my beliefs as a Canadian with 160 years of heritage on this continent have been sentenced to death by those with R.I.P. But I am not going to die. I am also not going to roll over and play dead nor become a living ghost as has happened to many of those who have for example questioned the financial affairs of war in this century. My heritage is that of making things better than they were before and, unlike many others, I can prove that - not only on this continent but on two others.

In a society where money rules man, my heritage will always lose. The Shackles of Guilt are the means used to surrender the proven benefits of creative individualism to the dogmas of the political 'World Order'. But soon the buildings, the bridges, the highways, the telephone lines, the hospitals, the sewers and the social order will all need rebuilding.

Please remember these creations are only the physical expression of the philosophically progressive attitudes of Western thinking. I dare any one to examine those societies most in need of repair and note the amount of rejection of Western philosophy by its inhabitants.

Those among us today who have crushed the progressive culture for their indefinable Equality, will be first to demand that society be repaired. Our post 60s society has taught our youth as well as new Canadians to demand repairs to the tangible and intangible structures supporting our society, but not how to create them.

Will those 'equalled' go to the equalizers (our courts, social workers or media) to fix the dysfunctional infrastructure or will they go to the global equalizers for technical expertise. When our nation's 'equals' dial 911 (getting put on hold for an indefinite time) and their call is no longer an emergency but a catastrophe, will they cease to believe the Egalitarian messengers? Nowhere has 'equality' created market order, only long lines of disillusioned souls waiting patiently for the promise of unearned rewards.

My goals, like my God, are always fair, as were those of the five generations of Canadians before me. I seek the association of similar philosophies as a form of protection and secondly, but most importantly, to enhance the heritage of progress. I do this for my own benefit, for the benefit of all those around me and for those Canadians that are now not seen nor heard but will be responsible for the type of society Canada becomes 50 to 100 years from now.

For this I am called a Racist? So be it.

This article appeared in Council of Public Affairs Digest, Vol. VIII, Nos. 9 and 10 (September l October 1992) under the title 'Culture Crushers'. The Digest is edited by E.M. Pressler, and we are deeply grateful to Mrs. Pressler for her encouragement and help with information. Jud Cyllorn is a writer, author and lecturer.