The prospect of Canada being “swamped by American Democrats” in the wake of a potential Donald Trump victory in the US Presidential Election in November, has this month triggered a surge in xenophobia in Canadian national media, social media, and halls of power. Bumper stickers, lawn signs, and hashtags featuring the slogans “US SJW’s Out! Eh?” and “We’re not sorry anymore! Eh?” have proliferated from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and a movement is emerging, united by the determination to “Build a wall, and make Portland, Oregon, pay for it! Eh?”
Until the last couple of weeks, the plethora of US celebrities threatening to move to Canada if Trump wins, backed up by the so-called spike in internet searches for, “How can I move to Canada?” were considered an amusing sideshow to the more open expressions of hatred by US “progressives” against Donald Trump. But in the wake of a serious gaffe by Hillary Clinton, a stellar week of campaigning by Donald Trump, renewed allegations of corruption against Clinton, and the inevitable acknowledgement of Clinton’s health issues by the mainstream media, Canadians have been forced to consider the mass migration of US lefties to Canada as a real, concrete possibility. As one anonymous racist Canadian troll said, “If there is one thing we know about US liberals, it is that they always follow through with what they say they are going to do, eh? That means they’re coming here, eh?”
Transparent excuses, hiding the inherent racism of ordinary Canadians, have become common in Canadian public discourse. One argument ironically makes the case that opposition to US liberal immigration is based on the necessity to “avoid the appearance of racism, eh?” Many of the US liberals threatening to leave America if Trump wins are rich white coastal elites. However, quotas have been put in place to ensure that most Americans taken as migrants will consist of minorities. One anonymous source told The XYZ, “We have pretty much determined the content of their character, eh? We can guarantee that we will vet people based on the colour of their skin, eh?”
Another line of argument used as cover for underlying bigotry raises concerns over Canada’s ability to provide for an influx of migrants who appear unable to provide for themselves, expect the State to provide for their every need, and require protection from ideas which conflict with their own fragile sense of self-worth. “We just don’t have the resources to provide for that many looters, eh?” said an unnamed source from the Canadian Human Services Department. “We are already stealing so much wealth from the productive to give to the unproductive, we are wary of upsetting this balance further, eh?” Similarly, Canadian Immigration Department officials have raised the technicality that “skill-sets such as rabble-rousing, inventing new forms of discrimination, and fudging statistics to make it look like white people are killing black people, when in fact black people are killing white people, are already in over-supply here in Canada, eh? We don’t need any more of their kind, eh?”
The most disturbing cases of hate-speech against the possibility of accepting large numbers of new Canadians have revolved around suggestions that most of those coming in could have a criminal history or a criminal nature. Again, one online troll has suggested, “Canada doesn’t need violent thugs who consider being political to simply mean shouting abuse at or beating up people who disagree with you, eh? People who call for the death of cops aren’t welcome in this country, eh?” Some have even suggested that if Canada accepts people associated with the Occupy movement, or members of the Clinton family, then it could be welcoming “murderers” and “rapists” into the country.
It’s your XYZ.
