Is Canada Covertly Minimizing Its Anglo-European Populations?

Government is tasked with remedying social trends such as a declining domestic population. In Canada, it never happened.

How do Canada's ruling Liberal government justify the largest per-capita immigration quotas on earth?

All-encompassing in presentation is the idea that in order to remedy our country's "aging population and workforce," government must import approximately half a million migrants each year.

While mainstream media back the concept with aplomb, never do they speak of a social phenomenon that exists in complete contrast to this "burning need."

A critical role for a ruling government is found in an ability to anticipate social trends within society, including the ramifications of the "baby boomer" generation which reached its pinnacle in the wake of the second world war.

Understanding what was coming down the demographic pipe, a succession of federal governments had ample time to develop programs to incent Canadian-born parents to have additional children.

Other nations have done so, and in fact, it's not that complicated a concept. CAP offer up a simple solution:

Cut foreign aid budgets back from the billions that government has been handing to so-called "developing" nations for decades. One reason to do so is found in the fact that many of these countries no longer qualify as "developing." As such, the Liberals today cling to an archaic foreign aid policy that transitions tens of millions of dollars to countries like India and China.

Did you know? Canada’s international assistance spending increased by 27.0% to CAD$8.4 billion in 2021, up from CAD$6.6 billion in 2020.

Take these funds, transfer them into monthly incremental payments to parents for each addition child they have. $300 per month for two children; $400 for three, etc.

Simply and effective-- and it never happened.

Instead, the Liberals offer a panacea: millions of migrants from India, China, Pakistan, Iran and other top source nations for immigration to our country.

As annoying as this is, in some ways it pales with comparison to an unspoken-of "trend" within Canadian society:

LGBT, Euthanasia, Abortion, Transgenderism.

Media won't tell you, but the impact of these Liberal-endorsed policies results in minimization of domestic births in our country. Permit Cultural Action Party[est.2016] to go where no mainstream media outlet dare to dwell:

Who are the recipients? As in, which identifiable Canadian communities most indulge in these activities? Neither government, media or our academic world ever venture into this critical area.

In terms of Canada’s demographic trending, Abortion is the most impactful, at least thus far in our demographic trajectory.

In 1967, then-Justice Minister Pierre Trudeau introduced a bill which included an amendment to the provision of the Criminal Code which prohibited abortions. Trudeau Sr. selected ex-inmate of a prison camp during WW2, Dr. Henry Morgantaler, as "abortion czar" of Canada.

Morgantaler proclaimed to have personally performed 5000 abortions on Canadian women, at a time when abortion had not yet been legalized.

The end result? Between 83,000- 108,000 abortions per year between 2007-2021. That's one heck of alot of potential Canadians.  Which communities do they mainly consist of?

That's behind door number #8-- no one knows, at least no members of the general public. CAP take a guess at it: in the main, they are drawn from our Anglophone communities. No doubt there have been a substantial number of Francophones, in addition to First Nations communities.

What seems to be a logical guess is that "new arrival" communities indulge far less. Sikhs are said to have a problem with female babies, so this may factor in. Chinese-Canadians, Muslim-Canadians, not so much. For the latter, likely very few.

LGBT and its various permutations, inclusive of transgenderism, are counter-productive to population growth. Interesting to take this into consideration in recognition of PM Justin Trudeau's full-on dedication to the cause. Fact is, transgenderism cuts down on sexual reproduction.

The Liberals back the entire movement, inclusive of giant funding for the "LGBT" industry. Then we have legacy media, who to this writer's knowledge have not once factored in the decline in reproductive rate element into their messaging.

Fascinating, eh? Media must want the same thing government wants-- just as it is in China.

If Pierre Trudeau can be considered the father of systemic abortion, Justin Trudeau is the father of Euthanasia policy. The original legislation passed in 2016, early in the tenure of our current prime minister.

Euthanasia also cuts down on Canadians. Again referencing the "aging population and workforce" concept, there’s no question that the vast majority of elderly Canadians are white. Not satisfied, the Liberals make incremental moves to broaden the scope to those over 18 years-of-age.

Next up, the mentally ill(pending, has not passed yet).  Who are the recipients? Safe to say, once again, the correct response is those from our "Old Stock" Canadian communities.

Beginning to see a pattern here? Gaining insight into the incongruous nature of population growth in Canada?

Demographic manipulation is in no manner a "post-modern" concept. It has played a fundamental role in every government-driven social revolution in modern history.

'Canada’s Fertility Rate Reaches New Low In 2022'

In 2022, Canada’s total fertility rate (TFR) reached its lowest level on record, at 1.33 children per woman.

Solution? The highest immigration rates on record. After which we point to another piece of futurism eschewed by Canadian media. White Canadians are headed for minority status at a rapid rate.

Really have to wonder about all this. The woke Liberal ethos perpetually pumps out a narrative focused on our "racist, homophobic" society. Too cowardly to come clean on the issues, the press never name names, but we know who they are referring to.

Yet, a deep dive beneath the surface suggests white Canadians are headed for a giant downfall. In a country infused with "victim culture," why the silence on the fate of those likely to become the biggest victims of all?