Media Celebrate All-Time High Immigration, All-Time Low Birth Rates

Why is it that media refuse to speculate on the future demographic composition of Canada?

Canada is on track to welcome record numbers of new immigrants between 2022 and 2024:

"For 2022, Canada has recently released a revised target of over 432,000 immigrants and even higher numbers in 2023 and 2024."

According to Statistics Canada, our country's fertility rate fell from 1.47 children per woman in 2019 to 1.40 children in 2020.

"Fertility rates have been steadily declining in Canada since 2009, statistics show. That shouldn't be a cause for concern," says Susan McDaniel, Professor of Sociology at the University of Victoria, Canada.

"It's a good trend. Basically, it's better for the children if there are fewer children, it's better for the parents if there are fewer children, and it's better for the society and the planet."

At which point CAP interject with a question: why are historical highs for immigration a good thing, while high birth-rates on Canadian soil are a bad thing?

Presumably, reduction in birth-rates applies mainly to "Old Stock" communities. The same applies for women who indulge in abortion. Add to this assisted dying policy introduced by the Trudeau government. To compensate, legacy media inform Canadians how wonderful it is to be importing 1.2 million migrants over a three-year period.

How does this affect our country's demographic make-up? A taboo question it is. CBC, CTV, Global News, Toronto Star, Globe & Mail. It will be a hot winter's day in Yellowknife when mainstream media address this issue. In 2022, it is more than reasonable to state that media reflect the will of our Liberal government.

For current PM Justin Trudeau and his partner in public control NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, will of government is accurately summarized in a single word: transformation.

Cultural Action Party has previously written on what should be a major curiosity among Canadians. A succession of federal governments knew in advance that our country would develop an elderly population problem. Why did they not step in to resolve the issue at a point when it could be rectified?

The solution wasn’t complicated. For each additional child, a financial subsidy is provided by government. Two children, $200 per month. Three children, $300 per month. A lot more productive than shipping off billions to Afghanistan, Somalia, and Syria.

It never happened. Instead, mass immigration was selected as the ultimate solution. Meaning government had planned in advance for mass immigration from Asia, Middle East and Africa to serve as a panacea for Canada’s demographic shortcomings.

Pity no one informed the public of the agenda. Then again, the Feds do not indulge in such a practice. Those who care must guess as to reasons why, resulting in conspiracy theories, and the like.

In terms of the plight of Old Stock citizens--Anglophones, Christians, Conservative, Pro-Life-- it was upon the arrival of Justin Trudeau that things really began to roll downhill. More than any Canadian politician in history, Mr. Trudeau has pushed the anti-Old Stock, pro-Immigration dynamic.

What makes this politician unique isn't found in an indifference to traditional communities--  it is exemplified by punitive measures toward them. A certain branding of these people as malevolent racists, bigots and homophobes. NDP leader Jagmeet Singh is cut from the same cloth.

On this basis, CAP suggest what government and media know of, but never speak of:

The future for Anglophone-European Canadians looks grim. It may not appear this way on the surface-- yet if one looks deeply enough, they will see it.

Our fate lies in the area Canadian media refuse to speculate on: the future of Canada. It is here that an ever-diminishing demographic will unfold for old school citizens. Add to this an erosion of political power, and the fate of our communities is sealed.