Because this didn't fit in the alt text:

I see some people are upset about my characterisation of Daniel Tyrie and his "Dominion Society" as racist.

They claim that he is "just questioning mass immigration," and to do so is not racist.

I agree that questioning or opposing "mass immigration" is not racist. And engaging in serious, good faith debate about immigration policy isn't racist either.

I have long opposed "mass immigration," if by that we mean the irresponsible levels of the Trudeau government, or large scale illegal migration, as seen in the US and Europe in recent years, etc..

For years I have called for a steep reduction of Canadian immigration levels to correspond to our capacity to settle and integrate people. I've done so in public debates, media commentary, social media, etc.

As Canada's longest serving Minister of Immigration, I implemented the most wide ranging and profound reforms to strengthen Canada's system in decades, tackling all forms of fraud and abuse, improving the selection of newcomers, focussing on the duty to integrate, etc.. Despite overheated rhetoric from the open-borders left (No One Is Illegal et al,) none of that was racist. To the contrary, it was essential to maintain public support for immigration as a positive factor in Canadian society.

But all of that is perfectly irrelevant to my claim that Tyrie and his group are racist, which is blindingly obvious.

Tyrie and his group:

- Are not just opposed to "mass immigration," but to ANY immigration. It says so on their website, where they call for a "total moratorium on all immigration for a minimum of 10 years."

- Their core demand is "remigration," including "mass deportation" of *millions* of permanent residents who were invited to immigrate to Canada legally, plus naturalized Canadian citizens, particularly those who are not "heritage Canadians." That's obviously a euphemism for people of white European ancestry. (It's unclear whether they regard indigenous people whose ancestors have lived here for millennia as "heritage Canadians.")

- Tyrie and his group are clearly associated with, and applaud the efforts of "Second Sons of Canada," who cosplay as a weird ersatz paramilitary group (think ANTIFA for right wing incels,) masked and dressed in black while protesting for "remigration."

- Tyrie and his group obsessively use images of turbaned Sikhs in their agitprop, obviously because turbaned Sikhs are the most visible of visible minorities. They mock Conservative Deputy Leader Tim Uppal as "Turban Tim."

- Of course there isn't even room for basic human compassion in their racial hatred. One day after the Tumbler Ridge massacre, Tyrie's wingman Max Genest posted the following on X about a beloved twelve year old black child who was murdered: "Abel Mwansa - Remigration would have saved his life."

That kind of hatred is a sickness of the soul.

So those who claim that Tyrie et al are "just asking questions about mass immigration" are being wilfully blind, totally disingenuous, or worse.

Yes, we need space for a robust debate on immigration policy and related areas, because demography is destiny.

Yes, the accusation of "racism" is made all too often to shut down that kind of debate. I should know, as I've been the frequent target of such defamatory claims by the far left for decades.

But fear of limiting good faith debate should not prevent us for calling out real racism when we see it. Because racism, ie hatred for or unjust treatment of people because of their race or ethnicity, is immoral.

Making these distinctions is especially important for those who have sincere concerns about sustained "mass immigration," or balkanization and ethnic enclaves vs integration and social cohesion. As I frequently argue, the Trudeau government's spectacular mismanagement of the immigration system damaged Canada in many real and obvious ways, not the least of which was the reversal of a broad public consensus in favour of a properly managed, rules based system.

The antics of extremists like Tyrie et al are not only morally, legally, and politically wrong. They also make it harder to actually have the serious debate Canada needs on these critical, difficult issues.