Jawaad Mahmood in Tokyo

It is sad, I can only think of one or two people from college who I still talk to. I wonder what ever happened to Flippy (Phil), Victoria and the rest?…

A small list of people I remember from college:
Philip Sanderson
Filip Petrovic
Victoria Newman
Natalia Abraham
Noah Philip

.. I knew a lot of Philips. On, and incidentally, what a fucking waste of my life college was.

I have heard from many people that second generation immigrants are “torn” between two worlds. As a second generation Canadian myself, I can somewhat understand that notion, although I previously found it quite inaccurate. Until very recently, I did not believe there was any contradiction between being a Muslim and being a Canadian. After all, the vision of Pierre Trudeau always seemed to be one of many cultures co-operating within one collective legal system. It would seem to me that under this framework, different beliefs about Godly power(s) that shaped our existence should not be of any importance.

This belief of mine has been challenged, in practice, in many occasions. There are shameful racially-divided ghettos which exist within our Universities. These are outright distasteful, whether they be foreign-born Chinese or Indopak-Canadian students associating only with each other, or whether it is racially-motivated groups (such as the “Black” student association at Champlain) that have events that do not attract a wider community. In all these situations, we have skewed and un-Canadian socialization patterns. However, this evidence is not damning in of itself. Most of the Chinese ghettos formed at our universities are with foreign students; one cannot expect them to have internalized the local language or customs. Anyone who has traveled at all knows that we seek something from ‘home’ when far away – it is only natural that they seek comfort in fellow Chinese students. Black students, in particular, face strong prejudices and the presence of other people who face the same sorts of bigoted beliefs can provide a sense of comfort in an ocean of faces.

At worst, these situations are racial issues and unrelated to one’s personal belief. If anything, I look at the most egregious of these social violations in silent horror and maybe even dark amusement. With the exception of Indopak students (who seem to be attached at the hip to their fundamentally inferior ‘asskisser’ culture), Canadian students tended to get along quite well together regardless of ethnicity and belief. This is, of course, to be expected; most students that I encountered are generally well-adapted to society, and can speak the local language. The problems with Multiculturalism and my own heritage are actually in the domain of the uneducated; both among immigrants and the locals.

Among immigrants, there are two types; the well-adjusted and educated, and those one that cling to old patterns like the Chinese students who come to McGill or Concordia. The second type feel they are in Canada for a short period of time, or only to be with family. They feel no need to learn local customs, and dress in a fashion that is incongruous with their neighbours. (Mind you, I am not talking about modesty or immodesty; it is sheer idiocy to suggest that the Shalwar Khamis is a suitable dress for the Canadian climate). This group is violating the implicit social contract between them and the nation. Chronic failure to learn at least one of the two official languages, as well as failure to associate with other citizens (outside a narrow family) is embarrassing and a retrograde behavior pattern. Most reasonable people would consider these people to be out-of-touch.

Fortunately, these are not as common as portrayed. There is a danger that we believe that the social contract is being violated if they remain within religious/belief based circles. This is nonsense. By its very definition, religion defines a laundry list of behaviors and practices that people believe to be “right” and “wrong”. To ask that people associate extensively with those of completely different beliefs is irrational – what is inherently wrong with someone who seeks out someone of the same belief (regardless of race)? This not to say that normal neighbourly relations should not be maintained, but rather that it is as acceptable for a new Canadian to socialize at a mosque as it is for an old Canadian to socialize at a wine and cheese.

Unfortunately, this strict definition of “right” and “wrong”, be them flawed as one might see them as being, have run afoul of many of the prevailing wind in my part of Canada, which is to say indifference. Indifference is portrayed as the ultimate acceptance of other people – as in, if we don’t care, we can’t discriminate against them. Of course, this is hogwash – most people harbour racist ideas as shown in recent polls. Indifference forms a sort of barrier by which we can elevate ourselves over others and act like their superiors. This subtle attitude is quickly forgotten when people find their own racial/religious interests at stake. Examine the last names of the people who write in whenever there is a critical article about Israel or India – it is almost embarrassing. I have half a mind to write the Gazette and ask them only to publish the letter writer’s name – we can usually guess his opinion from that alone.

Average Canadians can be quite intolerant as well, about their own holy cows (Feminism, Gay rights, etc..). Why is it such a nightmare scenario for an immigrant to be tolerant but leery of Homosexuality? That seems to be the opinion that most people hold in private – immigrant or not. It just seems that recent Canadians are more likely to be honest about these feelings – which I think is far better for the country anyway. However, I have had chats with old professors who told me it was incumbent on all newcomers to adopt whatever attitude the majority of Canadians have – a nonsensical argument made by cowards who are not secure in their own opinion. Should these immigrants be reprogrammed every time our national attitudes change as well? Why is it so threatening if an immigrant wants to change society through legal means?

Look at the Herouxville nonsense. When was the last time a woman was stoned, burnt alive, or anything of that sort in Canada? And how does that differ (in effect) from simply shooting a woman and leaving her to die slowly? Why is it that these exotic forms of murder are given any different punishments than any other form of crime? The very notion that we need to punish darker-skinned people differently for different crimes is antithetical to our Canadian beliefs. Put concisely – why is it so much scarier that a brown man beat his wife and took her kids than when a Caucasian male does the same thing? (Of course these brown men may or may not use a religious justification, but would we place any credence if a white man was to say Jesus inspired him to do it?)

I said that I was never “torn” about being a second generation immigrant in Canada. This was true until a few weeks ago. Now I’m torn between being honest and true to my beliefs, or being just someone else who derives his opinions from the (idiotic) editorials in the national newspapers, or gets excited by meaningless drivel being sprouted as news. I also now realize that, regardless of my belief or how effectively I might be able to articulate my thoughts, all it takes is a wifebeater saying he did it for “Allah” for me to be labeled a wifebeater. A good friend of mine told me that Super patriotism is no better than Fundamentalism – and only today, in this strange mood of mine, can I understand the true wisdom behind his words.

Actually, come to think of it, I’m not torn at all. In short, fuck you if you thinking being Canadian means I have to jump off the same cliff as the rest of you.