Xenophobia (was Re:jobs in Linux / IT)

[Leigh Honeywell]

On 1/11/06, Zbigniew Koziol <zkoziol-Zd07PnzKK1IAvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:

> My problem, if I had any problem, would rather be about approach to
> certain values. It is rather a common idea, may be largely unconscious,
> that newcomers ought to be used. Just used. That they should pay the
> cost of coming here. Well, they will pay that cost anyway, regardless of
> how open the society is towards them or how much federal money are
> invested into helping them. That idea is wrong right at its roots. It
> harms heavily these who are living here for generations as well. It is
> been used by single people, by propaganda in media, by governments.
> Still people seem not to mention that both, these who come here and
> these who live here for 100 years or more, are simply made stupid and
> their minds manipulated. One can not build Good by doing Evil.
>
> zb.

Well put, Zbigniew.

Another thing that I think often gets lost in discussions about "new
Canadians" is the difference between refugees and immigrants.

Now, the system isn't perfect, and there are abuses, but the general
idea is thus:

REFUGEES: if you manage to get to Canada somehow, and if the Canadian
government sending you back to your country would result in harm or
death to you because of persecution, war, or other factors,  Canada
has an obligation according to international law (see: Geneva
Convention, iirc) to let you stay.  Now, letting you stay has meant
variously "keeping you in a detention facility until the war in your
home country is over" to "integrating you into Canadian society with
more or less support available to you", but the general gist is that
as members of the human race, we have a moral obligation to not send
human beings back to a place where they face death or torture.

IMMIGRANTS, further specifiable as economic immigrants, on the other
hand, have to have a proven track record of a) an education b) good
physical health and c) a certain amount of funds (the exact amount
escapes me but i have some recollection that it's over $100K), before
we'll even let them into the country. Depending on their place of
origin and education, they may end up driving cabs because their
credentials (upon which we've allowed them in) aren't recognised by
various professiona groups.  Even with the last point, however, we're
still talking about a group that's by and large better off than
refugees are when they get here.

My point in making this distinction and these definitions quite
explicit is the following:

1) we're letting refugees in because it's the Right Thing to do as
human beings ( I and international law think so, at least).  They may
be uneducated.  They may have post-traumatic stress disorder.  We
should care for them and help them become full members of our society.
 It's the Right Thing To Do.

2) we're letting in immigrants because they _benefit_ our society. 
It's our own dumb fault for making them drive cabs - it's our loss. 
They're not "taking our jobs".  We're letting them in for their
skills, nowledge, and quite frankly money.  Having done some work with
the Ontario International Medical Graduate program back in my academic
advisor at U of T stage, I know that we just aren't putting the
resources into proprly assessing their degrees and qualifications when
they do get here.  There were something like several thousand
applications for 50 spots the last time I checked - that's several
thousand doctors who were driving cabs or working as lab technicians
when they could have been the GP I still have yet to find.

That's enough rant for the night :-)

--
Leigh Honeywell
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml