Home > Articles

The Purpose of Multicult-Speak: Killing the Canadian in the Child

"The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of IngSoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought -- that is, a thought diverging from the principles of IngSoc -- should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meaning and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meaning whatever." http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns-prin.html
- George Orwell, 1948

Multiculturalism is Canada's Ingsoc. The ideology of a "soft" totalitarian state. A state that does not need gulags, detention camps, or torture chambers to achieve its goals because the ruling political class can "manufacture consent" through its control of the media, the universities, and government departments. To use Marxist terminology, the political class--- the ruling class--does not need to control the "infrastructure", it only needs to control the "superstructure". It is far more important, for their purposes, to control the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) than it would be to control any major corporation listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange.

The most effective way to promote this ideology of "Diversity and Tolerance" and Cultural relativism (Marxism) is to shape the language, to supplant "Oldspeak" with "Newspeak", to replace accurate descriptions with euphemisms, to make it impossible for younger generations to think subversive thoughts by putting them in a verbal straight-jacket. The point is not simply to deny them the words they would need to express critical thoughts, but through the loss of these words to deny them the ability to form critical thoughts.

Is this not what has been happening, step by step, in the last forty years, picking up speed as time by passes by? Dumbing young people down by displacing plain standard English with PC jargon? Displacing critical thinking with ideologically programmed responses? Is this not what Canadian and many other universities do now? Is that not their mission? The goal of a liberal arts "education"? Are our present universities not just boot-camps of political correctness, factories to churn out soldiers for Multicult Group-Think? Soldiers who one day will occupy the newsrooms, cabinet rooms, staff rooms and board rooms of the nation?

Long ago an American military officer concluded that in order to complete the conquest, displacement and assimilation of Native Americans, “We must kill the Indian in the child”. In other words, for any colonial agenda, the final solution to the native “problem” must involve the eradication of native culture---and that culture is best transmitted through its language. It’s a habitual strategy. English occupiers tried to do that in Wales and Ireland and the Department of Indian Affairs tried to that in Residential Schools here in Canada. Now we are doing it to ourselves in our universities. Or rather, they are doing it to us.

Who are “they”? They are not our colonial occupiers, but their handmaidens, the Puppet Intelligentsia, the political class who are paving the way for our ongoing conquest by dressing it up as an opportunity to enjoy more “diversity”. Hence the invention of a language and a vocabulary which can frame the invasion in positive terms, and exclude alternative interpretations.

How ironic is it then, that by displacing Oldspeak with Multi-cult Newspeak, young Canadians are able to become reconciled to their own displacement. The political class is killing the Canadian in the child.

 


Editor's note

Mr. Murray is Canadian and writes frequently on some of the same issues that both our countries face. Canada's history and his citizenship can at times result in a somewhat different perspective and commentary from ours, but his understanding of the underlying social, political and cultural issues seems both accurate and constructive. Because of its climate, population, geography and long colonial status, Canada's exposure to these issues has been more recent than ours, allowing Mr. Murray a clear view of our successes and failures and the opportunity to inform and warn his fellow Canadian