September 11, 2015

Parliament not diverse enough, says Maclean's -- where only two writers aren't white

Ezra LevantRebel Commander
 

Maclean's magazine says that Parliament's big problem is... that it's too white.

In their latest issue, they did a racial, ethnic and gender analysis to demonstrate that this is the case. Why do they think this matters?

Do they really believe that most people feel it's more important to vote for someone who looks exactly like them?

It's weird enough that Maclean's thinks people would only want to vote for their own "tribe" or "clan." 

But it's especially strange when you see how white Maclean's is.

It's true:

Thirty-seven out of 39 of Maclean's writers are white!

If they think diversity is so important, shouldn't they work on themselves first?

 

JOIN TheRebel.media for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

VISIT our NEW group blog The Megaphone!
It’s your one-stop shop for rebellious commentary from independent and fearless readers and writers.

READ Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights --
Ezra Levant’s book about the Canadian Human Rights Commissions, censorship and the Mohammed cartoons was voted "the best political book of the last 25 years."

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-09-14 15:11:41 -0400
MacLeans: Typical guilty white MSM hypocrisy. The only colors they have any connection with are green and red.
commented 2015-09-13 11:50:32 -0400
Whatever happened to “the best qualified individual gets the job”?
Now we’re being told that we need a certain proportion of females, a certain percentage of minorities (of various stripes), and a certain number of not-straight people to make up whatever population of employees? This is a recipe for disaster if I ever heard one! Any company running under these rules would quickly find itself a white elephant — money-losing, bureaucratic, and incompetent!

And this is how the “activists” (to use the term in its most generous context) would have our government and society (and from there, business and lifestyle) conducted… Well, let the females campaign! Let the minorities campaign! Let the not-straight campaign! (They already do, I know.) This is what democracy is all about! The voters will decide who they like, and then the activists can shut up, because the results will show what the country wants, and not what the activists want.
commented 2015-09-13 09:57:00 -0400
Interesting the weight faux progs put on “diversity”. Diversity, pursued for its own resolve, has no intrinsic social value – either within historic retrospect nor in observed practical application. It does not make society stronger, brighter, more focused or successful. It simply bypasses the proven value of merit in arbitrarily rearranging social function.
commented 2015-09-12 22:29:39 -0400
Jason: uh, no, it didn’t. Read it again.
commented 2015-09-12 22:28:37 -0400
Colin: “TERRY, good copy and paste skills.” Actually, Colin, I write and edit.
commented 2015-09-12 20:18:54 -0400
While I agree with most of point “B” Terry, you just proved my point with “A”. You don’t care about the diversity? Your first statement claims otherwise.
commented 2015-09-12 19:53:21 -0400
TERRY, good copy and paste skills, you got any ‘answer the question’ skills? well do ya?
commented 2015-09-12 17:07:51 -0400
Colin, an admirable attempt to posit an epistemological conceptual frame – but perhaps misguided in your selection of analytical domain. While you’re suggesting alternative dialectical alternatives with a Popperian sequence of observation/hypothesis/falsification or verification (presumably to be followed through replication and peer review), as I’ve explained in my prior response to Jason, a more apposite line of inquiry would seek to establish whether my frame of reference for that comparison was inspired by Ionesco, Dali, or S.J. Perelman.
commented 2015-09-12 16:59:15 -0400
Jason, I think you missed the point of the post you think I missed the point of. I hate explaining things, but you seem to be a nice person. So.
a) I really don’t care about “diversity” at the Rebel, or at MacLeans. In my experience, it’s an issue that takes care of itself in the private sector, where performance is pretty much the only criterion.
b) The Maclean’s is an infographic that simply illustrates the actual breakdown of Parliament by multiple markers (including country of origin, gender, bilingualism, etc.) compared to the actual Canadian population.
Ezra’s summary, as usual, was simply bullshit provocation, to get you fired up in two ways. Macleans is showing a simple fact, illustrating the divergence between our actual demographics and representation in multiple settings; Ezra says it’s a complaint about about race.
To further compound the bullshit (because for some reason, Ezra seems to have a special chip on shoulder these days about Macleans), Ezra then compares the number of “writers” at Macleans (a private sector company) with the level of racial diversity in our elected governance body. Not only does that comparison have no relevance to anything – it’s also nonsensical. If for some reason you wanted to compare the “diversity” of Parliament and Macleans (and I’m still not sure why), why would you cherry pick ONE employment category – writers? Oh, of course – because that employment category appears to support your point – whatever that point is supposed to be?
Thus my ever LESS relevant comparison, and one step further into Absurdistan.
commented 2015-09-12 16:00:14 -0400
Just like Paul’s Wells’ nonsense the other day; yet another reason I allowed my Maclean’s subscription to expire…About a year ago the head of a teacher’s union spouted that there weren’t enough teachers of colour teaching in our schools. I wrote to him telling him that was a pretty precious statement coming from a “White male”, the leader of a union run by white people representing teachers whom the majority are white females…Double standard? Hypocrites? Of course not, they’re liberals. Do as I say, not as I do…Remember folks, when you point one finger at another person, four are pointing back at you. Just sayin’!
commented 2015-09-12 14:59:39 -0400
Terry, says, “Rodger: but not quite as white as the Rebel’s roster of writers.”

TheRebel is not screaming “racist”, Maclean’s is. But then I think you know that and are just being your usual jerk self.
commented 2015-09-12 14:38:56 -0400
Terry, epistemologically, would you say your position is a conceptual integration of reasonably verified observations into a theory to explain it, or is it a prediction of a thesis yet to be verified by observation? Or is that question falsely dichotomous & there is a third description epistemologically that applies to what Rodger’s position is?
commented 2015-09-12 12:18:03 -0400
Terry, I think you missed the point yet again. Macleans’s is basically shouting racism at the top of it’s lungs, while being too “white” themselves. That’s hypocrisy through and through. Racism should of been stamped out a long time ago, but it was given a boost in life for the simple fact that people just love to complain and stir the pot.

Robert Hewgill has it exactly correct. “Diversity is divisive”. Nothing could be more accurate with that quote. Good show sir!
commented 2015-09-12 11:13:10 -0400
“Diversity” is shouted loudly from behind the walls of the gated community.

Like most “progressive” narratives it is happy-face elitism – diversity for thee but not for me. Modern progressive constructs take place within an insulated echo-chamber – this is why it is oblivious to its own hypocrisy.

As a side note – what in hades has happened to Macleans?
commented 2015-09-12 10:52:21 -0400
Oops! It should have been subscription.
commented 2015-09-12 10:51:22 -0400
I picked up a copy of Maclean’s recently, and frankly was appalled at the lies that they wrote. I would never purchase a prescription to this rag mag ever. It isn’t fit to paper a bird cage, even the birds would throw it out!
commented 2015-09-12 09:28:44 -0400
Incredible, TERRY RUDDEN, has x-ray vision or by “white” does he mean one’s ideological position which is the narrative trumpeted by the hypocritical leftists, like Macleans, today?
commented 2015-09-12 09:08:20 -0400
Rodger: but not quite as white as the Rebel’s roster of writers.
commented 2015-09-12 00:08:17 -0400
Too funny Ezra. I don’t think they are white though, at least not right now, I suspect they are Red, at least in the face.
On second thought, maybe they are too stupid to be embarrassed. New definition for Webster. Hypocrite = MacLean’s Magazine.
commented 2015-09-12 00:08:12 -0400
So the MacLean’s writing staff is almost as white as the Democratic presidential candidates.
commented 2015-09-11 22:53:13 -0400
Why should it be diverse. Diversity is divisive.
commented 2015-09-11 21:10:02 -0400
I should think quality of work ability and factual true content matter most! Doh!

If we are so accepting of diversity, why are we nit picking about who has what skill and where they choose to employ it?

McLean’s hypocrisy has 4 fingers pointing back @ their own performance.
commented 2015-09-11 21:02:40 -0400
Why is it that activists demand that somebody do something that they want, but they never do it themselves?
commented 2015-09-11 20:27:47 -0400
Christian, if I am reincarnated, I want to be born into a family with your taste in magazines.
commented 2015-09-11 20:11:42 -0400
MacLeans?

Too funny – that rag is only good for ass wipe – any time I visit a house and see that they get it I tell them the same thing
commented 2015-09-11 20:03:02 -0400
I maintain the Left have psychiatric problems, and typically, the maturity of children. They think “equality” is counting heads. Whether it be the number of women ceo’s vs male ceo’s, or members of parliament, or those graduating or anything else. They remind me of my friend when we were 8, getting angry after counting the Christmas Presents, only to discover I got one more than he did!!
Well, in case a Lefty stops by and reads this, let me explain “equality” to you. Equality is the freedom to attend post secondary based on merit, not skin colour, it’s the freedom to walk into any Gov office and receive the same service as anyone else, whether it be medical treatment, applying for a driver’s license, starting a business or filing a Patent Application. And of course, ppl will participate more, if they want to. It’s not up to the Gov to “dictate”. That would be a “dictatorship” which they accuse Harper of being. Well do you stupid Lefty’s want a dictatorship or don’t you??

Oh, wait, silly me – Lefty’s are “incapable of learning”. How could I forget.
commented 2015-09-11 19:56:49 -0400
After all of this time (and many instances such as this one with Maclean’s), I find it particularly galling that they and their brethren at other name brand Canadian media outlets will still sanctimoniously speak of the public trust and of being able to serve such a vaunted ideal. Pathetic on their part, big time.
commented 2015-09-11 19:49:22 -0400
So this is probably another reason Maclean’s wants people to get angry with Stephen Harper over this alleged imbalance? Seriously, if I were father to one or a couple of young children, I’d probably rather have them discuss with me and their mother at the dinner table about what they read in Penthouse or Hustler as opposed to Maclean’s.
commented 2015-09-11 19:48:38 -0400
MacLean’s – and anybody who uses this argument like women’s and Native groups – is really shooting themselves in the foot. If you expect the race/gender spectrum in any organization to reflect the population at large, it logically follows that we need to put a lot more women in jail because men are vastly over-represented there. It also means that Canada’s laws are written with a strong anti-male bias. The same is true of schools. Girls tare strongly over-represented in scholarships and are also over-represented in post-secondary schools. That means we should either (1) kick more girls out of school or (2) have more affirmative action for boys! Of course, this argument is nonsense – but so are the demands that any organization reflect the numbers we find in society. People and cultures don’t work in such simple, straight-forward ways.