As we walk through this analysis, we must go to the root of contemporary immigration policy in Canada to fully understand its dangers to a cohesive national unity. By a cohesive national unity, I speak of a nation that once widely acknowledged Jesus as Lord. As we acknowledged in the last article, Canada was founded upon the supremacy of God and the rule of law. The father of Confederation, George Brown, explicitly expressed his desire to establish a government that would maintain Christianity in the land.¹ Is it possible to speak of any sort of lasting national unity outside of loyalty to Christ? The options are Christ or chaos.

Multicultural ideology was introduced by Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. It became policy on October 8, 1971.² In 1982, multiculturalism was recognized in section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Finally, the Canadian Multiculturalism Act was introduced in 1988.

Originally, multiculturalism was intended to address the divide between English and French Canada. After the introduction of the multiculturalism policy in 1971, in reference to the English and French cultures, Trudeau said in his speech to the House of Commons: “A policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework commends itself to the government as the most suitable means of assuring the cultural freedom of Canadians. Such a policy should help to break down discriminatory attitudes and cultural jealousies. National unity, if it is to mean anything in the deeply personal sense, must be founded on confidence in one's own individual identity; out of this can grow respect for that of others and a willingness to share ideas, attitudes and assumptions. A vigorous policy of multiculturalism will help create this initial confidence. It can form the base of a society which is based on fair play for all.”³

Later, it became clear that multiculturalism was moving beyond bridging French and English cultures. It revealed a deeper ideology at work in this nation. By the time Pierre’s son Justin came along and spoke in 2022, this multiculturalism had become a source of identity: “Our multiculturalism makes us who we are as Canadians, and many cultural communities have a long history of contributing to our country. Today and every day, let’s celebrate our differences—because they make Canada one of the best places to call home.”⁴ You see here the expansion of the issue of diversity from the English-French divide to many cultural communities.

Although the Trudeaus were originally focused on the French-English divide and the issue of things like language, you will notice the religious undertones. Religion is deeply intertwined with the cultures of the earth. The radical individualization of truth and religion (read: relativism) that is implicit in these earlier quotes from the Trudeaus becomes more explicit as we read further, and as history advances. In a 2015 speech at Canada House in the UK, Justin Trudeau stated: “We know that people are defined in large part by our relationships to other people. Our cultural background, our gender, our religious beliefs, our sexual orientation... We expand cultural freedom by ensuring that individual Canadians who come from these diverse communities have the freedom to live and express and grow and change their cultures.”⁵

Former Prime Minister Stephen Harper defended the link between multiculturalism and high immigration back in 2011, saying “We favour multiculturalism… And we show through multiculturalism our willingness to accommodate their differences, so they are more comfortable… That’s why we’re so successful integrating people as a country. I think we’re probably the most successful country in the world in that regard.”⁶ This can also be seen in how Conservatives appeal for national unity. For example, Harper recently argued that we should make “‘whatever sacrifice necessary’ to protect Canada’s unity.”⁷ The leader of the CPC, Pierre Poilievre, has not made statements as strongly in support of multiculturalism as Harper, but has said on the Jordan Peterson Podcast: “Bring your traditions and culture and your stories but leave the problems at the door.”⁸ Poilievre has also been campaigning for Canadian unity. But what is their definition of unity? Does unity demand the multicultural ideology of the Trudeaus? What is the unifying force for this nation? What sacrifices do we need to make? Do we need to sacrifice principle? Must we be united in unrighteousness? Must we speak a lie and say “all religions are true”? Unity is something we all want, in order to build a nation that is not rife with division. But there is no unity in relativism. Unity must be defined by a higher standard—by God’s truth standard.

In the last paragraph I mentioned that Mr. Poilievre accepted multiculturalism, but asked people to leave their problems at the door. I contest that this cannot be accomplished because the problems are baked right into the multicultural cake. You will know the value of multicultural ideology by its fruit. Multiculturalism, in its competing religious claims, leads to conflict, not unity. We see this increasingly in our nation. My focus in these essays has been the problems with religious pluralism that are interwoven into multiculturalism. This is where we see some of the greatest conflict. We have seen churches vandalized and burned.⁹ We have seen increased violence against synagogues.¹⁰ In the Fall of 2024, there were a number of major clashes between Sikhs and Hindus on the streets of Toronto.¹¹ Of course, the conflicts are not only religious. They are also cultural and political. In 2023 there was violent conflict on the streets of Calgary that involved about 150 people. This conflict was centered around two groups of Eritrean immigrants who were fighting each other about political events in their homeland, and it involved brandished weapons and active attempts to assault police officers.¹² The battle for a Khalistani state in India has bled into Canada, bringing another foreign struggle onto Canadian soil.¹³

Not only is the fruit of mass immigration religious and interethnic conflict, it is also foreign intervention. There are more reports today of foreign intervention in Canadian affairs and among the individual lives of Canadian citizens than ever before. New immigrants face pressure from their homeland, including pressure to vote for certain nominees and/or candidates in Canada depending on their ideological viewpoints. There was a public inquiry into foreign interference established in September of 2023 entitled “Public Inquiry Into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions,” and it has published at least one report.¹⁴ One CSIS report identifies the top countries of foreign involvement: “In 2025, the main perpetrators of foreign interference and espionage against Canada remained the People’s Republic of China (PRC), India, the Russian Federation, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and Pakistan.”¹⁵ CSIS has consistently identified China as one of the top countries that contributes to foreign interference and espionage in Canada.¹⁶ For example, over the years Conservative MP Michael Chong has had challenges with China on numerous occasions, and continues to do so, as in his latest visit to Taiwan. “Chong has been targeted by China in the past. Canada expelled a Chinese diplomat in 2023 for targeting the Conservative MP's family, and he was later the target of a disinformation operation on Chinese social media platform WeChat.”¹⁷ Allegations of Chinese intervention in Canadian elections are broadly reported on and spoken about.¹⁸ Again, we see that mass immigration, combined with the cultural framework of multiculturalism, has only led to more division and chaos.