How is that not racist, and how is that constructive?
It is racist because it implies that the fact that she is European somehow means that she ought to have successfully integrated or adapted to Canadian culture, whatever that is.
This is not racism. Racism is the belief that " racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race" (Merriam Webster). If the poster meant that adaptation to Canada should have been easier for the European due to racial superiority, then that would be racist. But I do not get that from the original post, and you have not adduced any evidence or argument to make the charge of racism stick.
But to restrict ourselves to a debate over what constitutes racism is silly. The real point, the one worth discussing, is this: do Europeans have behavioural habits (whether they derive from race or culture doesn't matter) that make it easier for them to adapt to Canada than other races / cultures?
I think the answer is yes. European behavioural norms are more similar to Canadian ones than is true of -- for example -- Latin behaviours. Take one example of many. Canadians value punctuality (or say they do, at any rate); if you are invited to a party, you are expected to show up more or less on time. Same is true in France and England (to mention only two European cultures). But some Latin American cultures don't value punctuality equally. In Costa Rica for example it is considered OK to show up to a party several hours late, or even the next day. So, on this matter of punctuality the Latino would have more to adapt to than the European.
To say that European habits are more in sync with Canadian habits -- and therefore adaptation may be easier for Europeans -- may be correct, or wrong, but the observation is not racist.
I don't know from what warped perspective you are looking at this -- but the truth is probably that immigrants of all strips and colors are discriminated against on a systemic albeit non-de jure basis, to varying degrees. For someone to then pass a quick one-liner judgment on her lengthy personal experience as detailed in these 30 plus pages, and then to attempt to belittle it in a summary fashion, is just plain wrong.
I would agree with you that to dismiss someone's argument in summary fashion would be wrong. Indeed, isn't that what you are doing by using dismissive phrases like " I don't know from what warped perspective ...."? Can you not make your points without resorting to sophomoric insults?
Draw the line however you want, but I would urge you to think and reflect carefully, because it is precisely that type of mentality (i.e., the mentality that "The burden of adaptation is on the immigrant" no matter how unjust and unfair the playing field is) that leads to unfair treatment and exclusion of immigrants.
If the playing field is unjust, then yes, the burden to adapt seems unfair. But defining "unjust" is the crux of the matter, and difficult to do to everyone's satisfaction.
In considering what is just and unjust in Canada's welcoming of immigrants, let's consider what is a reasonable expectation that immigrants will adapt somewhat to Canada. In asking to come to a new country, is the immigrant responsible to make an effort to adapt to some extent? If not, if the immigrant wants Canada to change substantially, to make Canada much like the home country, then why not just stay in the old country?
As an old University prof once told me, an ounce of illustration is worth a pound of talky talk. Example: a Chinese doctor with two years of medical education beyond high school (they are referred to as "barefoot doctors" in China) comes to Canada, and finds he can get only a job as a nurse or taxi driver, not doctor. Should Canada change and accept him a a doctor? Do you really want him treating your burst appendix? Or should he adapt by upgrading his medical qualifications to meet Canadian requirements? If I am a patient, I vote for the latter.
What is your view -- without the supercilious tone if you can manage it?
The issue is not one of immigrants asking for favorable treatment or even equal treatment -- rather, it is one of immigrants asking for a minimum level of decency in treatment.
If you can't see that or empathize with that, so be it. But don't discount the personal struggles and experiences of others, because the pain is very real. No one -- certainly not I -- is discounting the difficulties faced by immigrants. If you think I was, show me where.
