A long time ago, while sitting around a dinner table, I got an insight into the “progressive” mindset on immigration and multiculturalism.

One of the other diners, a nurse from Toronto, was eager to enlighten us western hicks on the benefits of open immigration, as well as cultural preservation for newcomers.

“I just love it when I see all those other people, from all those other countries, speaking all those other languages on the bus,” our dinner companion gushed.

“So you talk to them, do you?” I asked. “Learn something from them about their cultures?”

“Oh, no!” she exclaimed. “I just think it’s great because of what multiculturalism says about Canada and our tolerance.”

It was then I learned that on immigration and multiculturalism – as on a host of other public policies – progressives aren’t as interested in their policies producing results as they are in how their policies make them look to others and feel good about themselves.

That’s what’s behind Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s mad rush to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees here between now and the end of the year – six weeks.

He saw the photos of three-year-old Aylan Kurdi drowned, face-down on a Turkish beach. Took to Twitter immediately to broadcast his outrage. Was joined by hundreds of thousands of other instant Twits with similar superficial concern. Grasped the figure 25,000 out of thin air because it seems caring and sharing enough.

And the next thing you know we are clearing military bases and other public places for his influx of unscreened Syrian exiles.

This is a policy decision chosen as much or more for what it says about the Liberal mindset than what it does for refugees. If we sent the same money as aid to countries bordering Syria, we could help 300,000 refugees in camps there, rather than just 25,000.

Whether or not the Liberal decision to accept so many refugees is wise, let’s put their pledge in some perspective, first.

The United States – the liberal, Democrat, Obama-led United States – with 319 million people is taking 10,000 Syrians over the next year. Meanwhile Canada, with 35 million residents is taking 25,000 in the next month-and-a-half.

If the U.S. were taking a proportionate number, they’d have to welcome 228,000. And they’d have to accept them not between now and next November, but between now and New Year’s Eve.

Already in the U.S., 26 governors, both Democrats and Republicans, have said they will resist federal attempts to resettle any unscreened refugees in their states in light of the fact that at least one (and perhaps two) of the murderous attackers in Paris last Friday appear to have been ISIS terrorists masquerading as Syrian refugees who crossed into Europe only a month ago.

On the other hand, Canada has premiers such as Alberta’s New Democrat Rachel Notley. On Monday, Notley argued that Canada needs to act quickly to bring so many refugees here precisely because of the threat from ISIS.

“These refugees are themselves fleeing exactly the kind of terror that we were all shocked to observe … and that's why we need to be reaching out to them.”

Only Saskatchewan’s Brad Wall seemed to get it. He wrote to Trudeau saying “I understand that the overwhelming majority of refugees are fleeing violence and bloodshed and pose no threat to anyone. However, if even a small number of individuals who wish to do harm to our country are able to enter Canada as a result of a rushed refugee resettlement process, the results could be devastating.”

But that sensible approach would not allow progressives to feel as morally superior as they like.