Chris Selley: The perils of ‘defining’ bigotry

A valid dissenting view. Although I find illustrative examples are helpful improving understanding and can be the basis for conversation:

…This is the world we live in. If Holocaust denial is illegal (or sort of), then, the thinking goes, why shouldn’t denying the Nakba or the disastrous effects of the residential school system be illegal (or sort of) as well? A reasonable person could give a reasonable answer to that question. But governments aren’t reasonable people.

As I say, I totally understand Jewish groups’ concern. Some of the definitions of anti-Palestinian racism out there certainly seem studiously, deliberately vague. Citing the Arab Canadian Lawyers Association, Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East includes as examples “erasing the human rights and equal dignity and worth of Palestinians,” which is meaningless; and “justifying violence against Palestinians,” which could easily include defending Israel’s right to retaliate against Hamas atrocities.

But it should also be noted that Elghawaby welcomed the prospect of a definition, not any specific definition. I see little point in such “definitions” if they’re not going to be enshrined in law. But it would have made much more sense for Canada to craft its own definition of antisemitism instead of signing on to an international one that, in my view, does activate freedom-of-speech concerns. Free speech in Canada is far more protected than in many of our peer nations, and that’s a good thing.

It probably would have made far more sense still to leave all of this alone. Canadian law sets an appropriately high bar for prosecuting hate speech against any group. We don’t need the added confusion and division of “defining” every single form of bigotry.

Source: Chris Selley: The perils of ‘defining’ bigotry

Lederman: What happened in Amsterdam is antisemitism, Regg Cohn: There are no excuses for what happened to Jews in Amsterdam. Period

Indeed:

…Of course, the supposed justification for Kristallnacht was a pretext for a highly organized attack. Of course, what happened in Amsterdam was a dark night of extreme antisemitism, fuelled by anger over the war in Gaza. It has continued. On Monday night, rioters set a tram on fire, and yelled about cancerous Jews.

Here’s a hopeful thought: the people who did this are thugs, just as the Nazis were thugs. But on Kristallnacht, they were government-sponsored thugs, organized and supported by the men in charge.

The antisemites running rampant through Amsterdam have been condemned by the city’s mayor, the country’s prime minister and the king of the Netherlands. I’m taking some heart in that. But the gaslighting and victim-blaming – arguing that this was not antisemitism, that the Jews started it and deserved it – that is just heartbreaking.

Source: What happened in Amsterdam is antisemitism

…And so when protesters showed up earlier this year at the opening of the new Holocaust Museum in Amsterdam — home of Anne Frank — they claimed their demonstration was entirely anti-Israeli and utterly anti-Zionist, but couldn’t possibly be antisemitic. Which means the Holocaust is now fair game not merely for deniers but provocateurs.

During the Nazi occupation of Holland, three-quarters of the country’s Jews — 102,000 human beings — were deported to concentration camps. That’s history.

With an eye on that shared history, Dutch King Willem-Alexander publicly apologized for the latest antisemitic outburst: “Our history has taught us how intimidation goes from bad to worse.”

Prime Minister Dick Schoof described the violence as “unadulterated antisemitism,” but went one step further for the benefit of those trying to explain and excuse:

“Nothing is an excuse for hunting Jews.”

Nothing.

Source: Regg Cohn | There are no excuses for what happened to Jews in Amsterdam. Period

Outrage over Sir Robert Borden High School playing of peace for Gaza song at Remembrance Day ceremony

Legitimate concern:

…Kaplan-Mirth said the musical decision also ran counter to the OCDSB policy to steer clear of taking political stances on any and all issues.

“There is no excuse for this, playing one song at a Remembrance Day ceremony and it’s a song about Gaza? How many times and how many ways can you hurt the Jewish community? Somebody made a choice and there’s no place where this is an appropriate choice for Remembrance Day,” she said. “What if there was a Russian peace song or a Chinese peace song or an Israel peace song? None of that would be OK.”The Jewish Federation of Ottawa said it was also “deeply concerned” about the ceremony.

Source: Outrage over Sir Robert Borden High School playing of peace for Gaza song at Remembrance Day ceremony

Lyons, Cotler and Lew: To counter antisemitism, Canadians must first be able to recognize it

Op-ed promoting the antisemitism guidebook:

…Canadians should unite to combat antisemitism not only because it is an abhorrent, dangerous, and deadly prejudice, but because it is toxic to the very fabric of our democracy and society. Antisemitism is known as the “canary in the coal-mine” for all forms of hatred and intolerance – a weathervane for growing societal intolerance and prejudice – because what starts with the Jews does not end with the Jews.

Simply put, antisemitism is a threat not only to Jewish individuals and the Jewish community, but to Canadian society and democracy as a whole. Our hope is that the Canadian Handbook on the IHRA Definition will be a valuable tool for Canadians seeking to combat this threat and address the rising tide of antisemitism.

Source: To counter antisemitism, Canadians must first be able to recognize it

Chris Selley: Imagine the chaos if Israeli soccer comes to Canada

Not an appealing thought experiment:

…It was a terribly grim landmark day for European Jews, and indeed for Europe in general. The World Jewish Congress estimates there are only about 30,000 Jews in the Netherlands: roughly one-eighth as many as in 1939, on the eve of the Holocaust. There might be even fewer than that in very short order, if Thursday’s madness becomes routine. Canadians, Jews especially, are right to wonder whether it could happen here.

The answer is, basically, sure it could. But it could also be prevented. And this should have been. It looks like a colossal failure of policing. It’s easy to say from a desk on the other side of the Atlantic, but this was entirely predictable.

Reports out of Amsterdam Wednesday night were alarmingly and obviously portentous of what occurred the next day. Some purported Maccabi-supporting hooligans had assaulted a taxi driver and ripped down Palestinian flags, while chanting anti-Palestinian slogans.

Even if it weren’t true, the fact those stories were out there in the wild should have been reason enough to expect retaliation — and then some.

Clearly what happened Thursday night isn’t primarily about soccer. It’s about primordial hatred. But alas, soccer incubates primordial hatred. That’s true within the Netherlands: Ajax supporters, few of whom are Jewish, have traditionally embraced the team’s Jewish roots (they often refer to themselves as “the Jews”) and their rivals — especially supporters of Rotterdam club Feyenoord — have often taunted Ajax with antisemitic chants like “Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas, followed by a hissing noise. From a North American perspective, it’s almost beyond belief.

…It’s not inconceivable that Israel might qualify for the 2026 World Cup, and that it might play one or more games in Toronto or Vancouver. I shudder to imagine what that would look like. Police don’t just need to be prepared for serious Amsterdam-style violence; they, and their political overseers, need somehow to convince Canadian Jews and their friends that they’re actually safe. It’s a tough job, nowadays.

Source: Chris Selley: Imagine the chaos if Israeli soccer comes to Canada

Canadian Handbook on the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism: Comment

This is a useful initiative, both as an explainer as well as providing examples of antisemitic behaviour, one that can be used by a variety of organizations and institutions. The illustrative examples (section 3) are particularly strong.

That being said, some weaknesses IMO:

The paragraph “Misconception #4” overly simplifies the history of the definition, and avoids mentioning the concerns of the lead drafter, Kenneth Stern, that it could be used to curb free speech.

The handbook is silent on the other main definition, The Nexus Document, which  “examines the issues at the nexus of antisemitism and Israel in American politics” but has broader implications and provides greater clarity on when criticism of Israel and Israeli policies and actions cross over to antisemitism.

The Canadian handbook could have benefited from more extensive examples of legitimate non-antisemitic critiques of Israel and its government (e.g., settler violence, restrictions on movement, military strategies, limiting humanitarian aid etc), keeping in mind that singling out Israel from other abusers can cross the line.

Lastly, the handbook reflects the wisdom of having a public servant as the special envoy, who knows how to “work the system” to obtain practical results, something much harder for former activists. That being said, there is a need for a similar practical handbook for anti-Muslim bias and hate, although the absence of a widely agreed definition makes it more complicated. The UN’s background paper, A Working Definition of Islamophobia, among others, could provide the basis for the development of a more formal definition along with IHRA and Nexus but from the perspective of anti-Muslim bias and hate.

For illustrative purposes, I selected these examples from the Handbook which, with suggested rewording, also could be applied to anti-Muslim hate:

Example 1: Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Muslims in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

Example 2: Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.

Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Muslims as such or the power of Muslims as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Muslim conspiracy (great replacement theory).

Example 3: Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

Accusing Muslims as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Muslim person or group or even for acts committed by non-Muslims.

Example 6: Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

Accusing Muslim citizens of being more loyal to the Ummah, or to the alleged priorities of Muslims worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

Note: I would argue that participating in the Israeli defence forces or in the armed forces of Islamic countries, or organizations like Hamas, Hisbollah and ISIS make dual loyalty charges legitimate.

Example 9: Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.

Using the symbols and images associated with classic Islamophobia/anti-Muslim hate (e.g., Objectifying and generalising Muslims as different, exotic, or underdeveloped, or implying that they are outside of, distinct from, or incompatible with Canadian society and identity) to characterize citizens of Muslim countries.

Source: Canadian Handbook on the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism

Medical journal ‘equity’ audit ignores Jewish doctors, medical professionals

Of note. While historically somewhat understandable, tone deaf in the current context:

Glaring omissions in an equity audit from Canada’s leading peer-reviewed medical journal are causing concern amongst Jewish medical professionals. 

Published in June by the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ,) the external audit was meant to improve the publication’s diversity efforts, but instead the authors chose to focus almost exclusively on Black, Muslim and Indigenous issues — without once mentioning the explosion of antisemitism impacting Jewish physicians and medical students.

“In 2022 the CMAJ editor-in-chief commissioned an independent audit of CMAJ’s culture and processes in support of developing a strategy to address issues related to antiracism, equity, diversity and inclusion (AEDI,)” read an excerpt from the report’s webpage. 

Among the report’s recommendations are developing a “learning framework around historical systemic oppression and racism in the health sector with a focus on anti-Black racism, anti-Indigenous Racism and Islamophobia for CMAJ staff and editorial teams.”

But completely absent from the report was any mention of struggles faced by Jewish medical professionals, who — especially after last year’s Oct. 7 Hamas terror attacks — face daily discrimination and harassment, particularly those in medical school….

Source: Medical journal ‘equity’ audit ignores Jewish doctors, medical professionals

Globe editorial: There is no Charter right to intimidation

Indeed:

…Bubble zones would protect everyone’s right to be free of harassment as they go into community spaces. The right to demonstrate cannot become a licence to intimidate.

Source: There is no Charter right to intimidation

In Sweden, the far right is waging open war on the Swedish Committee for Combating Antisemitism

Of note:

The strategy is now well-honed. Whenever the Sweden Democrats (SD) – a far-right party and ally of the governmental right – are criticized for their ideology, hateful comments made by their elected representatives and members, or their anonymous social media accounts, they claim to be the victim of a conspiracy hatched by the left. Since October 16, the Swedish Committee for Combating Antisemitism has been in its sights.

Founded in 1983, this independent, recognized body has long annoyed the Sweden Democrats. By systematically recalling the party’s history, which stems from the neo-Nazi movement, as well as the regular abuses of its leaders, the committee contradicts the official discourse of the SDs, a party that believes it should be cleared of any suspicion of anti-Semitism owing to its unwavering support for Israel.

‘Clear zero tolerance against racism’

Visibly annoyed that the committee’s criticisms were raised again in a televised debate on October 13, party leader Jimmie Åkesson and four of his lieutenants signed an op-ed three days later in the tabloid Aftonbladet. In it, they denounced “serious, ill-supported accusations which appear to be based on misinterpretations and pure inaccuracies.”

Admitting the problematic history of their party – “there have been individuals with dubious opinions and links to extremist organizations” – they assured that they have been carrying out “systematic and targeted work to get rid of this type of problem for at least 20 years” with “a clear zero tolerance against racism and extremism.”

The next day, the committee’s president, Ulrika Knutson, responded in the pages of Aftonbladet. According to Knutson, the party’s attempts to present itself as “a model in the fight against Jew hatred lack credibility.” She accused the SDs of instrumentalizing anti-Semitism: They “strongly oppose it when the issue can be used to attack political opponents and minorities,” but are “much more lenient when it comes to statements within their own ranks,” she said.

Methodically, Knutson proved her point, going back over the statements made by four of the five signatories to the op-ed. Richard Jomshof, president of Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee, said in 2015 that Swedish Jews were not a problem “because the Jewish group is so small.” Björn Söder, former vice president of Parliament, doubted in 2014 that Jews could become Swedes and in 2019 took up a conspiracy theory claiming that Hungarian-born American billionaire George Soros was “the one pulling [the] strings” of the European Union…

Source: In Sweden, the far right is waging open war on the Swedish Committee for Combating Antisemitism

Christopher Dummitt: Serious questions for Canadians who still support Samidoun and Hamas

Valid questions. See the article for the complete list:

…There’s no indication that the professors or students at my universities or others want some advice. But if they had asked for direction, here are a series of questions I would want them to consider:

The first is a simple one: why does this conflict motivate you so much? Tens of thousands of people are being killed in Sudan in a longstanding civil war yet, as far as I can tell, this isn’t drawing your sympathy or anger. Why is it that the only Jewish state in the world is the one that attracts your ire, while other oppressive regimes escape sanction?

On Gaza itself, there is an even more basic conundrum: why are there no bomb shelters in Gaza? How is it that those who planned the raid on Israel, who knew that their attack would almost certainly elicit devastating retaliation, didn’t plan on ways to protect their own citizens?

It’s not for lack of resources. There are miles and miles of bomb proof tunnels all throughout Gaza. Why are these protective bunkers used to hide militants and not protect civilians? In London during the Blitz, Britain did all it could to protect its people. The same goes for Ukrainians today. Why is Hamas failing at the most basic part of government?…

Source: Christopher Dummitt: Serious questions for Canadians who still support Samidoun and Hamas