Genocide resolution reveals conflicts between scholars over Israel’s war in Gaza

2025/09/08 2 Comments

Of interest:

There was the allure of certainty in the headline: that an international association of genocide scholars had resolved that Israel was carrying out a genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

More precisely, “that Israel’s policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide” set out in the United Nations’ 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

That is the verdict adopted by the International Association of Genocide Scholars, a non-partisan group of about 500 academics, educators, activists, psychologists, lawyers and artists dedicated to research and teaching about genocide and genocide prevention.

The association’s Aug. 31 resolution was adopted overwhelmingly by those who voted, with 109 for the resolution and 20 against, said Onur Uraz, the chair of the association’s resolution committee and an assistant professor of law at Turkey’s Hacettepe University. About 30 per cent of the association’s membership cast a ballot, he said.

But interviews with several association members involved in the vote reveal a more cautious and conflicted approach to condemning Israel, a state that was founded after the genocide that killed six million European Jews during the Second World War.

“So many of us got our beginning in Holocaust studies and are very sensitive to the massive scope of that world historical event and its impact,” said Andrew Woolford, a sociology and criminology professor at the University of Manitoba and a former president of the association.

“I don’t think it’s a resolution that anyone goes too easily into and I trust my colleagues reflected on it very seriously.”

‘Anti-Israel agenda’

The passing of the resolution — which cited United Nations estimates (that are based on Palestinian Health Ministry statistics) of the killing of more than 59,000 adults and children, the forced displacement of more than two million Gazans, and the vast destruction of housing, schools, hospitals, archives and agricultural fields and food warehouses — has prompted fierce condemnation.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry called the genocide finding “disgraceful” and “an embarrassment to the legal profession and to any academic standard.”

“For the first time, ‘genocide scholars’ accuse the very victim of genocide, despite Hamas’s attempted genocide against the Jewish people” the ministry wrote on X.

Israeli opposition leader Benny Gantz, a former defence minister and military chief of staff, said Israel’s attempts to avoid civilian casualties, deliver humanitarian aid and create humanitarian zones in Gaza serve as a powerful defence against the charge of genocide.

A military that takes such steps “might be the most ‘incompetent’ perpetrators of genocide in history,” he wrote on X.

“The cheapening and weaponization of the term ‘genocide’ to suit a shameless anti-Israel agenda must stop.”

To denigrate and ridicule the association, one social media user signed himself up as a member using as a photo the image of a muscular man flexing in a skimpy pink bikini.

Someone took out a membership in the name of the Nazi leader Adolf Hitler — the most prominent practitioner of genocide in modern history — with the accompanying image of a masked Hamas militant.

Public opinion war

The intensity of the reaction points to the resolution’s impact in the public-relations battle pitting defenders of Israel against those voicing their support and concern for the plight of Palestinians.

The draft resolution was circulated among association members several weeks before the vote. But the results were announced shortly after a report by a coalition of aid groups confirming the existence of famine conditions in Gaza.

At the United Nations General Assembly meetings next week, Canada, France, Britain and several other countries are expected to formally recognize Palestinian statehood in a diplomatic push to resolve the conflict through a two-state solution.

And while the declaration of 129 scholars may seem small in comparison, some see it as an important step in the campaign to condemn and isolate Israel’s government over its handling of the war.

“Global public opinion is certainly influenced by something like this,” said William Schabas, a Canadian professor of international law at London’s Middlesex University.

A past president of the scholarly association, but no longer a member, Schabas said the resolution will also help broaden the debate over the war in Gaza, allowing discussion of positions that had been taboo and potentially career-ending not so long ago.

“A year and a half ago, it was not a simple thing to talk about genocide being committed by Israel, and there were academics who lost their job for doing that. We were regularly accused of antisemitism,” he said.

“It’s pretty hard to claim that someone’s an antisemite because they criticized Israel when an organization like the International Association of Genocide Scholars — by a very large majority, apparently — voted in favour of this resolution.”

‘Historians don’t act quickly’

Woolford, of the University of Manitoba, voted in favour of the resolution, but his thinking on the matter has evolved over the course of the two-year war.

Just eight days after the attack by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023 that killed 1,200 people in southern Israel and sparked the war, Woolford signed an open letter in which nearly 900 academics and legal scholars warned of “the possibility of the crime of genocide being perpetrated by Israeli forces against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”

In December 2023, he backed another statement by concerned academics saying that “the starvation, mass killing and forced displacement of Palestinian civilians in Gaza is ongoing, raising the question of genocide, especially in view of the intentions expressed by Israeli leaders.”

As a sociologist, he said that his professional approach to genocide is different than that of an expert in international humanitarian law, but his belief that Israel was in fact engaged in a genocidal campaign against Palestinians was shaped by arguments presented before the International Court of Justice, where South Africa has alleged that Israel is in breach of the 1948 genocide convention.

The ICJ, which is the principal legal forum for the United Nations, has not yet ruled on the allegations.

Uraz, the chair of the association’s resolution committee, said that most initiatives are voted on by between 30 and 50 per cent of the membership.

Alyssa Loggie, a communications instructor at Vancouver’s Columbia College, wrote in response to questions that she hoped the resolution would “add to the voices of those already speaking out” about the war in Gaza.

“We did not need the (association) alone to tell us what is so readily apparent, and has already been spoken by many brave people around the world, and, most importantly, from the cries of Palestinians suffering themselves,” she wrote. 

Some scholars don’t participate in resolution votes because they feel they lack the expertise, Uraz said. Others decline due to a lack of interest or a sense of inevitability, thinking that one additional vote for or against will hardly matter.

Ahead of this resolution, though, some members complained to Uraz that the wording and condemnation was “not … strong enough, which could be another reason for some to be absent.”

Hilary Earl, an assistant professor of history at Nipissing University in North Bay, abstained for a different reason.

“Historians don’t act quickly,” she said, while insisting that it was clear in her mind that war crimes and crimes against humanity had been committed by Israel against the Palestinians.

“I’m just not ready to say that it’s a genocide,” she said. “That doesn’t mean it’s not going to be, and it doesn’t mean that it isn’t.”

Earl said that Raphael Lemkin, the Polish law professor and Holocaust survivor who coined the term “genocide” in 1944, cast it not in terms of the impact on a victimized group, but on the intent of the perpetrator.

“What is their intention? Do they want to destroy the group, or is the continuation of the group OK?” Earl said. “It’s an awful, fraught definition, the result of a compromise.”

She said there was no question in her mind about the horrific suffering and impact upon Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip.

“But outcome is not what genocide is about. It’s about intent. If it’s about outcome, then every war is a genocide, right?”

Scholars or activists?

Every conflict is, thankfully, not a genocide. But the association of genocide scholars has weighed in on numerous conflicts in which, in their opinion, warring parties have crossed that horrible line — even if it is sometimes decades after the fact.

It has issued resolutions accusing the Islamic State of genocidal acts against religious minorities in Syria and Iraq; accusing Myanmar of genocide against its Rohingya minority; and accusing Pakistan of committing genocide against its Bengal minority during Bangladesh’s 1971 war of independence.

The association also condemned the threat by former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005 to wipe Israel off the map and for denying the Holocaust. It called the comments an incitement to genocide and said that the Jewish state would be at “imminent” risk of genocide if ever Iran obtains nuclear weapons.

The risky business of taking political positions has been at the heart of the scholarly association, something that sets it apart and which its members seem to appreciate.

“This has been at the core of the organization for a long time: are we a scholarly organization or are we an activist organization?” said Earl, a member since 1996.

“I think we’re both, and I think the organization is well within its rights, and I think we should have these discussions and debates regularly. The world is full of violence against civilians, so I would never want to silence that.”

No nuance

Shortly before his death in December 2024, Israel Charny, an Israeli psychologist who co-founded the association, wrote a rebuttal to a journal article that accused Israel of engaging in genocide in Gaza.

In it, Charny admitted there had been “excessive” bombing in Gaza and that too many Palestinians had been killed. But he defended Israel’s actions as a legitimate response to Hamas aggression.

Israel should stop the war as soon as possible, Charny insisted, but not before its legitimate war aims — particularly the release of the remaining Israeli hostages — had been achieved.

This is the difficult nuance of the Israel-Hamas conflict that, in the opinion of Hily Moodrick-Even Khen, the genocide resolution failed to consider.

“I don’t think that the association should avoid expressing academic views about what’s going on in the world — definitely it’s part of our mission as genocide scholars,” said Khen, a professor of international law and chair of the Center for the Research and Study of Genocide at Ariel University, which is located in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

“The problem is that I think that our case is much more nuanced … and the very fact that Israel is fighting against the terrorist organization must be recognized.”

Khen, who voted against the resolution, said that it failed to fully acknowledge this fact, while also relying on disputed figures about the injured and dead that are supplied by the Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza and circulated by the UN.

“It just speaks against any academic integrity, to my mind.”

But this does not mean that she and many other Israelis unconditionally support the right-wing coalition government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, or that they agree with every aspect of how the war has been prosecuted.

“I have my own criticisms about what’s going on,” she said. “But using the term ‘genocide,’ and using it in such an inaccurate and unprofessional way, is very destructive.”

Source: Genocide resolution reveals conflicts between scholars over Israel’s war in Gaza

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

André Pratte: Quebec prayer ban would render freedom of religion meaningless  

2025/09/08 Leave a comment

Good commentary but the police need to more willing to use the tools to remedy street blockages and enforce bubble zones:

…Yes, some of the demonstrations, tied as they are to the war in Gaza, are provocations. The demonstrators want to shock the public in the hopes of raising awareness to their cause. This is exactly the kind of unpopular behaviour that is protected by freedom of expression, as long as the demonstrators do not break the law, for instance by blocking traffic or intimidating others. If they cross those lines, the police already possess all the tools necessary to remedy the situation. An all-encompassing ban on prayers in public spaces is neither necessary nor reasonable.  

Separatist intellectual Mathieu Bock-Côté, who inspired many of the CAQ’s nationalist policies, wrote in Le Journal de Montréal that Islamic street players are “symbolic aggressions”: “We are talking about a conquering Islam, that is to say, an Islam shaped by Islamism and carried by waves of migration that are transforming the demographic composition of our societies.” However, Islamists are in no position to “transform the demographic composition” of Quebec, where Muslims represent a mere five per cent of the population, compared to 54 per cent for Catholics and 27 per cent for those who have no religion.   

For make no mistake: as with bill 21 banning the wearing of religious symbols by teachers, only one religion, Islam, is being targeted here. Other religious groups, including Catholics, have held ceremonies in public in Quebec for decades without anyone challenging their right to do so.   

The promised legislation will very probably violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Quebec’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. It is not yet known for certain if the Legault government will pre-emptively invoke the charters’ notwithstanding clause, but we do know that they have done so for two previous pieces of legislation, bill 21, already mentioned, and bill 96 strengthening the protection of the French language. This abuse of the notwithstanding clause is extremely serious, for in effect it deprives Quebecers of the right to challenge rights-infringing measures adopted by the state. Citizens are left with no means of defence, as if the charters did not exist. 

And so it is that Quebecers’ fundamental rights are being slowly but surely eroded. Sadly, that worrisome trend is met with an immense collective shrug.  

Source: André Pratte: Quebec prayer ban would render freedom of religion meaningless  

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with , ,

Browne: After 20 years working in Canada’s cultural sector, I can finally speak out without fear

2025/09/06 Leave a comment

Good long read and reminder of some of the excesses in the cultural (and other) sectors:

…I believe I was a progressive type. I wanted to be inclusive. I wanted to help people who had a difficult time – for one reason or another – get started in the cultural world or be recognized so they felt equal and worthy to others in the community. I tried to reach out to diverse communities not comfortable with traditional institutions, and … a long list of other well-meaning ambitions. Maybe I was a Christian trying to make the world a better place, but I’d never say that. Then I realized I was always going to be wrong, somehow. Remaining silent was safe for me and the organizations where I was employed. And I did even when there were people who were clearly paying for the sins of their ancestors or unintended consequences beyond their control, including having graduated from a prestigious university. I should have spoken up.

While I learned to say nothing out loud, I continued to have transgressive thoughts. In one training session, we began by confiding to the group what our pronouns were. Instead of he and him I wanted to insist on “sir” or “Mr. Browne” as monikers. (This is how my generation used to address older people they respected.) Needless to say, I didn’t blurt this out.

The cultural world is full of enforcers in 2025: art schools, universities, arts associations and, most brutal and rigid, provincial and federal funders. All conspire to instill proper thinking. If you’ve applied for government grants you know that culture money is a not so subtle animator of social policy objectives. If you want government money, you twist your art to fit their agenda. Much of what is produced in this manner alienates and produces cynicism, not just for a mainstream audience but for complicit culture workers.

Maybe the culture world needs an existential crisis to push us from so-called Canada to patriotism. One that moves culture from an exclusionary ideology that needs to keep finding people and ideas to disenfranchise or to be superior to … to what I’m not sure. Unsettling ideas are the raw cultural edge artists used to embrace; few sought the safety of consensus. This volatile, uncensored realm, not managed by academics or bureaucrats, can perhaps once again offer the possibility of revelation. 

Maybe a new generation of curators and administrators will better separate art from advocacy. In my postretirement life, I’m returning to my teenage ambition to be an artist. I have such old-fashioned ideas about art I’m likely not going to provoke anyone, but I’d hope I’m encouraged by whomever runs museums to do just this.

Kelvin Browne is a former vice-president at the Royal Ontario Museum and the former Executive Director and CEO of the Gardiner Museum

Source: After 20 years working in Canada’s cultural sector, I can finally speak out without fear

Filed under DEI, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Cheng: What I Got Wrong About D.E.I.

2025/09/06 1 Comment

Good piece and reminder that the importance of the journey:

…Math is famous for its equations, but equations are more subtle than they first appear. A simple equation like 4 + 1 = 1 + 4 shows not just that two values are equal but also that there are two subtly different ways of adding the same numbers to produce the same result. A similar approach applies to more advanced and complicated forms of math, such as the study of shapes or paths through space. We make choices about how to determine equality.

This is relevant to how we evaluate what people have achieved and make predictions about how well they will do. We can get some insight into how we should make these evaluations from a mathematical field called metric spaces.

A metric is a way of measuring the distance between two points but not necessarily physical distance; it could be how much time it takes with traffic as a factor or how much energy will be expended, depending on whether you’re going uphill or downhill. A distance cannot be measured based on the position of a single point. It requires the effort of measuring the distance between two points. This may sound redundant, but it’s an important clarification: Metrics can be measured only by taking into account the starting point and ending point, as well as relevant features of the journey — the whole story.

When we evaluate people, we could do the same. Instead of looking at just what they have achieved, we could also look at where they started and be clearer about how we are measuring the metaphorical distance they have come and whether we are taking into account the support they had or the obstructions they faced.

If we are selecting sprinters for a track team, we might look at their best times for the 100-meter dash. But if someone had, for some reason, only ever run races uphill or against the wind, it would make sense to take that into account and not compare that runner’s times to others’ directly. We would be treating those people differently but only because their paths were different; really we’d be evaluating their paths fairly relative to their contexts.

Other forms of achievement are not as straightforward to measure, but the idea is analogous. If someone achieved a certain SAT score after months of tutoring and someone else earned the same score having never seen an SAT before, it would be reasonable to be more impressed with the latter result and think that the second test taker has more potential. We should think of D.E.I. efforts as the best versions of this and aim to design systems that can measure the fuller picture of someone’s professional journey, not just the current result.

It took me a long time to realize that when I began my career, I had probably worked much harder than I might have if I had had a different identity. I had to work against people telling me I would never be able to succeed. When I attended conferences, I dealt with inappropriate behavior from men senior to me. I had to find my way in my career having no mentors who looked at all like me. I am grateful for the support of some senior mathematicians, and I now realize that it wasn’t extra help because I was a woman; it was help in overcoming the extra obstructions I faced as a woman.

It shouldn’t be called sexist to help people overcome sexism, and it shouldn’t be called racist to help people overcome racism, but if we give this help too crudely, then we leave ourselves open to these criticisms. Math teaches us that D.E.I. initiatives should be about carefully defining the metrics we use to measure how far people have come and thus how far they have the potential to go. They should be about uncovering when some people are constantly running uphill or against the wind, which can inform us how to give everyone an equal tailwind and an equal opportunity to succeed.

Dr. Cheng is the scientist in residence at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

Source: What I Got Wrong About D.E.I.

Filed under DEI, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Rioux | Drôles de prières

2025/09/06 Leave a comment

When is a prayer a prayer, and when is it more a political event. Other examples would arguably include the Annual March for Life and telling that most Christian religious figures oppose the ban:

…La France a toujours résisté à la tentation de légiférer sur ces prières, consciente que la religion a toute sa place dans les lieux publics pourvu qu’elle ne gêne pas l’ordre public et que sa présence ne relève pas de la provocation. Il n’est pas besoin d’être diplômé en théologie pour savoir que, dans nos pays, la prière n’est pas un banal instrument d’agit-prop. Ce prosélytisme exacerbé est en contradiction avec nos traditions culturelles et le sens même de la prière, celle-ci étant généralement considérée comme un geste intime et personnel qui exige le recueillement et ne saurait donc être confondu avec des slogans militants hurlés par une foule hystérique. Comment s’étonner dès lors que, en s’exhibant ainsi sur la voie publique, ces hommes (car les femmes en sont exclues) provoquent des réactions de rejet ? Et, à plus forte raison, s’ils le font un dimanche devant une église !

Pour peu que l’on daigne sortir de sa bulle, on constatera que ces prières publiques sont aujourd’hui instrumentalisées aussi bien sur Downing Street que devant la porte de Brandebourg. Si l’idée de la laïcité est étrangère à l’islam, se pourrait-il que, comme le voile, ces prières soient une façon pour lui de marquer son territoire ?

L’idée n’est pas nouvelle. On ne compte plus les intellectuels qui, durant tout le XXe siècle, et même avant, ont démontré le caractère conquérant de l’islam. Admirateur de la richesse de la culture musulmane, l’islamologue français Roger Arnaldez fut un ami du grand écrivain égyptien Taha Hussein, l’un des artisans de la renaissance intellectuelle arabe (la Nahda). Il considérait que « la conquête est pour les musulmans un moyen normal, voulu et conduit par Dieu, pour répandre la foi dans les pays des infidèles ». Cette conquête n’est pas toujours le fait des armes, écrivait-il dès 1994, mais « d’une volonté non seulement de convertir des individus, ce qui est normal, mais de prendre pied et position dans la vie sociale et politique des pays de l’ancien Dar al-Harb [où l’islam n’a pas triomphé]. Il n’est plus alors question de djihad armé, moins encore de terrorisme, mais d’un projet de conquête insinueuse qui n’en est pas moins une conquête ».

Tout en reconnaissant que ces thèses pouvaient être contestées, l’islamologue membre de l’Académie des sciences morales et politiques de France jugeait que « l’Islam, par beaucoup de ses traits et par son histoire passée, pose des problèmes que ne pose aucune autre des grandes religions. Il en résulte qu’on doit, à son égard, rester très attentif et garder une attitude de grande prudence »….

Source: Chronique | Drôles de prières

Filed under Laïcité, Religion Tagged with , ,

Adam Pankratz: The NDP is here to rescue us from ‘cis’ men

2025/09/06 Leave a comment

Patrick Lagacé has the more serious yet witty take below this take by Pankratz:

…Among the various requirements to be approved to run for the poisoned chalice of NDP leader is a Nomination Signature Form, which must be signed by 500 members in good standing of the NDP. So far, so normal. Then, as is too often the case for the new left, normal leaves the room to be replaced by grievance and nonsense.

And so, to ensure common sense is entirely absent from the signature process, the NDP requires “at least fifty percent (50%) of the total required signatures must be from members who do not identify as a cis man,” and “a minimum of one hundred (100) signatures must be from members of equity-seeking groups, including but not limited to racialized members, Indigenous members, members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community, and persons living with disabilities.”

If there were any lingering doubt, the party of the working class is now definitively the party of identity politics and grievance culture. This is the language that broadcasts to Canadians that the message the NDP got from their electoral drubbing is that they must be even more radical.

While the NDP’s tone deafness to public sentiment is remarkable, the manner in which it facilitates the exclusion of women is even more staggering. Nowhere, readers of the rules will note, is it specified that 50 per cent of signatories must be female, only not “cis man.” That is to say, a candidate can be approved with a combination of cis men and trans women, all natal males, without the need to seek the approval of a single female. While this scenario is admittedly unlikely, it is staggering that a party so hell bent on “inclusivity” and “equity” is so obviously comfortable with the erasure of women from its inclusion criteria. By refusing to mention the word “woman” anywhere, the NDP have signalled their virtue, all while displaying the electoral communications sophistication of trepanned gnat….

Adam Pankratz is a lecturer at the University of British Columbia’s Sauder School of Business.

Source: Adam Pankratz: The NDP is here to rescue us from ‘cis’ men

Legacé: Le NPD domine dans UQAM—Les-Nids-De-Poule

…Le NPD déconne parce que l’immense majorité de la population canadienne est cisgenre. Ce n’est pas une opinion, c’est un fait : les non-cis – transgenres et non-binaires – composent très exactement 0,33 % de la population canadienne de plus de 15 ans selon le recensement de 2021, soit 100 815 personnes sur 30,5 millions de personnes.

Mais oui, limitons le nombre d’hommes cisgenres qui peuvent appuyer une personne désirant diriger le NPD, ça me semble une excellente façon d’élargir la tente politique de ce parti !

Là où le NPD déconne aussi, c’est pour la vérification de l’étiquette de tous ces signataires. Comment les instances néo-démocrates vont-elles vérifier si un signataire est cisgenre… ou pas ?

S’il est 2S, soit bispirituel autochtone ?

Et véritablement autochtone ?

J’ai un TDA diagnostiqué : suis-je en situation de handicap ?

Passage sublime du texte de Catherine Lévesque dans le Post : Le parti n’a pas répondu immédiatement à savoir comment les dirigeants du parti vérifieraient si les signataires s’identifient comme cisgenres ou faisant partie d’un groupe « en quête d’équité ».

Pour authentifier les cis, va-t-on demander aux signataires de baisser leur pantalon ?

Pour le 2S, euh, comment on vérifie cela ?

Je cesse de déconner : le NPD a bien le droit de faire ce qu’il veut, même divorcer formellement de la majorité des Canadiens qui ne sacralisent pas leur sexe, leur genre, leur sigle, leur orientation sexuelle, leur patrimoine culturel. Bref, la moyenne des ours-es.

Mais dans le rayon du signalement de vertu, ces règles sont presque aussi niaiseuses que le discours anti-raciste-anti-colonialiste-anti-patriarcal qu’on retrouve dans les associations facultaires les plus militantes de l’UQAM.

Le NPD est sorti des élections du 28 avril avec le pire résultat depuis sa fondation, tant dans le nombre de députés que dans sa part du vote populaire. Il a perdu le statut de parti officiel au Parlement. Son chef Jagmeet Singh a fini troisième dans sa circonscription.

Source: Le NPD domine dans UQAM—Les-Nids-De-Poule

… The NDP is messing around because the vast majority of the Canadian population is cisgender. It’s not an opinion, it’s a fact: non-cis – transgender and non-binary – make up exactly 0.33% of the Canadian population over the age of 15 according to the 2021 census, or 100,815 people out of 30.5 million people.

But yes, let’s limit the number of cisgender men who can support a person wishing to lead the NPD, it seems to me an excellent way to expand the political tent of this party!

Where the NDP also messes up is for the verification of the label of all these signatories. How will the New Democratic bodies verify whether a signatory is cisgender… or not?

If he is 2S, or indigenous bispiritual?

And truly indigenous?

I have a diagnosed ADD: am I disabled?

Sublime passage from Catherine Lévesque’s text in the Post: The party did not immediately respond to how party leaders would verify whether the signatories identify themselves as cisgenders or part of a group “in search of equity”.

To authenticate the cis, will we ask the signatories to lower their pants?

For the 2S, uh, how do we check this?

I stop fooling around: the NDP has the right to do what it wants, even formally divorce the majority of Canadians who do not sanctify their sex, gender, acronym, sexual orientation, cultural heritage. In short, the average of bears.

But in the radius of virtue reporting, these rules are almost as silly as the anti-racist-anti-colonialist-anti-patriarchal discourse found in the most militant faculty associations of UQAM.

The NDP came out of the April 28 elections with the worst result since its foundation, both in the number of deputies and in its share of the popular vote. It has lost the status of official party in Parliament. His leader Jagmeet Singh finished third in his riding.

Filed under DEI, Multiculturalism, Politics Tagged with , ,

Globe editorial: Tweets and platitudes will not defeat antisemitism

2025/09/04 Leave a comment

Good points:

…It bears repeating: Whatever your view on Israel’s actions in Gaza, Jewish Canadians are not responsible for the actions of the Netanyahu government, any more than Muslim Canadians are responsible for the actions of Hamas and Hezbollah, or Russian Canadians are culpable for Vladimir Putin’s war of aggression.

That simple fact seems to elude the protesters who target the places that Jewish Canadians gather, including near the Ottawa grocery store where last week’s attack took place. Those protesters have a constitutional right to express their anger. But they also have moral responsibilities, namely to ask themselves whether the manner of their protest is fostering an atmosphere of hate….

Source: Tweets and platitudes will not defeat antisemitism

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with

Globe editorial: A premier goes out on wing and a prayer

2025/09/03 Leave a comment

Valid questions but some of the public prayers have been more political than spiritual in nature:

…It is already presumed that whatever law the government tables will infringe on an individual’s freedoms of expression, of religion, of conscience and of peaceful assembly, and then duck behind the notwithstanding clause. But how far will the government go?

What happens to a Quaker standing silently in a park? Is the government aware that this can constitute a form of prayer? Should the person be detained for questioning? 

What about someone doing yoga in a park? While yoga is generally a secular practice in Canada, it can for some be a devotional exercise and a communion with a higher power. How will the government know what intentions the person doing yoga al fresco has set?

What about doing tai chi in a park? It, too, is most often a secular, meditative practice in Canada. It is not a religion in and of itself, but it can be used as part of a spiritual journey by people of different faiths. Like yoga, it depends on intention.

What about Falun Gong, a modern religious movement devoted to a god-like leader that has been banned in China? Its practitioners are often seen outdoors in parks, and sometimes on sidewalks in front of Chinese consulates, their hands clasped in the prayer position. Will Beijing suddenly have an ally in the suppression of Falun Gong members? 

What about the annual Roman Catholic Good Friday procession in Old Montreal, an event involving public prayer? Will that still be allowed? It could make a secularist uncomfortable.

Or what about a soccer player who, smack in the middle of a public stadium, crosses himself before a game or when he scores a goal? Is that permissible?

If this seems ridiculous, it is no more ridiculous than the failing CAQ government taking a desperate swing at a divisive issue to save its skin.

How far Mr. Legault goes with this will be telling. Is it even possible to ban public prayer based on the actions of some Muslim protesters without also ensuring that people of other faiths and beliefs aren’t allowed to get away with the same infraction? 

Or is that the whole point – to again single out the one group that was most affected by Bill 21 and its ban on hijabs, and which has so often come under fire in Quebec?

Like yoga, it’s all about setting intentions. 

Source: A premier goes out on wing and a prayer

Filed under Laïcité, Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with , ,

Danella Aichele: Canada’s immigration policy must address the growing number of students who don’t speak English or French

2025/09/03 Leave a comment

Surely the provinces should ensure this input as part of the annual levels plan consultations. In general, Canada scores highly on PISA for immigrant integration and outcomes:

…A better approach would involve genuine intergovernmental coordination. If Ottawa intends to maintain high levels of immigration, it should consult with provinces and large urban school boards before announcing new targets. Federal funding should be aligned with provincial education budgets so that school systems can hire more ESL teachers, develop tailored curricula, and ease the transition for newcomers.

This wouldn’t be administratively burdensome. Immigration is heavily concentrated in a relatively small number of urban centres. The challenge isn’t complexity, it’s negligence.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has framed immigration as central to Canada’s growth strategy. He is right. But growth cannot come at the expense of cohesion. If immigration is to succeed, it must be matched by the resources and the planning required to make integration work.

That means Ottawa can’t simply drop new arrival numbers into the system and hope for the best. It needs to start in the classrooms where integration is lived and learned every day. Immigration targets should reflect not just national ambitions but the realities in Brampton, Calgary, and Montreal schools.

Canada’s future prosperity and social cohesion depend on getting this balance right. Immigration works best when it is ambitious and realistic—when it opens doors but also equips schools, teachers, and communities with the tools they need. Anything less risks undermining public confidence and shortchanging the very students who will shape the country’s future.

Danella Aichele is a former teacher with the Calgary Board of Education with a Master’s of Public Policy from the University of Calgary.

Source: Danella Aichele: Canada’s immigration policy must address the growing number of students who don’t speak English or French

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Quebec turns down federal funding for addressing systemic racism in justice system

2025/09/03 2 Comments

Willful blindness:

The Quebec government has turned down federal funding aimed at combatting systemic racism in the criminal justice system, saying it doesn’t agree with the program’s approach.

The federal government first offered $6.64-million in funding to provinces and territories in 2021 to improve fairness in the courts. Spread out over five years, the money was aimed at addressing the overrepresentation of Black people in the criminal justice system by promoting the use of race and cultural assessments before sentencing. 

These assessments – known as Impact of Race and Culture Assessments, or IRCAs – analyze how a convicted person’s experience of systemic racism contributed to their criminal charges.

While most provinces have accepted the federal funding aimed at supporting defendants or to cover the costs of assessments through their legal aid programs, Quebec has been opposed to providing this type of support.

“We are not party to any funding agreement involving Impact of Race and Culture Assessments, as Quebec doesn’t subscribe to the approach on which the funding program is based, namely systemic racism,” Marie-Hélène Mercier, a spokesperson for Quebec’s Justice Department, told The Canadian Press in an e-mail….

Source: Quebec turns down federal funding for addressing systemic racism in justice system

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →