L’après 11 septembre : la lutte contre l’islamophobie est nécessaire, mais elle ne doit pas être un appui à l’islamisme

2021/09/14 Leave a comment

Good commentary by Antonius and some of the naiveté of the left:

Les attentats du 11 septembre 2001 ont lancé un signal clair : les mouvements djihadistes islamistes étaient désormais prêts à s’en prendre directement aux puissances occidentales par des actions violentes d’envergure.

En réponse à ce défi, les États-Unis ont déployé une double stratégie au Moyen-Orient. D’abord militaire, pour combattre Al-Qaeda ainsi que certains régimes jugés menaçants, dont celui des talibans en Afghanistan. Puis politique, pour convaincre leurs alliés arabes autoritaires de laisser une plus grande marge de manœuvre à leurs sociétés civiles.

Ce deuxième volet de la stratégie était fondé sur l’idée qu’un espace démocratique plus grand rendrait le recours à la violence moins attirant pour les courants contestataires, en particulier islamistes. Cette stratégie a donc été accompagnée de diverses initiatives d’ouverture envers les courants de l’islam politique qui ne revendiquaient pas la violence comme moyen d’action privilégié.

Ces tentatives de cooptation, voire de glorification d’un certain islam conservateur, ont constitué un désavantage pour les courants sociaux et politiques sécularisés au sein même des sociétés musulmanes, mais elles ne les ont pas paralysés. Au contraire, ces sociétés ont elles aussi bénéficié de cette ouverture, qui a permis les lentes et patientes mobilisations qui ont rendu possibles les révoltes arabes de 2011.

J’ai commenté et publié sur ces événements, en tant que professeur de sociologie à l’Université du Québec à Montréal. Je m’intéresse entre autres aux transformations sociales dans les sociétés arabes, incluant l’émergence de l’islam politique, aux conflits au Proche-Orient, en particulier israélo-palestinien, ainsi qu’aux stéréotypes et aux discriminations qui ont ciblé les communautés arabes et musulmanes.

L’agenda sécuritaire et l’islamophobie

En même temps qu’il développait ses nouvelles stratégies dans le grand Moyen-Orient, le gouvernement américain a développé des stratégies sécuritaires visant à empêcher que des attaques semblables à celles du 11 septembre 2001 ne se reproduisent sur son territoire. Allié fidèle des États-Unis, le gouvernement du Canada, a lui aussi développé des stratégies similaires de lutte contre le terrorisme.

La menace du 11 septembre étant venue d’un groupe qui se réclamait explicitement de l’islam dans son action politique violente, les soupçons se sont naturellement portés vers des groupes similaires. Le discours sécuritaire a alors constitué un terreau fertile aux dérapages xénophobes qui visaient spécialement les musulmans, d’abord dans les mesures sécuritaires elles-mêmes, dont certaines étaient clairement discriminatoires. Par exemple, le traitement différentiel en fonction de l’apparence ou du nom, ou encore les « No-Fly Lists » des citoyens ordinaires dont le nom était « suspect ». Mais c’est surtout dans certains discours populistes, qui encourageaient la méfiance et la haine envers l’islam et les musulmans, que ces dérapages se sont manifestés, produisant hélas de nombreuses agressions contre des citoyens du seul fait qu’ils et elles étaient musulmans.

C’est cet ensemble de politiques, de discours et d’attitudes hostiles à l’islam et aux musulmans qui a été désigné par le terme « islamophobie », souvent considéré comme étant synonyme de « racisme antimusulman » et comme étant étroitement lié à l’agenda sécuritaire post-11 septembre.

Des appuis à l’islam politique

En réaction à cette islamophobie, un mouvement de solidarité et de défense des droits des musulmans s’est développé au Canada et au Québec.

Initié par des associations antiracistes et de défense des droits, ce mouvement a rapidement conclu, à juste titre, qu’il fallait lutter contre les stéréotypes négatifs associés à l’islam et le montrer sous un meilleur — et plus réaliste — jour.

Mais comment aborder la question de l’émergence des courants de l’islam politique d’inspiration wahhabite, originaire d’Arabie saoudite, et qui est une forme spécifique de salafisme ? Comment tenir compte de l’émergence de l’islamisme, avec ses composantes antidémocratiques ou même liberticides ?

C’est là, je crois, que certains mouvements antiracistes ont fait des erreurs importantes. En voulant s’opposer à l’agenda sécuritaire considéré discriminatoire et islamophobe, ils ont ignoré les dangers de l’islam politique et lui ont apporté des appuis qui vont bien plus loin que la défense des droits démocratiques. Ceci les a amenés à glorifier, à l’occasion, les pratiques salafistes comme étant émancipatrices, par exemple dans cette vidéo inattendue publiée sur le site du journal Ricochet.

Plus généralement, les symboles associés à l’islamisme, ainsi que les discours identitaires islamistes, devenaient des revendications qu’il fallait appuyer activement au nom de la diversité, du libre choix et de l’antiracisme.

Des sympathies douteuses

Cette empathie ne s’est pas seulement appliquée aux pratiques religieuses orthodoxes. Oussama Atar, citoyen belge, l’un des cerveaux des attentats de Paris du 13 novembre 2015, avait été adopté par des groupes de défense des droits, dont Amnistie internationale, dans le cadre d’une campagne intitulée « Sauvons Oussama », lorsqu’il avait été emprisonné pour son association avec des groupes djihadistes. Au Canada, le controversé Adil Charkaoui (qui s’est réjoui publiquement du retour au pouvoir des talibans) avait reçu un appui, un hommage même, de la part de la Ligue des droits et libertés, quand il luttait pour faire annuler un certificat de sécurité déposé envers lui par le ministère de l’Immigration.

Ces cas ne sont pas que des anecdotes. C’est la conception même de « l’islamophobie », portée par une partie de la gauche antiraciste, qui est en jeu ici. En effet, la définition de l’islamophobie a été élargie pour considérer comme « phobie » toute critique, y compris rationnelle et documentée, des idéologies politiques qui se réclament de l’islam.

C’est ce qu’on pouvait lire dans un manuel (par ailleurs fort utile) produit dans le cadre du Islamic Heritage Month par le Toronto District School Board. Dans sa première version, publiée dans le Resource Guidebook For Educators, en 2017, on pouvait y lire cette définition : « Islamophobia refers to fear, prejudice, hatred or dislike directed against Islam or Muslims, or towards Islamic politics or culture », soit « L’islamophobie désigne la peur, les préjugés, la haine ou l’aversion dirigés contre l’islam ou les musulmans, ou contre la politique ou la culture islamique ».

Cette définition a été amendée quelques mois plus tard, en réaction aux protestations venues de… la droite, la gauche étant restée silencieuse sur cette question. Inutile de souligner ici le danger d’inclure la critique des politiques associées à l’islam comme étant du racisme islamophobe.

Cette conception de l’islamophobie portée par certains des courants antiracistes converge tout à fait avec les politiques officielles du gouvernement canadien, peut-être en raison de la stratégie d’ouverture envers l’islam politique non violent évoquée plus haut. Les efforts pour combattre l’islamophobie, définie dans ce sens très large, et sans critique de l’islamisme, trouvent ainsi un écho même au Parlement canadien, qui a adopté en 2019 une Motion pour combattre l’islamophobie.

Le combat contre le dogmatisme religieux

Cependant, dans le monde arabo-musulman, les critiques de l’islam comme idéologie politique se sont fait entendre de plus en plus. Face aux courants fondamentalistes se dressent des conceptions laïques de la société et de l’État, qui vont jusqu’à critiquer les fondements mêmes de l’islam. Ces courants ne revendiquent pas nécessairement la laïcité comme principe, mais ils l’expriment concrètement dans les arts, la culture, la littérature, les comportements sociaux et aussi la politique.

Ces critiques ne sont pas nouvelles : très visibles dans la première moitié du XXe siècle et jusqu’après l’ère des indépendances, elles avaient été étouffées par la montée de l’islam conservateur à partir des années 1970, puissamment appuyé par le régime saoudien. Mais on les voit émerger à nouveau à présent.

Dans de nombreux pays arabes, on peut voir par exemple des groupes se disant explicitement athées proliférer sur les réseaux sociaux tout en gardant un certain anonymat par peur de représailles. Un livre autobiographique d’un ex-salafiste/djihadiste devenu athée, publié sous le nom de Kafer Maghrebi (Apostat maghrébin) a eu un énorme succès durant la foire du livre de Casablanca où sa vente avait été autorisée. D’autres critiques radicales confrontent le récit officiel de l’histoire glorieuse de l’islam et contestent les rapports de domination justifiés au nom du dogme religieux.

C’est sur ces courants, enracinés dans les sociétés arabes, qu’il faudra compter pour continuer le combat contre le dogmatisme religieux et pour la laïcité, c’est-à-dire pour que les politiques de l’État n’aient pas besoin de justifications religieuses. Souvent exilés de leur pays d’origine, ceux et celles qui appartiennent à ces courants n’auront pas l’appui de cette partie de la gauche qui, en voulant défendre les droits des musulmans, appuie la propagation de l’islamisme. Ce faisant, cette gauche a cessé d’être un allié dans le combat pour la laïcité au sein des groupes arabes en situation de migration.

Source: https://theconversationcanada.cmail19.com/t/r-l-trxltjt-kyldjlthkt-v/

Filed under Islamophobia, Multiculturalism Tagged with

McWhorter:What Should We Do About Systemic Racism?

2021/09/13 Leave a comment

Interesting and nuanced discussion and the need for a more sophisticated discussion of different outcomes:

Here’s why some people aren’t onboard with the way Americans are taught to think about systemic racism: Even fully understanding that systemic racism exists and why it is important — persistent disparities between Black people and others in access to resources — one may have some questions. Real ones.

For me, the biggest question is not whether systemic racism exists but what to do about it.

A thorny patch, for starters, is figuring out whether racism is even the cause of a particular kind of disparity. One approach, well-aired these days, is that all racial disparities must be due to racism — a view encapsulated in a proclamation like “When I see racial disparities, I see racism.”

But that approach, despite its appeal in being so elementary — plus a bit menacing (a bit of drama, a little guilt?) — is often mistaken in its analysis, not to mention harmful to Black people if acted upon.

Here’s an example. Black kids tend not to do as well in school as white kids, statistically. But just what is the “racism” that causes this particular disparity?

It isn’t something as plain and simple as the idea that all Black kids go to underfunded schools — it’s a little 1980s to think that’s all we’re faced with. School funding is hugely oversold as a reason for schools’ underperformance, and the achievement disparity persists even among middle-class Black kids.

And middle-class Black kids are not just a mere sliver: Only about a third of Black students are poor. Yet the number of Black students admitted to top-level universities, for example, is small — so small that policies changing admissions standards are necessary for such schools to have a representative number of them on campus. This is fact, shown at countless institutions over the past 30 years such as the University of Michigan and recently Harvard. The key question is what justifies the policies.

One answer might be: “When I see racial disparities, I see racism.”

But in evaluating that idea, we must consider this: Black teenagers too often associate school with being “white.” Doesn’t such a mind-set have a way of keeping a good number of Black kids from hitting the very highest note in school? If many Black kids have to choose between being a nerd and having more Black friends — and one study suggests that they do — then the question is not whether this would depress overall Black scholastic achievement, but why it wouldn’t. The vast weight of journalistic attestations about growing up Black and how Black kids deal with school show the conflicting pressures they can face about achieving good grades and making friendships.

Now, my point here is not to simply accuse students of having a “pathology.” To be sure, the reason Black kids often think of school as “white” is racism. Just not racism today. Thus to eliminate systemic racism, our target cannot be some form of racism in operation now, because the racism operated several decades ago.

It took a while for Brown v. Board of Education to actually be enforced. When it was, starting in the mid-1960s, white teachers and students nationwide were not happy. Old-school open racism was still in flower, and Black kids in newly desegregated schools experienced it full blast — and not just in the South.

It was then that Black kids started thinking of school as the white kids’ game, something to disidentify from. While it hurts to be called a nerd when you’re white, the sting is worse when you are called disloyal to your race.

The source to consult on all of this is the book “Acting White: The Ironic Legacy of Desegregation,” as key to understanding Black history as Michelle Alexander’s “The New Jim Crow.”

One might ask why the disaffection with school persists even though the racism that caused it has retreated so much — for certainly this kind of open racism diminished enormously in the 1970s and 1980s. But cultural traits can persist in human beings beyond what sparked those traits. The idea that school is not what “we” do settled into a broader function: ordinary teenage tribalism. White kids might choose to be, say, Goths or various things. So might Black kids — but another identity available to many of them is a sense of school as racially inauthentic. The “acting white” idea has persisted even in well-funded middle-class schools, where if anyone is discriminating against the Black students, it’s being done in ways too scattered and usually subtle to explain, indefensible though they are, to realistically explain the performance gap.

This sense of school as “other” can be covert as well as overt. A 1997 study by Clifton Casteel, a Black educator, showed that white eighth and ninth graders tend to think of themselves as doing homework to please their parents, while Black ones think of themselves as doing it for their teachers. That’s subtle but indicative — the idea that school stuff for Black students is outside of home and hearth. And in the 1980s, a mathematics educator, Phillip Uri Treisman, showed that Black college students do better in calculus if they are taught to work together in studying it (with high expectations and close professor mentoring also recommended). That Black students need to be instructed to share schoolwork rather than go it alone illuminates a private sense of school as not what “we” do — i.e., when we are together being ourselves.

I will not pretend that there has not been, for 20 years, people vociferously denying that Black kids often have an ambivalent attitude toward excelling in school. However, that Black kids don’t say in interviews that they disidentify from school reveals no more than that whites say they aren’t racist in interviews — why hit rewind and pretend psychology has no layers solely when Black students are involved? Then there is the idea that certain studies have disproved that this sense of disconnection exists when they actually found possible evidence of it, such as one documenting Black students saying that they like school and yet reporting spending less time on homework compared with white and Asian kids.

In sum, the sheer volume of attestations and documentation of Black students accused of “acting white” makes it clear to any unbiased observer that the issue is real, including the shakiness of the attempts to debunk the claim. The denialists are worried that someone like me is criticizing the Black students, upon which I repeat: The sense of school as white was caused by racism. It’s just that it was long, long ago now.

So, we return to “when I see racial disparities, I see racism.” This is a mantra from Ibram X. Kendi, and one of his solutions to the Black-white achievement gap in school is to eliminate standardized tests. They are “racist,” you see, because Black kids tend not to do as well on them as others.

And in line with this version of racial reckoning, we are seeing one institution after another eliminating or altering testing requirements, from the University of California to Boston’s public school system.

The idea that this is the antiracist thing to do is rooted in an idea that there is something about Black culture that renders standardized tests inappropriate. After all, Kendi certainly doesn’t think the issue is Black genes. Nor, we assume, does any responsible person think it’s genes, and it can’t be that all Black kids grow up poor because to say that is racist, denying the achievements of so many Black people and contradicting simple statistics.

So it’s apparently something about being a Black person. Kendi does not specify what this cultural configuration is, but there is reason to suppose, from what he as well as many like-minded people are given to writing and saying, that the idea is that Black people for some reason don’t think “that way,” that Black thought favors pragmatic engagement with the exigencies of real life over the disembodied abstraction of test questions.

But there is a short step from here to two gruesome places.

One is the idea getting around in math pedagogy circles that being precise, embracing abstract reasoning and focusing on finding the actual answer are “white,” which takes us right back to the idea that school is “white.”

The other is the idea that Black people just aren’t as quick on the uptake as other people.

Yeah, I know — multiple intelligences, “energy” and so on. Taking a test of abstract reasoning is just one way of indicating intelligence, right — but folks, really? I submit that few beyond a certain circle will ever truly believe that we need to trash these tests, which were expressly designed to cut through bias.

One of Kendi’s suggestions, for example, is that we assess Black kids instead on how articulate they are about their neighborhood circumstances and on their “desire to know.” But this is a drive-by notion of pedagogical practice, with shades again of the idea that being a grind is “white.” I insist that it is more progressively Black to ask why we can’t seek for Black kids to get better on the tests, and almost phrenological to propound that it’s racist to submit a Black person to a test of abstract cognitive skill.

To get more Black students into top schools, we should focus on getting the word out in Black communities about free test preparation programs, such as have long existed in New York City. We should resist the elimination of gifted tracks as “racist,” given that they shunted quite a few Black kids into top high schools in, for example, New York back in the day. Teaching Black kids to work together should be even more of a meme than it has become since Treisman’s study. And the idea that school is “for white people” should be traced, faced and erased, reified and rendered as uncool as drunken driving and smoking have been.

Boy, that was some right-wing conservative boilerplate, no? Of course not. Many would see these prescriptions as unsatisfying because they aren’t about wagging a finger in white America’s face. But doing that is quite often antithetical to improving Black lives.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/10/opinion/systemic-racism-education.html

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with ,

‘Just a lot of talk’: Activists urge party leaders to increase focus on racism

2021/09/13 Leave a comment

There is a lot not being discussed during this campaign, not just racism. Liberal, NDP and Green platforms have extensive commitments, some more realistic or sensible than others. Conservative platform is surprisingly silent. Expect that there may be more discussion at the local campaign level in ridings with more visible minorities and Indigenous peoples:

Federal leaders have not focused on addressing systemic racism during the campaign, despite the urgency of the issue after findings of unmarked graves at former residential schools and rising hate against minority communities during the COVID-19 pandemic, advocates say.

While the Liberals and NDP have included programs in their election platforms to tackle barriers that people of colour face, the Conservatives don’t mention the word “racism” even once in their 150-page election plan, said Fareed Khan of Canadians United Against Hate.

Regardless of promises, Khan said the lack of discussion by Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh of fighting racism during their campaign events makes him wonder how seriously they are taking the issue.

“On the one platform when it would make the biggest impact during an election, they haven’t talked about it,” Khan said.

“So what that says to me and a lot of people, activists, is that maybe what they’ve said over the last year is just a lot of talk, and they’re not as serious about fighting hate as they said they were.”

Khan said the campaign is an opportunity for politicians to explain how they will respond to those who have protested against anti-Black racism, called for justice for Indigenous Peoples and demanded action against Islamophobia.

“The people have spoken. They want action on this,” he said.

The issue of systemic racism reached the campaign trail this week after Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet complained about a debate question that he said painted Quebecers as racist. Trudeau and Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole jumped to defend Quebec as not racist, while Singh said it’s unhelpful to single out any one province.

The question was about Quebec laws the moderator deemed “discriminatory,” including Bill 21, which bans some civil servants from wearing religious garb on the job. Mustafa Farooq, chief executive officer of the National Council of Canadian Muslims, said it was “shameful” the main party leaders did not step in to argue the law was discriminatory.

But on Friday, Trudeau told dozens of people gathered in a restaurant in Scarborough, Ont., that the pandemic hit racialized people harder than others and saw an increase in hatred and intolerance. The rise in hate has been aggravated by COVID-19 but the issue is “bigger than that,” he added.

“We see more and more white supremacist groups and racist groups taking toeholds on the internet, and more and more in our communities,” he said.

After defending his government’s record on supporting racialized communities, Trudeau promised to introduce a new law combating online hate in 100 days of his new mandate if re-elected.

Speaking to reporters in Ottawa on Friday, Singh said systemic racism is a problem many people live with every day.

“We’ve seen it in police violence (where) racialized people who had mental health or health concerns ended up losing their lives. We know that this is a problem that exists and it needs to be fixed, and we are committed to fixing it.”

O’Toole said in a statement that every day, people experience discrimination or racism in some form and he is committed to working with communities to find concrete solutions to these problems.

“Conservatives believe that the institutional failings that have led to these outcomes can and must be urgently addressed. It is imperative that we meet this challenge with practical policy changes that solve institutional and systemic problems,” he said.

While the Tory platform doesn’t contain the word “racism,” it does propose strengthening the Criminal Code to protect Canadians from online hate and notes that racialized people have been disproportionately impacted by unemployment during the pandemic.

Chief R. Donald Maracle of the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte First Nation in Ontario said there are programs in place, funded federally and provincially, to eliminate racism but it still is a problem.

“First Nations people have suffered racism by government over decades, with a lack of investments to deal with housing and water and post-secondary education and also lack of opportunity for employment and training,” he said.

“In recent years the governments have invested a lot of money to try to overcome those barriers.”

He said there are many competing issues to be addressed by political leaders during the campaign with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the economy.

“The focus seems to be to keep the economy restarted and return to some kind of normal life for most Canadians, but again there’s a lot of racism that has caused a lot of systemic poverty,” he said.

“It’s an issue that remains outstanding to be addressed.”

Andrew Griffith, a former director at the federal immigration department, said it’s surprising that the Conservatives didn’t include any specific measures to end racism in their platform despite the rise of hate during the pandemic.

The pandemic also highlighted the link between being a member of a minority group or an immigrant community and the lack of access to health care and good housing, he said.

“Ongoing issues in terms of policing, various reports in terms of increased anti-Asian incidents, antisemitism remains perennial, attacks on Muslims, including the most recent ones in London, (Ont.), so there’s a whole series of issues there that I find it striking that there’s really nothing there in the (Conservative) platform,” he said.

Farooq, of the National Council of Canadian Muslims, said it’s saddening that federal leaders are not prioritizing tackling systemic racism.

“We have a week or so left in this federal election campaign. I would hope that they take seriously what Canadians have been asking for,” he said.

All major federal leaders travelled to London, Ont., in June to show solidarity with the Muslim community after a vehicle attack against a Muslim family left four dead and a nine-year-old boy seriously injured.

“It’s easy to talk in the aftermath of a tragedy and to say that you’re committed to action and doing something,” Farooq said. “But the real test is at a time like this. What are you actually committed to standing on and standing for?”

Source: https://globalnews.ca/news/8182949/canada-election-racism-campaign-systemic/

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with , , , ,

France grants citizenship to 12,000 Covid frontline workers

2021/09/11 Leave a comment

Quicker than Canada (as of this week, only about 4,300 have applied out of 20,000 slots):

France has granted citizenship to more than 12,000 frontline workers whose jobs put them at risk during the Covid pandemic under a special fast-track scheme.

As well as speeding up the application process, which normally takes up to two years, the government also cut the residency requirement from five years to two.

“Frontline workers responded to the call of the nation, so it is right that the nation takes a step towards them,” said the citizenship minister, Marlène Schiappa. “The country pulled through thanks to them.

“I welcome our new compatriots to French nationality and thank them in the name of the republic. The country also thanks them.”

In September 2020, the interior ministry invited those who had “actively contributed” to fighting the Covid health crisis to apply for fast-track naturalisation. On Thursday, Schiappa said 16,381 had applied and 12,012 applications were approved.

Among them were health professionals, security and cleaning staff, those who looked after essential workers’ children, home help workers and refuse collectors, the minister announced.

John Spacey, a Briton, was one of those given fast-track nationality as a foreigner who had “proved their commitment to the republic” in the eyes of the ministry.

Spacey lives in the Creuse region in central France and works for an organisation that provides domestic care for elderly people. “It genuinely feels like a great honour to be offered citizenship,” he told the Local earlier this year.

“France has been very good to me since my arrival and has given me opportunities I could never have dreamed of before stepping off the Eurostar in 2016 – a home of my own, a wonderful relationship, a 20-year-old Peugeot 106, a 40-year-old Mobilette, the most satisfying job in the world and a very bright future.

“Soon, I’ll be able to vote, will regain my freedom of movement and will finally feel fully European once more, finally feel fully integrated into the nation I’ve already come to love like my own.”

Spacey said he also received a one-off bonus payment from the state “as a kind of merci for services rendered during the crisis … something for which I was very grateful and that I’d not expected, given I’d been paid for my work anyway”.

He added: “Then came another, far more unexpected, thank you – the chance to apply for French nationality six months earlier than would have been possible under the normal rules and to have the process fast-tracked. All for doing a job I love.”

In April 2020, French hospital staff and nursing home workers were awarded tax-free bonuses of between €1,000 and €1,500 as part of the government thank you for their work during the Covid-19 crisis.

In August 2020, France’s 320,000 home-care workers were given Covid-19 bonuses of up to €1,000.

Source: France grants citizenship to 12,000 Covid frontline workers

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Malaysian mothers hail win for equality in citizenship case

2021/09/10 Leave a comment

Significant:

A group of Malaysian mothers won a landmark legal challenge Thursday, overturning what they described as discriminatory citizenship rules affecting women who gave birth overseas.

The rules had meant a woman with a foreign spouse who had a child abroad was barred from automatically passing on her Malaysian nationality.

Similar restrictions did not apply to men from the Southeast Asian country, who enjoy a straight path to citizenship for their offspring.

Socially conservative Malaysia was among only a handful of countries worldwide with such rules, with campaigners long complaining they were discriminatory.

But on Thursday, the High Court in Kuala Lumpur ruled in favour of a challenge brought by six Malaysian mothers, who argued the regulations breached the constitution.

“This judgement recognises Malaysian women’s equality, and marks one step forward to a more egalitarian and just Malaysia,” said Suri Kempe, president of NGO Family Frontiers, which helped bring the case to court.

The judgement applies to all Malaysian mothers, not just the plaintiffs in the case, she said.

The lawyer for the mothers, Gurdial Singh Nijar, hailed a “momentous decision”, saying the rules had “disrupted family structures”.

There was no immediate reaction from the government, and it was not clear whether they would appeal the ruling.

Campaigners said the law had sometimes left women trapped in abusive relationships.

If they brought their children back to Malaysia, the youngsters faced obstacles in accessing public services like free education and healthcare.

Women could apply for their overseas-born children to be granted citizenship but authorities rarely agreed.

According to Family Frontiers, the home ministry received over 4,000 applications between 2013 and 2018, but only approved 142.

The government had sought to get the mothers’ challenge dismissed, insisting the rules were in line with the constitution.

But campaigners said they breached constitutional guarantees to equality before the law, and the court allowed the case to proceed.

Source: Malaysian mothers hail win for equality in citizenship case

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

European Anti-Semitism Reappears with Virulent Versions for the Covid Era

2021/09/10 Leave a comment

Of note:

As the coronavirus spread through Europe last year, cartoons and posts began going up on French social media that might as well have come straight from the 14th century. In one series, Agnes Buzyn, who is Jewish and was France’s health minister until February 2020, was depicted with grotesquely distorted features dropping poison into wells.

This trope of Jews poisoning wells to kill Christians has made the rounds in most European epidemics since the Middle Ages, but was particularly rife during the Black Death, when it led to pogroms and massacres of Jews throughout the continent. The vile meme is just one example of a shocking, if sadly unsurprising, surge in anti-Semitism that correlates with the pandemic. That’s the disturbing conclusion of a new report by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a think tank, for the European Commission.

The authors mined French and German posts on Twitter, Facebook and Telegram between January 2020 — that is, just before Covid-19 first surged in Europe — and March 2021. They looked for content that’s anti-Semitic according to a definition by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. They found not just petri dishes of hatred but entire cesspools.

In both countries, anti-Semitic tropes and memes soared during the pandemic (see chart). In France, where Twitter was the preferred medium for this bigotry — at least until the social network tweaked its policies — the number of anti-Semitic posts increased seven-fold; in Germany, where Telegram appears to be the platform of choice, it went up 13-fold. The likes, shares and retweets counted in the millions, the views in the billions.

As Covid Spreads, So Does Anti-Semitism

In Germany and France, posts with anti-Jewish content have been increasing during the pandemic

While the delivery vehicles may seem whizzbang modern, the narratives are depressingly hoary. The well-poisoning theme is ancient. But it’s now morphing into storylines that try to recast SARS-CoV-2 as a “zionist bioweapon” — by fabricating Jewish links to laboratories in China, for instance.

A German channel on Telegram with more than 34,000 followers doctored videos as alleged “proof” that the virus was bio-engineered to hurt only gentiles. “Corona is not for the Jews!” the channel’s owner wrote. “Only for the goyim! That’s what they call us!” On another channel, users claimed that “Virology was invented by the Eternal Jew” — a reference to a Nazi propaganda film.

A contradictory meme is somehow circulating in parallel. It says that that SARS-CoV-2 either doesn’t exist at all or exists but is harmless, and is instead a figment invented by Jews and the gentiles they have corrupted — such as Bill Gates or the Clintons — in their quest to control entire populations and establish a “New World Order.”

This so-called NWO genre of anti-Semitism also taps into an ancient narrative, one that was most notoriously exploited by the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” This entirely fictional text, produced over a century ago in Russia and translated into many languages, pretended to document how Jews were making secret plans to rule the world by manipulating the media, finance and government.

In some of anti-Semitism’s current strains, vaccination is the alleged tool chosen by the conspiracy — Albert Bourla, the Jewish chief executive of Pfizer, features prominently in these libels. Some posters claim that the vaccines are meant to kill or sterilize gentiles. To get around obvious logical hurdles such as Israel’s pioneering role in mass inoculation, other users fantasize that the Israeli shots are only placebos.

On and on it goes, in never-ending loops of paranoia and delusion. As it always has in Europe, and elsewhere. The researchers had to restrict themselves to just a small sample of countries and social networks. But from that, we can extrapolate how much of this garbage is out there.

The study’s authors felt compelled, as one does, to offer thoughts on regulatory or legal tweaks to mitigate the problem. And the social networks, for their part, should certainly think harder about how to drain their cesspools of bigotry while still hosting legitimate free speech. But the sad truth is that even as human technology keeps bounding ahead, human nature and culture lag woefully behind, often literally in the Middle Ages. If only there were a vaccine against stupidity and hatred.

Source: European Anti-Semitism Reappears with Virulent Versions for the Covid Era

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

Ottawa Council’s ethnocultural liaison doesn’t see strict vaccine policy as a barrier to increasing diversity at city hall

2021/09/10 Leave a comment

Sensible:

Council’s liaison for anti-racism and ethnocultural relations doesn’t believe a new COVID-19 vaccination policy will be a barrier to increasing the diversity of the municipal public service.

Rideau-Rockcliffe Coun. Rawlson King said he doesn’t believe the policy, which came into effect this week, will challenge the city in achieving its diversity goals.

“I don’t see that specifically it will actually detract people from joining the public service at the city. I see them as two separate issues, really,” King said Tuesday after a meeting of the finance and economic development committee, which received a new report on the diversity of the municipal workforce.

“The issue that we’re having, or at least what I think in Overbrook or areas of Manor Park, is the fact that people have a lot of life challenges that are getting in the way of them getting vaccinated.”

The City of Ottawa has made progress in diversifying its workforce over the past year, though it has a long way to go when it comes to changing the composition of management, according to the report by Suzanne Obiorah, the city’s director of gender and race equity, inclusion, Indigenous relations and social development.

Meanwhile, the City of Ottawa’s new mandatory vaccination policy requires all members of the municipal public service to be full vaccinated against COVID-19 by Nov. 1. The policy also requires a full COVID-19 vaccination to be hired by the municipal government.

The Black Opportunity Fund, African-Canadian Civic Engagement Council and Innovative Research Group released national survey results in July that suggested 33 per cent of the adult Black population showed some form of vaccine hesitancy. The rate compared to 19 per cent of adult white Canadians and 25 per cent of non-Black visible minorities who showed vaccine hesitancy.

King said the factors for people not getting vaccinated relate more to income inequality. “And, of course, who suffers disproportionately from that? Black and racialized people,” he said.

City manager Steve Kanellakos said the municipal government wants its workforce to represent the community it serves, while also advocating for high vaccination rates to help reduce the spread of COVID-19.

“The City is aware of the barriers certain residents may encounter when accessing health care and continues to work with Ottawa Public Health (OPH) to identify and remove those barriers, address questions, and make accessing a vaccine as easy and convenient as possible for our residents and our workforce,” Kanellakos said in a statement sent through the communications department.

“The City has followed OPH guidance on making the vaccination requirements uniform for all employees to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and make our workplace healthy and safe for all.”

Based on information the City of Ottawa collected in workforce surveys, the rate of visible minorities was 16.27 per cent in July 2021 compared to 12.6 per cent in September 2020. The city’s target is 20.7 per cent. When it comes to the rate of Aboriginal Peoples in the workforce, city hall improved to 1.99 per cent in July, up from 1.4 per cent (the target is 3.2 per cent).

The city has also improved its rate of employees with disabilities. The rate was seven per cent in July, up from 2.4 per cent in September 2020. The target rate is nine per cent.

The rate of women in the municipal public service was 39.16 per cent in July, with a target of 43.3 per cent.

The city has been exceeding its target for women in management (49 per cent compared to a target of 43 per cent), but its rate of visible minorities in management is 9.9 per cent compared to a target of 20.7 per cent.

King said more senior staff could be retiring in the next year or two, presenting a big opportunity to improve diversity in the management ranks.

“This, for me, will be the litmus test to whether an equity employment initiative at the city is a success,” King said.

Source: Council’s ethnocultural liaison doesn’t see strict vaccine policy as a barrier to increasing diversity at city hall

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Immigration-related party platform commitments: Updated with Green Platform

2021/09/09 1 Comment

I have updated the immigration party platform table to include the Green Party. Please note that this analysis is based on the published platforms only, not other public commitments.

platform-2021-comparison-high-level-1Download

Some general observations that supplement my earlier summary:

  • All platforms have a mix of specific commitments (e.g., LPC reduce family class processing times to under 12 months) versus non-specific commitments (e.g., NDP address backlog for refugees);
  • All platforms resort to process commitments (e.g., Foreign Credential Recognition);
  • Focus on Quebec particularly apparent in Conservative and NDP platforms. All parties save the Bloc silent on Quebec’s Bill 21;
  • All platforms contain “virtue signalling” or party base language (e.g., LPC reference to previous CPC cuts to immigration levels — not true, CPC “prepared to work hard, contribute to growth and productivity of Canada, and strengthen our democracy” for transition to permanent residency);
  • All platforms save PPC are silent on immigration levels. Surprising that Liberals didn’t mention the levels plan given all the messaging around achieving 400,000 this year;
  • Limited immigration policy innovation, save for CPC family class “point system,” expedited processing fee and replacing GARS with PSRs and Blended refugees, along with operational innovation;
  • Clear divisions on the STCA: Liberals silent, CPC and PPC would apply across the border (closing Roxham Road “loophole”), Bloc and Greens would end the agreement, with NDP surprisingly silent;
  • Relatively little attention paid to operational and administrative issues save for general reference to processing times;
  • All parties are silent on issues where either their record is mixed (Liberals on processing) or party positions may be controversial (e.g., CPC on multiculturalism and anti-racism) or unclear (e.g., NDP on economic immigration);
  • Some catering to specific groups (e.g., Liberals with respect to Blacks, Conservatives with respect to visa-free travel for Ukrainians, Bloc of course with Québécois);
  • Liberal (82 pages), Conservative (160 pages), NDP (114 pages) and Green (103 pages) platforms are lengthy, allowing them to micro-target. The Bloc (30 pages) is more concise given its focus on Quebec. PPC has not provided one complete pdf to compare length but covers most areas. Unlikely that any party could deliver on the majority of commitments.

Updated by issues

  • Levels: No reference to specific levels by CPC, NDP, Bloc and Greens.
  • Liberals are silent (save for a false claim of previous Conservative cuts) but levels are known through the immigration plan.
  • PPC platform commitment to reduce levels to between 100 and 150,000.

Economic:

  • Liberal commitments to welcome talented workers through existing Global Skills Strategy and reduce processing times to under 12 months.
  • Conservatives emphasize the priority to be given to healthcare workers and expansion of the Provincial Nominee Program in regions which retain immigrants.
  • PPC commits to increase percentage of economic and require in-person interviews with questions regarding alignment with Canadian values along with additional resources for background checks.

Family:

  • Liberals commit to electronic applications and a program to issue visas to spouses and children abroad pending full application processing.
  • Conservatives, more innovatively, propose replacing the lottery system with a point system based upon childcare and family support along with language competency, along with additional resources.
  • NDP proposes to end the caps on Parents and Grandparents, the Greens propose an increase while the PPC proposes to abolish P&Gs and limit others.
  • Greens also propose to revise adoptions procedures, including adoption bans from Muslim countries.

Refugees:

  • Liberals propose to increase the number of Afghan refugees from 20,000 to 40,000 as well as 2,000 skilled refugees through the Economic Mobility Pathways program with a healthcare focus.
  • Conservatives propose replacing Government Assisted Refugees (GARS) with Privately Sponsored (PSR) and Blended programs with no change in numbers. Priorities will be the most vulnerable, SPOs with strong track record and the introduction of a “human rights defender stream” for situations like Hong Kong as well as making the LGBTQ Rainbow Refugee program permanent. Additional capacity for the IRB along with closing the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) loophole (between official points of entry) and joint border patrols with the US are part of the platform.
  • NDP commits to addressing the backlog and working with Canadians to resettle refugees in communities.
  • Bloc would end the STCA and welcome French speaking refugees.
  • Greens also propose to end the STCA, and revise all CBSA practices (e.g., detention centres, family separation), address long processing times, and lower family reunification barriers for convention refugees.
  • PPC commits to fewer refugees, declaring the entire border an official port of entry (thus covered by the STCA), reliance on private sponsorship and no longer relying on UN selection of GARS with priority given to religious minorities in Muslim countries and those who reject “political Islam.”

Foreign Credential Recognition: All three major parties with continue to work with provinces and territories, with the Conservatives committed to a task force for “new strategies.” The Greens promise greater funding and collaboration with accreditation issues.

Cultural Sensitivity: In addition to the Conservative proposal on “cultural sensitivity,” the Greens propose to “address xenophobia in all aspects of settlement, including temporary visa liberalization, issuing of temporary permits …and family reunification.”

Immigration fees: The Conservatives would introduce an expedited service fee for quicker application and the Greens would provide a fee exemption for low-income immigrants.

Temporary Residents: Both Liberals and Conservatives commit to a trusted employer system to reduce the administrative burden on employers.

  • Liberals mention the Global Talent Stream focus on highly skilled workers and commit to an employer hotline to resolve issues.
  • Conservatives would introduce standards and timelines for Labour Market Information Assessments (LMIA).
  • Bloc proposes the transfer of the Temporary Foreign Workers Program to Quebec.
  • Green platform has general reference to liberalization for temporary workers and strategies for workers to report abusive employers without losing status.
  • PPC would limit the number of temporary workers and ensure that they are only filling temporary positions and not competing with Canadians.

Temporary to Permanent Transition:

  • Liberals would reform economic immigration programs to expand pathways to Permanent Residence.
  • Conservatives commit to pathways for both the “best and brightest” as well as low-skilled workers, latter based on labour market data, and those that are “prepared to work hard, contribute to growth and productivity of Canada, and strengthen our democracy”. Employers would be allowed to sponsor those wishing to transition.
  • NDP would provide a pathway to all Temporary Residents, highlighting caregivers in particular.
  • Greens would lower barriers to transition, particularly for healthcare workers.

Consultants: Only the NDP mentions consultants and commits to government regulation.

International cooperation: PPC commits to withdraw from the Global Compact on Migration.

Settlement/Integration:

  • Conservatives state they will support settlement services but with no specifics.
  • NDP states that it will work with the provinces.
  • Greens would provide greater funding for language training and employment skills.

Administration (Processing):

  • Conservatives emphasize simplification and streamlining of application and administrative processing, with technology being used to speed up application vetting. The IT infrastructure (the one currently being developed) would record all transactions and applicants would be allowed to correct “simple and honest” mistakes rather than the application being rejected. The Conservatives also commit to harmonizing FPT systems.
  • The Bloc would accelerate Permanent Resident application processing.

Citizenship:

  • Liberals recycle their 2019 commitment to eliminate citizenship fees.
  • Bloc plans to table a bill requiring knowledge of French to obtain citizenship (currently, knowledge of either official language). Ironic, given the Bloc’s persistent in respecting jurisdictional competencies as citizenship is exclusively under federal jurisdiction.
  • Greens would update the citizenship guide (already been revised, awaiting political decision to release) and exemption from citizenship fees for low income applicants
  • PPC promises to make birth tourism illegal.

Visitor visas: 

  • Strangely, the Conservatives commit to a five-year super-visa when they had introduced a 10-year super-visa when in government that was maintained by the Liberal government. They also commit to explore more “generous and fairer visas” by more enforceable commitments on length of stay.
  • Greens would remove visa requirements for most parents visiting children, including TRs

Multiculturalism:

  • CPC: No mention or commitments
  • Liberals commitments include: improve gender & racial equity among faculty (Canada Research Chairs $250m), reference to existing initiatives (Black Entrepreneurship, Black-led non-profits, youth), implement the Black-led Philanthropic Endowment Fund, strengthen equity targets for fed-funded scientific research, specific target for Black Canadians and Funding for promising Black graduate students $6m), support production led by equity seeking groups, creation of a Changing Narratives Fund for diverse communities, BIPOC journalists and creatives $20m), and Increase funding to multiculturalism community programs.
  • NDP commitment include preventing violent extremism through support for community-led initiatives, confronting systemic racism (few details), a national action plan to dismantle far-right extremist organizations, a national task force and roadmap to address over-representation of Blacks and Indigenous peoples in Canadian prisons and, working with the provinces, the collection of race-based data health, employment, policing.
  • Familiar Bloc commitments include placing the federally-regulated sectors (banking, communications, transport) under Quebec’s language charter, opposing Court Challenges Program funding for challenges to Quebec laws (e.g, Bill 21), a commission on prevention of “honour crimes,” and excluding Quebec from the Multiculturalism Act.
  • Greens would implement recommendations from the UN Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, limit RCMP role and funding in municapt and reserve policy, develop a national oversight approach working with provinces, end RCMP carding and shift police resource to social and community services. 
  • PPC would repeal the Multiculturalism Act.

Anti-Racism/Hate:

  • CPC: No mention or commitments
  • Liberal commitments include: a National Action Plan on Combatting Hate, possible amendments the Criminal Code hate provisions, boosting funding to the Anti-Racism Strategy and Anti-racism Secretariat, introducing legislation to combat serious forms of hurtful online content including making social media platforms responsible for such content, strengthening the Human Rights Act and Criminal Code to more effectively combat online hate, and the creation of a National Support Fund for Survivors of Hate-Motivated Crimes.
  • NDP commitments include: ensuring all major cities too have dedicated hate crime units, establishment of national standards for recording hate crimes (beyond police-reported which already exist?) and work with non-profits to increase reporting, ban carding by the RCMP and establishing a national working group to counter online hate and protect public safety, and making sure that social media platforms are legally responsible for distributing online hate.
  • Bloc condemns hate speech but no proposed changes to the Criminal Code and denounces “Quebec bashing” assertions regarding racism in Quebec.
  • Greens commit to developing better guidelines to address weaponization of free expression, funding data collection online hate and real-world violence, improve AI solutions to detect online hate & violence and require social media to detect and prevent online hate.

Employment Equity:

  • Liberal commitments include: the creation of Diversity Fellowship for mentoring and sponsoring of under-represented groups, French language training for 3rd and 4th year university students to bridge language barriers to entry, expand recruitment to international students and Permanent Residents, and the creation of a mental health fund for Black public servants & support career advancement for Black workers.
  • NDP commitments include: a review to help close the visible minority and Indigenous peoples wage gap and ensuring diverse and equitable hiring in the public service and FRS (recent public service data indicates considerable progress).
  • Bloc proposes the use of blind cvs in public service hiring (pilot carried out in 2017 suggested little difference between existing and blind cv processes).
  • Greens welcome the review of the Employment Equity Act and call for greater working input, an extended timeline and increased resources, and broadening it application to outsourced workers.

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Pew Research: Views of Muslims in the US, 20 years after 9/11

2021/09/08 Leave a comment

Of interest:

An unprecedented amount of public attention focused on Muslim Americans in the wake of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The U.S. Muslim population has grown in the two decades since, but it is still the case that many Americans know little about Islam or Muslims, and views toward Muslims have become increasingly polarized along political lines.

There were about 2.35 million Muslim adults and children living in the United States in 2007 – accounting for 0.8% of the U.S. population – when Pew Research Center began measuring this group’s size, demographic characteristics and views. Since then, growth has been driven primarily by two factors: the continued flow of Muslim immigrants into the U.S., and Muslims’ tendency to have more children than Americans of other faiths.

In 2015, the Center projected that Muslims could number 3.85 million in the U.S. by 2020 – roughly 1.1% of the total population. However, Muslim population growth from immigration may have slowed recently due to changes in federal immigration policy.

The number of Muslim houses of worship in the U.S. also has increased over the last 20 years. A study conducted in 2000 by the Cooperative Congregational Studies Partnership identified 1,209 mosques in the U.S. that year. Their follow-up study in 2011 found that the number of mosques had grown to 2,106, and the 2020 version found 2,769 mosques – more than double the number from two decades earlier.

How we did this

Alongside their population growth, Muslims have gained a larger presence in the public sphere. For example, in 2007, the 110th Congress included the first Muslim member, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn. Later in that term, Congress seated a second Muslim representative, Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind. The current 117th Congress has two more Muslims alongside Carson, the first Muslim women to hold such office: Reps. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., first elected in 2018.

As their numbers have increased, Muslims have also reported encountering more discrimination. In 2017, during the first few months of the Trump administration, about half of Muslim American adults (48%) said they had personally experienced some form of discrimination because of their religion in the previous year. This included a range of experiences, from people acting suspicious of them to being physically threatened or attacked. In 2011, by comparison, 43% of Muslim adults said they had at least one of these experiences, and 40% said this in 2007.

A bar chart showing that Americans are more likely to say Muslims face discrimination than to say this about other religions

In a March 2021 survey, U.S. adults were asked how much discrimination they think a number of religious groups face in society. Americans were more likely to say they believe Muslims face “a lot” of discrimination than to say the same about the other religious groups included in the survey, including Jews and evangelical Christians. A similar pattern appeared in previous surveys going back to 2009, when Americans were more likely to say that there was a lot of discrimination against Muslims than to say the same about Jews, evangelical Christians, Mormons or atheists.

A series of Pew Research Center surveys conducted in 2014, 2017, and 2019 separately asked Americans to rate religious groups on a scale ranging from 0 to 100, with 0 representing the coldest, most negative possible view and 100 representing the warmest, most positive view. In these surveys, Muslims were consistently ranked among the coolest, along with atheists.

Over the last 20 years, the American public has been divided on whether Islam is more likely than other religions to encourage violence, and a notable partisan divide on this question has emerged. When the Center first asked this question on a telephone survey in 2002, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents were only moderately more likely than Democrats and Democratic leaners to say that Islam encourages violence more than other religions – and this was a minority viewpoint in both partisan groups. Within a few years, however, Republicans began to grow more likely to believe that Islam encourages violence. Democrats, in contrast, have become more likely to say Islam does not encourage violence. Now, Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to say they believe Islam encourages violence more than other religions.

Though many Americans have negative views toward Muslims and Islam, 53% say they don’t personally know anyone who is Muslim, and a similar share (52%) say they know “not much” or “nothing at all” about Islam. Americans who are not Muslim and who personally know someone who is Muslim are more likely to have a positive view of Muslims, and they are less likely to believe that Islam encourages violence more than other religions.

Source: Views of Muslims in the US, 20 years after 9/11

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Facebook Apologizes After Its AI Labels Black Men As ‘Primates’

2021/09/07 Leave a comment

Ouch!

Facebook issued an apology on behalf of its artificial intelligence software that asked users watching a video featuring Black men if they wanted to see more “videos about primates.” The social media giant has since disabled the topic recommendation feature and says it’s investigating the cause of the error, but the video had been online for more than a year.

A Facebook spokesperson told The New York Times on Friday, whichfirst reported on the story, that the automated prompt was an “unacceptable error” and apologized to anyone who came across the offensive suggestion.

The video, uploaded by the Daily Mail on June 27, 2020, documented an encounter between a white man and a group of Black men who were celebrating a birthday. The clip captures the white man allegedly calling 911 to report that he is “being harassed by a bunch of Black men,” before cutting to an unrelated video that showed police officers arresting a Black tenant at his own home.

Former Facebook employee Darci Groves tweeted about the error on Thursday after a friend clued her in on the misidentification. She shared a screenshot of the video that captured Facebook’s “Keep seeing videos about Primates?” message.

“This ‘keep seeing’ prompt is unacceptable, @Facebook,” she wrote. “And despite the video being more than a year old, a friend got this prompt yesterday. Friends at [Facebook], please escalate. This is egregious.”

This is not Facebook’s first time in the spotlight for major technical errors. Last year, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s name appeared as “Mr. S***hole” on its platform when translated from Burmese to English. The translation hiccup seemed to be Facebook-specific, and didn’t occur on Google, Reuters had reported.

However, in 2015, Google’s image recognition software classified photos of Black people as “gorillas.” Google apologized and removed the labels of gorilla, chimp, chimpanzee and monkey — words that remained censored over two years later, Wired reported.

Facebook could not be reached for comment.

Source: Facebook Apologizes After Its AI Labels Black Men As ‘Primates’

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →