‘What Part of Illegal Don’t You Understand?’

2020/02/21 Leave a comment

Really good long read by Sonia Nazario, mix of personal account and policy discussion (excerpt):

My family has been running from danger for nearly 100 years. The Nazarios are refugees; their remnants have scattered around the world to survive. My Jewish mother fled Poland in 1933. My Christian father fled Syria two years earlier. They met and married in Argentina, whose right-wing dictatorship imprisoned and almost killed my sister. By giving us a home, the United States saved our lives.

Would it do the same today?

The Trump administration has barred those seeking refuge from our borders and turned our immigration courts into a joke. This is a betrayal of America’s decades-long role as a world leader in refugee protection. It also breaks our own laws and treaty commitments, which say we will take people in, give them a fair court hearing and not return them to harm.

But it is not a total historical anomaly. America has gone through spasms of nativism before. In 1939, Congress tabled a bill to take in 20,000 Jewish children, and the SS St. Louis, which carried 937 Jewish refugees, was turned away from the docks; hundreds aboard were murdered in the Holocaust.

Then, as now, many on both the right and the left have argued that the choice Americans face on immigration and asylum is between zero tolerance and opening the floodgates. But this is a false choice. We can have an immigration policy that is sane and humane.

….

The American government generally does not allow innocent people to be imprisoned, raped and shot in the back. These are the kinds of experiences refugees who come here seeking safety are fleeing.

We can have a pragmatic, compassionate refugee policy. We don’t have to choose between letting everyone in and no one in.

Conservatives may not like this, but we have to let through people who say they are afraid. Allow applicants into the United States and monitor them until their court hearings (which nine in 10 do show up for). Don’t lock them up, as we are doing with some 60,000 immigrants a night, in places where they get inadequate medical care. At least seven migrant children have died in immigration custody since 2018. This simply didn’t happen before. Our government is killing children through neglect.

Make the court process fair; make it fitting of our country. Take our increasingly politicized immigration courts out of the Department of Justice and make them independent. Make sure that immigrant children have a government-funded lawyer, since most cannot afford representation, which basically guarantees they will lose. From October 2017 to June 2018, 70 babies went to court alone.

Liberals might not like this, but we also have to deport migrants who lose their cases. President Trump refers to asylum as a “loophole” in our system. That’s bogus. Yet there is another loophole that must be addressed: A vast majority of those who lose their asylum cases don’t leave the country. They stay and blend into the woodwork. This rightfully riles Americans who believe these unsuccessful asylum-seekers are thumbing their noses at our legal process. Require Immigration and Customs Enforcement to focus on deporting people who have just lost their asylum cases, not the parent who has been here 30 years.

Democrats need to get woke and realize that any immigration reform plan has to show they believe in the rule of law. I’ve lived in a country with no laws. Democrats don’t want that. We cannot take in everyone, so we need to prioritize those fleeing harm. Stop talking about idiotic things like open borders. Or liberals will keep losing on this issue.

There’s something ready-made for Americans who care about this travesty to lobby for: the Refugee Protection Act, introduced in Congress in November. It would require the United States to take in far more refugees, including at least 100,000 a year from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras alone. It would prevent the government from forcing people to apply for asylum in other countries they passed through on the way here, and prohibit ports of entry from pleading overcrowding as an excuse to turn people away. It would exempt migrants from criminal prosecution for crossing without documents, and allow asylum-seekers to be released temporarily in the United States if they pose no risk to public safety. It would reverse a Trump administration decision that bars people fleeing domestic or gang violence from obtaining asylum. And it would require our government to appoint lawyers for migrant children.

Americans need to stop whining and to ride Congress to pass this bill. Every one of my fellow Jews in this country should have their hair on fire over this — especially folks like Jared Kushner, whose Polish family, like mine, found safety here.

I often get asked: What part of “illegal” don’t you understand? Well, our laws say we have to help people who are running for their lives. Take it from a Nazario: President Trump is the one who has broken the law.

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

India: CAA enacted to create religious test of citizenship, says new US commission factsheet

2020/02/21 Leave a comment

Of note:

A new legislative document by a US federal panel alleges that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) is part of an effort by the Indian government to create a religious test for citizenship.

In a factsheet issued on Wednesday the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) said that after the passage of the citizenship law large scale protests had broken out across India.

“Quickly after the CAA’s passage, large scale protests broke out across India with the government instituting a violent crackdown against the protestors. In conjunction with a proposed nation-wide National Register of Citizens, there are fears that this law is part of an effort to create a religious test for Indian citizenship and could lead to the widespread disenfranchisement of Indian Muslims,” USCIRF said.

The CAA grants citizenship to Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Parsi, Buddhist, and Christian refugees from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh, who came to India on or before December 31, 2014. Protests have erupted across the country against the contentious CAA since Parliament gave its nod to the Bill last year.

The USCIRF had then condemned the then Bill terming it as a “dangerous turn in the wrong direction” and sought US sanctions against Home Minister Amit Shah “and other principal Indian leadership” if the with the “religious criterion” is passed by both houses of Parliament.
India had condemned the “inaccurate” and “unwarranted” comments made by USCIRF and said that the Act aims at providing expedited consideration for Indian citizenship to persecuted religious minorities from “contiguous” countries.

Source: CAA enacted to create religious test of citizenship, says new US commission factsheet

Filed under Citizenship, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

‘Colorism,’ A Major Challenge to Advertisers and Networks

2020/02/20 Leave a comment

Interesting insights from the advertising industry:

We know that representation in media matters. In Horowitz’s latest State of Consumer Engagement 2019 study, over half (55%) of multicultural consumers said it would have a positive impact on their intent to purchase from a company if the company featured people of their race/ethnicity in their advertising, and six in ten (57%) said it would have a positive impact if a company’s advertising represented their culture or lifestyle.But getting diversity and representation right is not as simple as just putting a person of color in an ad or TV show and calling it a day. Consumers today are more sensitive to—and more savvy about—when brands are making a sincere effort to connect with them versus when they are just trying to check the “diversity box.” And they are quick to call brands out in social media for pandering or insensitivity.

At Horowitz, we spend a lot of time talking to Black and Latinx consumers about what resonates with them—and what irks them—about how they are represented in the media and in advertising. One of the topics that comes up time and again is colorism: the practice of favoring lighter-skinned people over those who are darker-skinned, even intra-racially.

Perhaps in an effort to be pragmatic and attempt to resonate with multicultural audiences while not alienating “general market” (white) audiences, decisions are often made to cast lighter skinned or “less ethnic” Black or Latinx talent, and increasingly, racially ambiguous/mixed-race talent, in media and advertising. This does not go unnoticed by audiences of color, especially by those with darker skin, who find that people who look like them are often noticeably absent in the media. In fact, the State of Consumer Engagement 2019 study found that over one in three (36%) Blacks with darker skin tones feel that the advertising industry ignores them compared to one-quarter (25%) of Blacks with lighter skin tones.

As the industry continues to strive towards diversity, it is critical to examine the implicit (and explicit) biases that might be influencing the choice to favor casting lighter skinned talent of color.

Cultural anthropology and biology tell us that that race is a social construction, not a biological one. In fact, across the entire human race, skin tones exist on a spectrum. Despite that fact, the binary classification of people into racialized groups by skin color has been used to grant rights and privileges to some, while denying them from others. It has been baked into in our legal and institutional frameworks. History is rife with examples of structural discrimination, from the Jim Crow laws that were in place in the South after the reconstruction era all the way to the 1950s, to “Stop and Frisk” and other racial profiling policing policies that happen today. It was also baked into our social and cultural frameworks. Representations of beauty in the arts over time reinforced the idea that whiteness and the features and traits assigned to it were superior to and more desirable than darkness and its associated features and traits. Darker skinned people were often “whitewashed”—rendered invisible in the arts and media.

The underlying message is that whiteness is “good” and comes with privileges that darker people are denied, while darkness is “bad” and comes with disenfranchisement that whiter people would never experience—all based purely on racialized classifications. Countless studies have documented the impact of colorism within racism: The darker a person’s skin is the more disenfranchisement one experiences, from employment discrimination, to higher likelihoods of being incarcerated, to being paid lower salaries for equal work—and being less likely to be represented positively in film, TV, and advertising.

There’s nothing wrong with making the choice to cast lighter-skinned, “mixed-race,” or “racially ambiguous” talent if it is in context and fits the storyline in a realistic way. But it is critical to examine the reasons behind that decision. Is it driven by implicit bias that “lighter is better?” Is it driven by a pragmatic decision to “check more than one diversity box,” which essentially, though perhaps wittingly, whitewashes darker-skinned people of color? Additionally, how does this casting fit into your brand’s overall approach to representation of people of color across the entire spectrum of skin tones?

These are important questions to ask nowadays because it speaks to the optics through which brands and media companies are judged by consumers: Two in three Black and Latinx consumers in Horowitz’s recent study say that they make it a lifestyle choice to know the socio-political stances of the companies they do business with, and that showing support for their respective communities would impact their decision to do business with a company.

As we move into the 2020s, brands’ success will hinge on connecting with America’s diverse marketplace. It’s time for the media and advertising industry to examine its own implicit biases and embrace the full spectrum of America’s diversity.

Source: ‘Colorism,’ A Major Challenge to Advertisers and Networks

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

How afrofuturism gives Black people the confidence to survive doubt and anti-Blackness

2020/02/20 Leave a comment

New term to me. Not sure whether fantasy or escapism is more effective than real people and role models although greater diversity in all forms of entertainment and culture important:

In 2018, Black people globally got a signal of hope when director Ryan Coogler and Marvel Studios released the critically acclaimed movie, Black Panther. While few knew of the Black Panther as a superhero despite the comic being released in the 1960s, millions now know of him because of the film’s overwhelming success.

Its success can be due, in part, because of what it tells us about Black people’s futures. Many Black people — seeking belonging and better outcomes for their lives — have turned to afrofuturism as the source of optimism. According to afrofuturist expert and author Ytasha Womack, afrofuturism refers to “an intersection of imagination, technology, the future and liberation … Afrofuturists redefine culture and notions of Blackness for today and the future by combining elements of science fiction, historical fiction, speculative fiction, fantasy, afrocentricity and magic realism with non-western beliefs.”

Black Panther had Black people chanting “Wakanda Forever,” while many imagined that they too could put on the Black Panther suit to gain a sense of belonging. Black people, including Canadians, believed that Wakanda, the utopian city where the Black Panther resides, is a real place. For Black Canadians, Wakanda offers a place that exists outside the harsh reality of an anti-Black white settler narrative that is anti-Black.

Black legal scholar Lolita Buckner Inniss says anti-Black racism is deeply enmeshed in the Canadian social fabric. Anti-Black racism cuts deep enough so that many, if not all, Black Canadians feel there is no hope for a better future.

Afrofuturism in cinema is but one source. Writer Nnedi Okorafor’s 2015 science fiction novella, Binti, features a Black woman protagonist named Binti Ekeopara Zuzu Dambu Kaipka. Binti is an intelligent woman leader of the Himba tribe whose genius gets her into to the prestigious Oomza University, which floats about the galaxy. Binti is the first member of the Himba ethnic people to attend the school. Her decision to attend is met with ridicule, laughter and threats to her life due to the fear and insecurities of her people.

Her people have never been allowed to imagine futures beyond their traditional way of life and identification with the land. Binti states:

We Himba don’t travel. We stay put. Our ancestral land is life; move away from it and you diminish. We even cover our bodies with it. Otjize is red land. Here in the launch port, most were Khoush and a few other non-Himba. Here, I was an outsider; I was outside.

She echoes the social challenges that Black people face when embarking upon new ways of living after leaving traditional family and cultural contexts. Often, their families and cultures pressure them to remain entrenched within the known confines of family, culture and community, rather than explore the new and unknown.

One of us, Anthony, was the first member of his immediate family to attend post-secondary education and graduate school. He wanted to apply to graduate school but had to fight internalized feelings of low self-worth that insisted he did not belong in academia. Indeed, a lack of self-confidence influenced the choice to avoid applying to programs that required a high grade-point average with a full scholarship because he did not believe he would be accepted.

Blazing a trail to a Black future

In her village, Binti had been one of the few who used knowledge to create peace in her tribe, so she had to overcome pressure to remain in the village in order to embrace new learning. On a spaceship, travelling from her village to the Oomza University, Binti as the only Himba at the university encounters another obstacle: the false assumption that people from her land are evil, dirty and primitive.

In one moment, one of the Khoush (a different lighter-skinned tribe) students touches Binti’s braids out of curiosity and without consent. Her hair is mixed with sweet smelling red clay and perfume called Otijze, which is connected to her cultural heritage. One of the Khoush students responds that it has a horrible smell, suggesting a passive discriminatory logic of sanitation.

One can observe strong echoes of the attitudes of privileged whites towards high-priority Black neighbourhoods whose inhabitants are stereotyped as criminal, irrational, impoverished and unintelligent. The book suggests that there is no such thing as neutral space and that structural inequities and racial inequalities make space and place difficult to navigate, especially in elitist environments.

But Binti is gripped by the challenge of the new. Her journey of self-discovery begins when she decides to leave village life, defying her ancestors’ dedication to their land and cultural identity. Binti explains that tribal knowledge was handed down orally as her father had taught her 300 years of oral lessons “about astrolabes including how they worked, the art of them, the true negotiation of them, the lineage … circuits, wire, metals, oils, heat, electricity, math current and sand bar.” Her mother had also transmitted mathematical insights and gifts, but never in formal educational settings. Family unity and protection were paramount.

Binti symbolizes the trailblazer who encounters politics, racism, stereotypes, ignorance, systemic inequalities, gender inequities, classism and so on. Additionally, she faces the strong pull of past traditions since she is the first member of her family and tribe to attend a formal educational institute.

Afrofuturism offers a way for Black people to envision their futures, as Missy Elliot’s futuristic music videos exemplify.

Some Black individuals living such stories will inevitably encounter feelings of isolation, lack of belonging and self-doubt. Their internal battles will pit self-trust and the drive towards the new against the safety and security of the past. They will have to develop a secure sense of self and an understanding that it does not matter how far they travel among the galaxies because everyone has unique gifts they can contribute to the universe.

Against the pull of anxieties and insecurities, Anthony graduated with a master’s degree and a PhD; he currently has a post-doctoral fellowship — yet is in another galaxy of his own among the stars.

Afro-Caribbean Black people living in white settler, colonized nations such as Canada face discrimination and negative stereotypes. Afrofuturism can enable Black communities to reimagine new possibilities, especially when the future trajectory for Black Canadians is at times uncertain.

Source: How afrofuturism gives Black people the confidence to survive doubt and anti-Blackness

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Can Japan Embrace Multiculturalism?

2020/02/20 Leave a comment

Appears to be a good overview of the challenges and welcome any comments from those with experience in Japan:

In April 2019, Japan officially opened its doors to lower-skilled foreign workers under a major revision of the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act. The creation of the Specified Skills visa program for blue-collar and other workers represents a historic change in Japanese immigration policy. But questions linger as to whether Japanese society, often described as insular and homogeneous, is prepared to welcome foreign residents and facilitate their participation on an equal footing.

Can Japan Become More Open?

I was confronted by such questions when I traveled to Cairo last December, at the behest of the Japan Foundation, to speak in Parliament and at Cairo University. “Do you think Japanese society can change and become less insular?” I was asked. “Isn’t the government just admitting foreign workers to do the jobs Japanese people don’t want any more?”

These are legitimate concerns. The Japanese have a reputation for looking down on nonwhites from other countries. Moreover, the recent deterioration in diplomatic relations between Japan and its neighbors, China and South Korea, has affected popular sentiment regarding the citizens of those nations. The far-right Japan First Party attracted considerable media attention during the unified local elections of 2019 with its anti-Korean, anti-immigration rhetoric (though the party has yet to win a seat at the local or national level).

It should be stressed that one rarely encounters such extreme forms of bigotry among ordinary Japanese people. Foreign students and trainees from Asia and elsewhere have entered Japan by the tens of thousands over the past two decades and have become a familiar sight behind the counters of convenience stores. Almost everyone in the local community views them positively, as intrepid, hard-working young people coping with the demands of life far from home. Increasingly, the Japanese people are coming to see that their society will need foreigners if it is to continue functioning as the native population dwindles and ages.

However, there is no doubt that foreign residents face serious challenges adapting to life in Japan, and that much remains to be done to ensure that our new immigration system works. In the following, I review some of the steps taken thus far before spotlighting the key issues demanding action.

Community-Driven Change

Until quite recently, the central government has done very little from a policy standpoint to assist foreigners living in Japan or promote their integration into society. On the other hand, local governments and nonprofit organizations have been working hard to fill the gap at the regional and community level. The municipal governments of Nagoya and Kitakyūshū and the Nagano prefectural government have set aside an annual “multicultural month” devoted to educating the public about cultural diversity and tolerance. In terms of legislation, Miyagi Prefecture has led the way with its Ordinance Pertaining to the Promotion of the Formation of a Multicultural Society , aimed at “building a community that upholds the human rights and social participation of all prefectural residents regardless of nationality or ethnicity.” The government has established a support center and other multilingual resources for foreign nationals and holds regular social events bringing together Japanese residents and foreigners living and working in the prefecture under the Technical Intern Training Program (see below). Shizuoka Prefecture has passed a similar ordinance.

Hate speech is an important target of efforts to promote tolerance. The central government made some attempt to address the issue with the 2016 Act on the Promotion of Efforts to Eliminate Unfair Discriminatory Speech and Behavior against Persons Originating from Outside Japan, although it fell short of criminalizing such behavior. Osaka enacted its own ordinance against hate speech in the same year, and in December 2019, Kawasaki became the first municipality to pass an ordinance that makes hate speech a punishable offense.

In Shinjuku, a municipality in central Tokyo with a large foreign population, a community council was established by local ordinance with the aim of building a more harmonious and livable community for Japanese and foreign residents alike. The Shinjuku Multicultural Community Building Committee, of which I am chair, holds regular meetings where representatives of various ethnic groups freely share their experiences and opinions. In this way, we are working to shed light on and improve the living conditions of Shinjuku’s growing population of foreign nationals.

Discrimination in Daily Life

As part of its effort to build a harmonious multicultural community, Shinjuku has conducted an extensive questionnaire survey of its foreign and Japanese residents. The results of the 2015 survey help to highlight the challenges facing newcomers to Japanese society as they attempt to lay the basic foundations for daily life, from renting an apartment to opening a bank account.

The 2015 Shinjuku survey asked foreign residents how frequently they felt subject to discrimination or prejudice in their dealings with Japanese. A full 35% responded that “it happens sometimes,” and another 7.5% reported that “it happens often.” More than half of these (51.9%), the largest number, identified “apartment hunting” as a situation in which they encountered discrimination. The second most frequently cited situation was “looking for a job” (33.2%), followed by “administrative procedures” (25.6%).

Comments in the “free response” section of the survey reveal a wide range of impressions. A woman from Myanmar had nothing but praise for Shinjuku, declaring that, in her seven months in Japan, everyone she had dealt with, from municipal officials to hospital and school employees, had treated her and her family courteously and kindly and that she had seen no evidence of discrimination. However, another woman lamented that her husband had been turned away time and again when searching for an apartment for the sole reason that he did not speak Japanese. She called on municipal authorities to publish local housing guides for foreigners.

Overcoming the Language Barrier

The language barrier is cited time and again as an obstacle to integration with the local community. In the 2015 survey, 58.6% of respondents reported experiencing difficulties with the Japanese language. “Reading newspapers and notices” was the problem most frequently cited (49.3%), followed by “understanding instructions from municipal officials and hospital staff” (46.6%) and “ordinary conversation” (37.6%). Among the comments in the free-response section were calls for multilingual editions of the Guide to Living in Shinjuku and other publications. “It’s very common to find oneself in violation of the rules simply because one can’t read Japanese,” commented one Chinese woman. Others called for expansion of the Japanese language classes sponsored by the municipal government. “One class a week is not enough to master Japanese,” said a Chinese woman, adding that “lessons focused on Japanese used in daily life would be ideal.”

The language barrier can be a serious issue for children as well as adults. Lack of proficiency in Japanese often leads to poor achievement and social isolation at school. Indeed, just “looking like a foreigner” can provoke bullying in many cases. Some parents transfer their children to international school to protect them, but for many the tuition is prohibitive. Children who are bullied or shunned at school are apt to drop out and grow up undereducated, perpetuating the cycle of poverty and isolation.

In December 2018, in conjunction with the revised immigration law, the government announced a package of “comprehensive measures for acceptance and coexistence of foreign nationals.” Under the policy, the government, recognizing foreign residents as members of the community, has allocated ¥21.1 billion for measures to promote inclusion and integration. In June 2019, it enacted the Act for the Promotion of Japanese Language Education, which explicitly recognizes the government’s responsibility to provide language instruction to foreigners living in Japan. These are important steps forward.

Closing the Back Door

Unfortunately, the “comprehensive measures” do not have the force of law and do not guarantee the rights of foreign residents. The lack of guarantees is particularly alarming in light of the continued expansion of the Technical Intern Training Program, which has been widely criticized for opening the door to human rights abuses and illegal immigration.

Established in 1993, the TITP has served for years now as a backdoor for foreign workers, who are recruited from other Asian countries ostensibly for training purposes. Admitted for a limited stay, the “interns” are assigned to farms, factories, and construction firms in need of cheap labor. They work at minimum wage and are not permitted to change jobs. Human-rights abuses have been reported, and some 9,000 of the interns have gone missing, according to the latest government figures.

As of fiscal year 2018, approximately 80,000 foreign trainees were entering Japan each year under the program. Recently, the number of interns assigned to workplaces in Kyūshū and Shikoku has spiked as labor shortages worsen in those outlying regions. There is good cause to worry that these workers, denied such basic rights as fair wages and freedom of movement, will encounter hardship and discrimination as they pour into communities that have little prior experience with foreigners. The result could be more disappearances and visa overstays, as well as potential public safety problems. What we need is a fundamental law on the status and rights of foreign residents in Japan.

“One Team” for Japan’s Future

During the 2019 Rugby World Cup, held in Japan under the motto “One Team,” the multinational, racially diverse Japanese rugby team thrilled and inspired fans with its historic advance to the top eight. Overcoming their differences to achieve a common goal, the Brave Blossoms offered a shining example for Japanese society to follow in the coming years.

Japan’s population is declining at a rate of nearly 500,000 a year. The number of foreign residents is increasing at a rate of about 200,000, and that growth is expected to pick up.

The future of Japanese society hinges on our ability to adapt our systems and our attitudes to these new realities. The government needs to send a clear message about its commitment to building an inclusive society in which foreign and Japanese nationals can live and work together harmoniously.

(Originally published in Japanese.

Source: Can Japan Embrace Multiculturalism?

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with

The Case for a More Negative Black History Month

2020/02/20 Leave a comment

Canadian media coverage overwhelmingly celebrates the positive as well:

Black History Month is traditionally a time to honor black Americans and, theoretically, accord them their proper place in American history. Every February we re-examine the exemplary lives of Harriet Tubman, Charles Drew, Frederick Douglass and those of lesser known but truly significant leaders, artists, scientists, thinkers and others.

The occasion has always felt too narrow to me. We are eager to celebrate our favorite figures and their trailblazing achievements — Obama is the latest — but less eager to examine the fact that their heroism was based more often than not in fighting an American system that fought — and still fights — against their status as full Americans. Perhaps it’s because black people don’t want to ruin the Black History Month party and white people would rather not examine their role in the racism that made the month necessary in the first place. I’ve grumbled for years about the shortcomings I see but have always come down on the side of celebration. We deserve it.

But the party (though God knows we could use one) can’t be the point this time. In 2020, at this very perilous moment in the history of us all, it’s urgent that we turn the lens around, take it off the worthy black individuals and put it on America as a whole. It’s time to acknowledge what black history really reveals — not individual heroism or the endurance of democratic ideals, but their opposites. Time to examine what black history has always shown us: how hundreds of years of codified oppression, groupthink, hypocrisy, lies and political cowardice have made possible, and palatable, the political oppression and moral corruption of the current moment that threatens to wipe out democracy for everybody.

I don’t exaggerate. We’ve already had lots of alarmed post-mortems about the recently concluded Senate impeachment trial in which the Republicans united to ensure no witnesses were called. The party is increasingly recognized as a cult that serves not people — after all, 75 percent of Americans wanted to see more evidence — but its own interests. It is flaunting this self-interest openly, à la Trump, even suggesting that racist, crude or unconstitutional acts by the president are simply idiosyncrasies — or executive privilege — that are ultimately good for democracy. America appears to be, as Susan Sontag might have said, at the end of seriousness.

But we have been at this end before. We have always been here. The institution of slavery meant that the Constitution, for all its worthy prescriptions that Representative Adam Schiff defended so eloquently during the House trial, was going to be a document undermined from the beginning by the founders’ tacit embrace of that institution. Black history rooted in slavery means that the country was always going to have to make ugly compromises with its own ideals, a process that became normalized. The longevity of slavery meant that business and the pursuit of profit, not justice, would be the dominant force in American life and the real energy driving even the most optimistic notions of American exceptionalism. Put in this context, the cult of Trump is not new, just another compromise with our ideals, albeit a far-reaching one that looks particularly bad in the allegedly enlightened post-civil rights era of the 21st century.

The good news may be that America is finally feeling the embarrassment about the flaws in its national character that it should have felt 400 years ago. Embarrassment is not moral outrage, but it’s a start. The civil rights revolt of the ’60s was greatly aided by the images on television of police dogs and white officers attacking black protesters who were only seeking the right to sit at lunch counters and shop at department stores. It was bad public relations for America, and in the end, bad for business.

That was then. Embarrassment — forget moral outrage — is totally lacking now among Republicans, who willingly take their cues from a man incapable of feeling remorse or regret for any reason. Far from being embarrassed, the cult now seems to be saying that racism and corporate supremacy are, if not actually good for business, conditions we all can and perhaps should live with. Again, not new — we all lived with the economics of Jim Crow for a hundred years. But in 2020 the consequences of clinging to the status quo are incredibly far-reaching.

What we must come to grips with is that the arrogance and myopia that made our race-based social caste system possible, that allowed us to dishonor our Constitution and delude ourselves on a regular basis, are the same arrogance and myopia that are now threatening the well-being of the entire planet. Denying climate change is part and parcel of denying the corrosive effects of segregation. The point is that America is very good at making its own reality, which is another way of saying it has always tolerated — even welcomed — fake news and alternative facts for the sake of power and political convenience.

All this month, I’ve wondered: Would Harriet Tubman, et al, have been surprised at this state of affairs? I think not. Disappointed for sure, but not surprised; I doubt any black freedom fighter expected a country so wedded to inequality to significantly change in his or her lifetime or ours. Yet if we as a country don’t significantly change our view of our own history, which is framed in black history, there will be precious little in the future to celebrate.

Source: The Case for a More Negative Black History Month

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Anti-Islam Pegida rally meets resistance in Dresden

2020/02/20 Leave a comment

Of note:

Thousands of people rallied in the eastern German city of Dresden on Monday to protest against Germany’s anti-Islamic and xenophobic Pegida movement.

Pegida supporters, including Bjorn Hocke of the far-right party Alternative for Germany (AfD), gathered for the group’s 200th demonstration in the city.

Hundreds of anti-Pegida demonstrators arrived in Neumarkt square, with posters carrying slogans such as “Red card for Nazis” and “Grandmas against the right.”

Organizers of the counterrally said earlier on Monday that they had expected around 1,000 people to attend, but 90 minutes into the event, they estimated that 2,500 people had arrived, according to German news agency DPA.

Local media reported that Pegida leaders complained and threatened to cancel planned speeches due to the level of noise from counterprotesters.

Nazi rhetoric

The Pegida movement, created in 2014, is led by Lutz Bachmann,who has previously been convicted for incitement.

As one of the AfD’s most contentious figures, Hocke has been accused of using Nazi rhetoric in his speeches.

Pegida stands for “Patriotic Europeans against the Islamization of the West.”

Local chapters of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP) in the state of Saxony called for a counterrally under the slogan “Democracy needs backbone.”

Both parties have the support of Saxony’s Association of Jewish Communities, the Catholic Church and the Protestant Church.

State premier Michael Kretschmer, and a number of his ministers, have offered their support in a private capacity.

Bjorn Hocke has been accused of using Nazi rhetoric in his speeches.

AfD presence

AfD executive board member Alexander Wolf told the DPA news agency that Hocke’s rally attendance was risky ahead of elections in the northern German city of Hamburg on Sunday.

“As legitimate as the issue may be, a demonstration does always hold risks because you cannot control who takes part,” he said.

Thousands of anti-Pegida protesters took to Dresden’s Neumarkt square

The Pegida movement has also had the support of Hocke in the past.  In 2016, he said in a speech that: “Without them, the AfD would not be where it is.”

Pegida held its first rally in Dresden in October 2014, calling for an end to the “Merkel dictatorship” and protesting against Islam and refugees

During the movement’s peak, tens of thousands of people participated in Pegida rallies.

Source: Anti-Islam Pegida rally meets resistance in Dresden

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

India’s citizenship law changes are discriminatory and should be repealed

2020/02/19 1 Comment

Good op-ed by Ratna Omidvar and Deepa Mehta:

In recent months, a populist turn of events in India has tarnished Gandhi’s vision and the country’s future as the world’s largest secular democracy.

We were born in the same provincial city in post-colonial India. We grew up on a steady diet of stories about the fight for independence. Our parents burned their Western-spun clothes as part of the national protest against England and donned home-spun khadi in support of Mahatma Gandhi’s dream of a free, democratic and secular India, home to a new nation for many cultures, languages and religions.

Through twists of fate, both of us find ourselves in Canada as grateful and engaged citizens of this country. But we continue to take an abiding interest in India, its people and its politics. We are both therefore saddened and dismayed by the developments in our country of birth.

In 2019, the Parliament of India amended the Citizenship Act to provide a path to citizenship for members of Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi and Christian religious minorities who fled persecution in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan before December, 2014. It’s the first time religion has been overtly used as a criterion for citizenship under Indian nationality law.

The amendment has been widely criticized as discriminating on the basis of religion, in particular for excluding Muslims. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights called it “fundamentally discriminatory,” adding that while India’s “goal of protecting persecuted groups is welcome,” this should be accomplished through a non-discriminatory, “robust national asylum system.”

The government has defended its position by pointing out that Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan are Islamic countries, where Muslims are unlikely to face persecution. This argument fails to take into account that certain minority Muslim groups, such as the Hazaras and the Ahmadiyyas, have faced and continue to face persecution in these countries. In addition, there is widespread concern that the bill, coupled with the new National Register of Citizens, would render many Muslims stateless, as they may not be able to meet the stringent birth certificate requirements.

Indians have not stayed quiet in the face of this discriminatory law. Intellectuals, artists and particularly young students are speaking out with courage. Women are the leading voices in many cases. Sadly, the media and the courts appear to have largely succumbed to political and populist pressure and fallen silent.

The 17.5 million Indians who comprise the world’s largest diaspora have been watching carefully. Demonstrations were held in New York, Toronto, San Francisco and Connecticut on Jan. 26, India’s Republic Day. They were joined by leaders of civil rights groups such as Reverend Chloe Breyer, the executive director of the Interfaith Center of New York. She noted that Martin Luther King Jr., who was inspired by Gandhi, “called to speak for the voiceless.” She went on to say that the Citizenship Act “makes an enemy of India’s own precious people, damaging the pluralistic democracy that has existed since 1947 and has been such an inspiration to the world.”

What has inspired us the most is the involvement and initiative taken by young people. In Toronto, peaceful protests have been planned and led by university students. These students light the way forward for the rest of us. Their unwillingness to walk away from the reality of the situation and their passion to stand by what’s right for humanity has been so moving.

Canadians and in particular Indo-Canadians need to add their voices to those demanding a repeal of the act. We need to remember that the persecution of one group or one religion or one culture opens the door to the persecution of others. As the world seems to increasingly fall prey to strong-man politics, we should do our best to ensure the health of the world’s largest democracy.

We, proud Indo-Canadians, find ourselves labelled “anti-Indian” because we are against the bill and its nature. But the truth is that it is our very “Indianness” that makes us feel so fiercely indignant about what is happening.

It is said that you can take an Indian out of India but not India out of an Indian. And this has never been as relevant as it is today. Though we are not in India dealing with the immediate ramifications of the situation, we can still stand by our fellow Indians in solidarity as they face it head on. Humanity is taking a hit, and we cannot stand idly by waiting for change. We do not become who we are in isolation.

Source: India’s citizenship law changes are discriminatory and should be repealed: Ratna Omidvar and Deepa Mehta

Filed under Multiculturalism

‘Most Visible Jews’ Fear Being Targets as Anti-Semitism Rises

2020/02/19 Leave a comment

Not surprising but no less reprehensible. Likely same phenomenon with respect to the most visible Muslims:

A rabbinical student was walking down a quiet street in Brooklyn last winter, chatting on the phone with his father when three men jumped him from behind. They punched his head, knocking him to the ground before fleeing down the block.

When police officers arrested three suspects later that night, the student, a Hasidic man who asked to be identified by his first name, Mendel, learned that another Hasidic Jew had been attacked on the same block in Crown Heights just minutes before he was. Video of the earlier attack showed three men knocking a man to the ground before kicking and punching him.

The victims in both attacks were “very visibly Jewish,” said Mendel, 23, who has a beard and dresses in the kind of dark suit and hat traditionally worn by Hasidic men. That, he said, made them easier targets.

“You could ask everyone if they’re Jewish,” he continued, “or you could just go after people who you don’t have to ask any questions about because you can just see that they dress like they’re Jewish.”

Anxiety is increasing in Jewish communities around the United States, fueled in part by deadly attacks on synagogues in Poway, Calif., last April and in Pittsburgh in 2018. Anti-Semitic violence in the New York area has been more frequent lately than at any time in recent memory, with three people killed in a shooting at a kosher supermarket in Jersey City, N.J., and five injured in a knife attack at a rabbi’s home in Monsey, N.Y.

But the rise of anti-Semitism has affected different parts of the Jewish community differently. Although synagogues of all denominations have been subjected to threats or vandalism, community leaders say the risk of street violence is greater for Orthodox Jews who wear religious clothing like yarmulkes; black suits and hats; and wigs or other hair coverings in their daily lives.

“We know there are over one million Jews in New York City alone, and a couple hundred thousand of those are Orthodox,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, the chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, using a term that encompasses Modern Orthodox as well as Hasidic Jews. “They are being singled out in disproportionate numbers to their percentage of the population.”

Jewish people were the victims in more than half of the 428 hate crimes in New York City last year, with many of the crimes committed in heavily Orthodox neighborhoods, according to the Police Department. Community leaders said most of the victims in the Monsey and Jersey City attacks were Orthodox.

The tempo of such incidents increased as 2019 ended and the new year began, with 43 across New York State from Dec. 1 to Jan. 6, according to the Anti-Defamation League.

No organization tracks the number of attacks on Orthodox Jews, said Jennifer Packer, a spokeswoman for the Orthodox Union Advocacy Center. But Jewish leaders said the heightened risk to the Orthodox was clear in the pattern of incidents.

Nathan J. Diament, the executive director for public policy at the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, said in testimony to Congress last month that “the most visible Jews,” including those who wear hats, yarmulkes, wigs or wear long beards or sidelocks, “have been subject most to these physical and verbal assaults.”

“Anxiety about this new reality is present in Orthodox Jewish communities in all of your districts and across the entire country,” Mr. Diament testified.

Many of the incidents in New York have happened in sections of Brooklyn that have been popular with generations of Hasidic families, like Crown Heights and Williamsburg. Jewish pedestrians in the neighborhoods have been assaulted or harassed, women have had hair coverings ripped from their heads and synagogues have been vandalized.

Community leaders said that the violence reminded them of anti-Semitic acts in Europe, where in recent years Jews have been attacked by followers of the far right in Germany and killed by jihadists at places like the Jewish museum in Belgium.

“We thought the things that happen in Europe would never happen in the United States and definitely not in New York City,” said Rabbi David Niederman, the president of United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg and North Brooklyn. One of those killed in Jersey City, Moshe Deutsch, volunteered for his organization. “But unfortunately, we were in dreamland.”

Most of the anti-Semitic incidents in New York have not been perpetrated by jihadists or far-right extremists, but by young African-American men, Mr. Greenblatt said. Local leaders said that phenomenon grows out of tension in areas where longstanding African-American and Jewish communities have been squeezed by gentrification.

“You have this mixture of African-Americans and Hasidic people, and then you have gentrification,” said Gil Monrose, an African-American pastor at Mt. Zion Church of God 7th Day who lives in Crown Heights. “All of this is colliding in Crown Heights and it leads to young people committing crimes where they live.”

“Sometimes people want to blame different groups for the fact that they are being priced out of the neighborhood, but the Jewish community is not to blame for that because the Jewish community is being priced out too,” he said. “That’s why they went to Jersey City.”

In November, the Anti-Defamation League expanded an anti-bias education program it started in Brooklyn in 2018 with a goal of bringing it to 40 schools. Eric L. Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, praised the program when the expansion was announced.

“Since extremist, hate-filled rhetoric has become awakened and stoked across this country — particularly in Crown Heights right here in Brooklyn — this unacceptable behavior is increasingly becoming the norm for some,” Mr. Adams said in a statement.

The rise in anti-Semitic attacks has been not limited to Brooklyn.

Jeff Katz, the treasurer of the Stanton Street Shul, a small Orthodox synagogue on the Lower East Side of Manhattan, said that he was riding the subway one day last fall when another passenger erupted at him.

“He was saying, ‘Why aren’t you looking at me?’” said Mr. Katz, who wears a yarmulke. “And I thought, ‘We’re on the subway, I don’t want any part of this. Then he started saying, ‘What? Do you think you’re superior, Jew boy?’”

Mr. Katz said that a friend who also wears a yarmulke had been slapped by a stranger as he was walking on Delancey Street in Manhattan a few weeks later, during Hanukkah.

“A lot of these incidents don’t get reported,” Mr. Katz said. “I’m going to call the police and say someone bothered me in the subway? What are the police going to do?”

That sentiment is common, Rabbi Niederman said. But his organization urges victims of bias crimes to file police reports as soon as possible.

“The first thing we tell people when there is an incident is don’t hide it under the rug,” he said.

Attorney General William P. Barr came to Brooklyn last month to announce federal hate-crime charges against a woman whose case has helped stoke criticism of recent bail reform laws.

The woman, Tiffany Harris, was arrested on suspicion of slapping three Orthodox women in Crown Heights in December. After being released without bail, she was arrested the next day in connection with another assault.

Mendel, who studies at the World Headquarters of the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic movement on Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn, said that almost everyone in Crown Heights seemed to know someone who had been harassed or attacked on the street. But he said few of those incidents were reported.

He praised the response of the Police Department, which arrested the three suspects quickly in his case last January. But he expressed frustration at the comparatively slower pace of the district attorney’s office. The suspects have yet to go to trial, according to court records.

Crown Heights has been a center of Hasidic life in New York since the 1920s, and Mendel and others in the area said that it remained so despite gentrification and the increasing prevalence of anti-Semitic incidents.

“People are concerned,” Mendel said during an interview at a bagel shop crowded with Hasidic families at midday. “I do look around when I go out, I don’t go out too late at night. But it is a beautiful community. I don’t think this anti-Semitism should mar or put a stain on the beautiful community that Crown Heights is.”

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

His family was banned from a Toronto roller skating club for being Black. He fought back in court

2020/02/18 Leave a comment

Note from our history:

Before Viola Desmond refused to leave the whites-only section of a Nova Scotia theatre and Hugh Burnett led sit-ins at restaurants unwilling to serve Black customers, a barber in Toronto pushed back against racial intolerance.

During the first decade of the 20th century, a roller-skating craze swept North America. Rinks sprang up in cities across the continent and Toronto was no exception. Citizens had several options including Victoria Rink on Huron Street and Granite Club Roller Rink at 519 Church. Roller skating appealed to all ages. The craze was so popular sporting goods stores quickly ran short of skates. Participants were required to rent skates from rinks. Ads placed in newspapers by competing arenas boasted “Strictly select patronage.”

The Taylors lived in a home in the shadow of St. James Cathedral on Francis Street. On a cool November evening in 1906, Arthur Taylor, 12, and his mother, Lydia, dressed against the chill and boarded a Toronto Railway Co. streetcar for the short ride north to the Granite Club, a forerunner of the city’s current Granite Club. After purchasing tickets and entering, they queued up to rent skates. Before they could join the crowd on the floor, however, an attendant instructed by management informed them they were unwelcome because they were Black.

Mother and son returned home humiliated.

The Granite Club chose the wrong family to discriminate against. Arthur’s father, the successful barber Armistead Pride Taylor, refused to take the slight lying down. Incensed, Taylor rushed to the courthouse at city hall and issued a civil claim for $50 in damages.

Armistead Taylor was born a freeman of colour in Virginia in 1845. After visiting an aunt in Toronto in 1870, she convinced him to settle here. Prior to the move, he wed Lydia Hegetscweiler in Virginia and relocated north of the border with his new wife.

The newlyweds initially resided in Yorkville, where Taylor opened a barbershop. Within a decade, he earned a reputation for challenging social norms. Fined two dollars for violating the Lord’s Day Act — Taylor shaved a customer on a Sunday — he won the case on appeal.

Taylor descendant Paul de la Rosa of Toronto is familiar with his ancestry but remained unaware of the specific indignity experienced by his great-grandmother and great-uncle.

What does de la Rosa suppose gave his great-grandfather confidence to challenge the WASP establishment? De la Rosa speculates, “Being considered freeborn in a time of slavery gave him hope for a better life. His move from the States to Canada was also part of that. Self-esteem, pride, and a determination not to go backwards … probably were driving forces. Along with some rage!”

The Taylor family eventually grew to 10 children. By then the barber had standing in the community. He opened the first bathhouse in Yorkville and managed barbershop facilities at the Queen’s Hotel. A talented musician, he was a member of local marching bands.

Lydia and Armistead valued education for their children. Those who survived into adulthood would pursue higher education, going on to make valuable contributions in the fields of medicine and law, in Canada as well as south of the border.

Judge Frederick Morson heard the case before Christmas 1906. With a reputation for fairness, the magistrate was known to dispense swift justice. The defence was mounted by Edward Bayly, a skilled lawyer later appointed deputy attorney general to the province of Ontario.

Hotelier Abram Orpen, a former bookie with previous run-ins with authorities, managed the rink. In years to come, Orpen would establish Dufferin Park Racetrack. The successful venture led Orpen to open additional horse tracks throughout the province. As his wealth and influence grew, he became a friend to politicians and a favourite son of the city.

At trial, the lawyer representing the Granite Club claimed the recreational and social club was not liable for damages since Orpen leased the rink from them for his own purposes.

From the witness box, Armistead Taylor surmised staff initially permitted his light-skinned wife and son entrance assuming they were white. For his part, Orpen unabashedly testified ordering mother and son from the rink after discovering they were Black. Upon hearing arguments, Judge Morson admitted never having adjudicated a race-based case such as this. Court was adjourned to allow his honour to examine Canadian jurisprudence and case precedents.

Two weeks later a decision was rendered. In a challenge against the WASP establishment of the day, a verdict in the Taylors’ favour seemed unlikely. Win or lose, Taylor would not tolerate the indignity afforded his wife and son.

He refused to back down and his tenacity paid off. This doggedness doesn’t surprise de la Rosa. It runs in the family. “I attended a large family reunion many years ago,” he explained, “During this reunion, I actually saw a bill of sale for one of my ancestors that had bought himself! It seemed that that determination and drive was alive then, and was passed down.”

Judge Morson’s judgment read, “In this country nobody has a right to subject anybody to indignities because of his colour. Be a man or woman coloured … he or she is entitled to respect and protection.” Reflective of the times, however, he stated that if management intended to deny entry based on skin colour, a notice should have been conspicuously posted.

The judge denied Taylor’s claim for punitive damages but ordered the Granite Club to reimburse the ticket cost.

What effect the small victory had on young Arthur is impossible to say but it is worth noting, after completing his education in Toronto, the young man attended Lincoln University in Philadelphia and then Yale to study law. He would become assistant district attorney for the District of Brooklyn, N.Y.

Why isn’t the Taylor victory widely known? De la Rosa ponders. “How many know that Toronto once had a Black mayor?” (William Peyton Hubbard, elected Toronto’s first Black alderman in 1894, served as acting mayor on several occasions.) There were schools and streets named after prominent Black leaders in the community that have quietly had their names changed over time, and those stories have been lost to history as well.”

Source: His family was banned from a Toronto roller skating club for being Black. He fought back in court

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →