ICYMI – Geist: Canada’s Campus Antisemitism Crisis: National Survey Finds Antisemitism Nearly Everywhere and University Responses Nowhere

Understandably, this report has received considerable coverage and commentary. One of the better commentaries IMO:

…The report itself stops short of formal recommendations, concluding instead that academic leadership must take greater responsibility and that the findings should be used immediately by leadership in higher education institutions to examine their policies and practices. The recommendations came separately from the Network of Engaged Canadian Academics (NECA), a non-partisan group of more than 400 Jewish and non-Jewish academics from 54 institutions of which I am a member, which released ten recommendations alongside the report. The list will sound familiar to anyone who has followed this issue: applying existing policies to protect students targeted for any aspect of their Jewish identity including Zionism, institutional neutrality policies that apply across the institution, adoption of the IHRA definition of antisemitism together with the Canadian Handbook, a centralized and transparent incident reporting system with annual campus climate assessments, and a special advisor on antisemitism on every campus.

What has been missing is not knowledge of what to do, but the will to do it. Indeed, the release carries its own illustration of the problem: the survey was commissioned by former Special Envoy Deborah Lyons before the government eliminated her role, leaving the government to release the most comprehensive evidence yet of a systemic antisemitism problem on campus just months after creating a leadership void that has yet to be filled and a new anti-hate council that has yet to act.

I have been an academic for nearly 30 years, working in an environment where inclusion and safe spaces for all students to be their best were unquestioned priorities. Backed by a supportive University president, dean, and advisor on antisemitism, I still believe that to be the case. But this survey confirms that the vast majority of Jewish students encounter antisemitism on campus. If this were any other group — 95% of Indigenous students reporting discrimination or 70% of BIPOC students reporting mental health harm — this would be viewed as a major crisis requiring immediate action. But when 95% of Jewish students report encountering antisemitism, 70% report harm to their mental health, a majority hide their identity, and students report threats of violence and Holocaust denial, the response from some quarters is to ignore or take issue with the survey data.

The bottom line is that hundreds of Jewish students from campuses across the country report antisemitic conduct on campus that is stunning in scope and harm. Every university president in Canada should be investigating how much of the data reflects their own campus experience and committing to change through the NECA recommendations. Every faculty member should be examining whether the discriminatory conduct occurs in their class. And every faculty and student union should be working to fully protect their Jewish members. Years of willingness to tolerate or excuse the antisemitic reality – a Jewish exception – suggests this is unlikely to happen. But now no one can say they didn’t know what was happening.

Source: Canada’s Campus Antisemitism Crisis: National Survey Finds Antisemitism Nearly Everywhere and University Responses Nowhere

Colby Cosh: Supreme Court to decide which comes first — Crown oath or Sikh faith

Commentary more nuanced than the header:

…Over the remainder of the 19th century, the great hero of world atheism, Charles Bradlaugh, fought successfully in England for the principle that oaths could be replaced by “affirmations,” allowing unbelievers a loophole into political life and all secular professions. This option is in fact available under the Alberta Legal Profession Act, and was given to Wirring, but the difference in wording between “swear” and “affirm” didn’t seem to assuage his religious feelings. The core problem seems to be the notion of “allegiance,” but at common law all citizens were understood to owe allegiance to the sovereign, as part of a reciprocal obligation, whether we like it or not. Maybe this is some of the meat left on the bone that the Supreme Court apparently hopes to gnaw; I don’t know that anyone expected them to give leave to an appeal of Wirringat all.

Source: Colby Cosh: Supreme Court to decide which comes first — Crown oath or Sikh faith

Lederman: The delay for a Palestinian theatre artist’s visa is a shame

Indeed:

…The Cultch attracted protests earlier this year for mounting Soldiers of Tomorrow, written and performed by Israeli-Canadian Itai Erdal who served in the IDF (and is strongly opposed to the Israeli occupation). Ms. Redfern stood her ground then, and she’s moving heaven and Earth now to bring The Horse of Jenin to Canada. She understands the important role art can play in understanding human catastrophes. 

This moment demands this kind of theatre, whether you agree with the artist or not. Any concern that this play about a boy and a sculpture will serve as some sort of Trojan horse for a political message would be absurd. That message is everywhere, anyway. Canadian audiences should be able to hear it from, well, the horse’s mouth. 

Source: The delay for a Palestinian theatre artist’s visa is a shame

Khan: We need solidarity in the face of Islamophobia

As we do in the face of antisemitism and other forms of hate:

…Local communities can play a key role in strengthening social cohesion. This was demonstrated by the good people of Clarington, who came together at a town hall to support the harassed Muslim family, and stand firmly against fear-mongering. 

Human connection is a powerful currency in this more isolated digital age, as we can learn we share much in common. Our hearts, like this land, are expansive enough to offer comfort and solidarity in the face of hatred. The Clarington approach can serve as a blueprint for strengthening communities across Canada against Islamophobia, antisemitism, and hate in general.

Source: We need solidarity in the face of Islamophobia

Le Devoir Éditorial | Vivre ensemble, c’est tout

Good editorial:

…C’est devenu un objet d’étude en soi, avec la montée en force des médiations interculturelles, ici et ailleurs. La grande université californienne de Berkeley s’est même dotée d’un indice d’inclusivité qui lui permet de mesurer nos progrès, d’identifier les bonnes pratiques comme les mauvaises, celles qui crispent les sociétés et les divisent. Le Canada s’y classe au 15e rang, en sandwich entre l’Allemagne et le Danemark. Tout au sommet, on trouve la Nouvelle-Zélande, le Portugal et les Pays-Bas.

Ses chercheurs observent la constante suivante : l’agitation, les remous et les contre-courants feront toujours partie de la vie en collectivité. Comme il ne sert à rien de s’acharner à vouloir dompter une rivière agitée pour en faire un long fleuve tranquille, il leur apparaît plus utile de jeter des ponts sur son dos afin que tous puissent y faire leur chemin et mettre leurs histoires en commun.

En d’autres mots, l’accord parfait n’adviendra pas et n’a même jamais existé. Il faut définir les valeurs communes qui nous lient et bâtir à partir d’elles, et non contre celles qui nous divisent. Les prochaines années s’annoncent politiquement, économiquement, climatiquement et humainement instables. C’est à ce défi immense mais ô combien prometteur que nous voudrions voir nos partis politiques s’atteler en prévision de la prochaine campagne.

Il est vrai qu’aller vers l’autre est exigeant. Cela vient avec des inconforts, des doutes, des incompréhensions, des appréhensions, voire de l’insécurité. Cet « inconfort interculturel », s’il est bien attesté, n’est heureusement pas éternel, nous enseigne la professeure agrégée de psychologie Marina M. Doucerain. Il a même « tendance à s’estomper à mesure que les gens accumulent les interactions interculturelles ».

Comme c’est en forgeant qu’on devient forgeron, la science nous enseigne ainsi que c’est en multipliant les contacts avec les autres qu’on devient… humains. Voilà une riche leçon pour qui veut passer d’un « imaginaire défensif » à un « imaginaire contributif », pour reprendre l’habile formule du professeur émérite Khadiyatoulah Fall parue récemment dans Le Devoir.

C’est aussi l’occasion de revisiter la pensée du regretté sociologue et philosophe Edgar Morin, pour qui la polarisation restera toujours le symptôme d’une « pensée mutilée » qui réduit le monde à des oppositions binaires. Face à cette fragmentation, il oppose la finesse d’une pensée complexe exigeant de relier les contraires plutôt que de les séparer. « Nous avons trop bien appris à séparer, observe-t-il. Il vaut mieux apprendre à relier. Relier, c’est-à-dire pas seulement établir bout à bout une connexion, mais établir une connexion qui se fasse en boucle. »

Travailler à relier, n’est-ce pas là le début d’une promesse électorale porteuse d’avenir ?

Source: Éditorial | Vivre ensemble, c’est tout

… It has become an object of study in itself, with the rise of intercultural mediations, here and elsewhere. The major California University of Berkeley has even acquired an inclusiveness index that allows it to measure our progress, to identify good and bad practices, those that tense and divide societies. Canada ranks 15th, sandwiched between Germany and Denmark. At the very top, we find New Zealand, Portugal and the Netherlands.

Its researchers observe the following constant: agitation, turmoil and counter-currents will always be part of community life. Since it is useless to insist on wanting to tame a rough river to make it a long quiet river, it seems more useful to them to throw bridges on his back so that everyone can make their way there and share their stories.

In other words, the perfect agreement will not happen and has never even existed. We must define the common values that bond us and build from them, and not against those that divide us. The next few years promise to be politically, economically, climatically and humanly unstable. It is to this immense but very promising challenge that we would like to see our political parties tackle in anticipation of the next campaign.

It is true that going to the other is demanding. This comes with discomfort, doubts, misunderstandings, apprehensions, even insecurity. This “intercultural discomfort”, if it is well attested, is fortunately not eternal, teaches us associate professor of psychology Marina M. Doucerain. It even “tends to fade as people accumulate intercultural interactions”.

As it is by forging that we become a forge, science teaches us that it is by multiplying contacts with others that we become… human. This is a rich lesson for those who want to move from a “defensive imaginary” to a “contributory imaginary”, to use the skillful formula of Professor Emeritus Khadiyatoulah Fall recently published in Le Devoir.

It is also an opportunity to revisit the thought of the late sociologist and philosopher Edgar Morin, for whom polarization will always remain the symptom of a “mutilated thought” that reduces the world to binary oppositions. Faced with this fragmentation, he opposes the finesse of a complex thought demanding to connect the opposites rather than to separate them. “We have learned too well to separate,” he observes. It is better to learn to connect. Link, i.e. not only establish an end-to-end connection, but establish a connection that is made in a loop. ”

Working to connect, isn’t this the beginning of an electoral promise with a future?

Globe editorial: Thoughts and prayers, Canadian style

Valid critique. Time to stop using “thoughts and prayers” language with any such incident, no matter the issue or group:

…So how to turn back this growing tide of hatred? As we have argued before, that effort has to begin with understanding, and speaking, the truth: Antizionism is fuelling the rise in antisemitism. The rejection of Israel, of its very right to exist, has become the growth medium for the contagion of antisemitism. The test of courage for any political leader is whether they are willing to speak this truth. Prime Minister Mark Carney failed that test in June, even as he tried to provide comfort to the Jewish-Canadian community.

Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow has failed even more spectacularly. In fairness, Ms. Chow has spoken out against anti-Israel protests being staged in the heart of the Jewish-Canadian neighbourhood near Bathurst and Sheppard in north Toronto. And, of course, she has offered her thoughts and prayers, Canadian style, in condemnation of incidents such as the attack on Kiva’s.

But Ms. Chow has, through her actions, shown where her sympathies lie. The mayor refused to attend a flag-raising ceremony for Israel’s national day in May, 2024, saying such an event was “divisive.” She also declined to take part in the annual Walk for Israel in June of this year.

Yet, the mayor had no problem with blurting out “Free Palestine” – the rallying slogan of those antizionist rallies – during the Pride Parade in late June. 

The mayor’s office did not respond when asked last week why the flag-raising event was divisive, but reciting the Free Palestine slogan is not a problem. Ms. Chow owes Torontonians, particularly Jewish Torontonians, an explanation.

Does she, for instance, support the right of Israel to exist? Or is she in line with the hate-infused catechism (recited most weeks near Bathurst and Sheppard) that deems Israel a pariah state?

Until she does clarify, her thoughts and prayers will ring hollow.

Source: Thoughts and prayers, Canadian style

Under Hegseth, Women’s Share of Top Military Promotions Plunged This Year

Not surprising and not justified:

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s blocking of promotions for high-ranking women in the military has contributed to the lowest percentage of such nominations for women in at least 25 years, according to a New York Times analysis.

Eight of 201 candidates for high-ranking posts this year have been women, or 4 percent — less than half the average percentage of the past 10 years.

More women could still be promoted this year. And the number of women nominated for promotion in any year is relatively small, so the percentages can fluctuate based on a few individual officers. In 2012, for example, the percentage of high-ranking nominations going to women also fell below 5 percent.

But the proportion of female nominees would be higher in 2026 if not for Mr. Hegseth’s actions. He has blocked at least 40 high-ranking promotions from reaching the Senate in recent months — some for white men, but about half for women and people of color, The Times has reported….

Source: Under Hegseth, Women’s Share of Top Military Promotions Plunged This Year

ICYMI – Geoff Russ: Multiculturalism is a terrible reason to drop hockey for soccer

Culture wars come to sport?

…Despite the disappointing finish at the 2026 Winter Olympics, Canada is still the world’s premier hockey nation, but we can only remain so if the country remains committed to it being our national winter sport.

The glorious past of hockey, and the ice it is played upon in winter lets Canadians recognize each other and their forebears in a way that soccer could never. So goes that, and so goes a pastime that connects today’s youth players to those at Montreal’s Victoria Skating Rink in 1877. If any sport has earned the lion’s share of a $1 billion investment, it is not soccer.

Revitalizing Canada’s winter pastime, which creates common ground and connection between a logging town on Vancouver Island to the ramparts of Quebec City, should be a national priority, as is maintaining our international supremacy in the sport, so shaken at the present time.

This is Canada, and we Canadians play hockey. There are many who evidently prefer that we didn’t. When they rear their ugly heads, what they deserve is a stiff, verbal check into the boards, every single time.

Source: Geoff Russ: Multiculturalism is a terrible reason to drop hockey for soccer

ICYMI – Bouie: Why Do We Tolerate Elon Musk’s Racist Commentary?

Indeed:

…As Quinn Slobodian and Ben Tarnoff show in their book “Muskism: A Guide for the Perplexed,” an important part of Musk’s vision is to see the world as a compound, where “the horizons of humankind” are shrunk “into the defense of white fertility.” This in turn is tied to a larger effort to liberate humanity from the “woke mind virus” that Musk sees as a self-destructive tendency responsible for the “empathy” that has led Western nations to open their societies to others.

This too is little more than a restatement of themes and ideas found in “The Turner Diaries,” where the titular character believes that whites have been corrupted by a “Jewish-liberal-democratic-egalitarian plague.” Slobodian and Tarnoff observe that these views are also downstream of Musk’s upbringing in South Africa, where apartheid leaders fretted over birthrates and the future of white society.

Musk’s virulent racism and vicious, disturbing views are no secret. He does not hide them. They sit in plain view, easily accessible on the social media website he owns, where he does everything he can to promote similarly far-right and white supremacist ideas.

If there is a question to ask, then, it is this: Why does Musk get a pass? Why do politicians, journalists and commentators treat his far-right racist radicalism as a sideshow rather than the core of his political, ideological and industrial project, seen in everything from his deep support for Donald Trump in the United States and Restore Britain in Britain to his decision to construct a massive pollution-generating data center in predominantly Black Memphis?

Musk spends a large part of his free time fomenting violence and spreading the same hateful ideology that motivated some of the deadliest shootings and attacks ever to happen on American soil. It is that fact, and not the cars he builds or the rockets he launches, that ought to define his place in public life.

Source: Why Do We Tolerate Elon Musk’s Racist Commentary?

A tight-knit Toronto hospital unit cared for the dying. Then, a war thousands of miles away tore them apart

No winners in this:

…Unsubstantiated claims, then an unsettling development

The investigation into the complaints by Algu and the two doctors who attended the January meeting found they were unsubstantiated. There was no evidence that the meeting was an effort to silence voices advocating for Palestinians, nor was there evidence that they were working in a poisoned environment, the investigation report said.

It also concluded that Algu’s two colleagues were not rehired at a time when there was a funding crunch as well as overstaffing. Shearer previously noted it was a norm at the centre to overstaff.

She also said their bias claims were tainted by discussions they had among themselves after they filed their complaints. Algu’s lawyer told the investigator during the probe that the complainants’ views “should not be discounted simply because they talked about a very difficult workplace situation with one another.”

A day later, the result of the environment assessment came in.

It found Sinai Health leadership did not effectively manage the challenges relating to the expression of views around Israel-Palestine because the leaders had adopted a “softer, compassionate approach” and did not clearly and decisively communicate expectations and boundaries during a complex geopolitical situation, Sinai Health told palliative care staff in a memo.

The investigator also said the point of the assessment was not to make factual findings about any particular individual. But the report went on to focus on Algu, whom the investigator concluded appeared to have a “disproportionately negative impact” on the workplace culture.

Algu said she felt baffled: Was her advocacy an issue for the hospital or was it not?

…The assessment cited “many” unnamed colleagues, defined as at least eight people, as saying Algu’s social media advocacy was “irresponsible” and “offensive,” and not respectful of patient care or safety.

There was a perception that Algu used work time for personal advocacy and solicited colleagues for political causes, those interviewees said.

But no specifics were offered. The assessment did not cite any specific tweet or act of advocacy as an example of wrongdoing, Algu said, it relied on perceptions and feelings. Her complaint, on the other hand, offered specific emails to support her allegations of a poisoned work environment. As for advocating during work, she said she used to sometimes tweet during breaks like other physicians, but she stopped even those sometime in early 2024.

“I did go to a small number of protests on work days but would take vacation days for that.” she said. She also did not identify herself as a Sinai employee in any of her public advocacy, Algu said.

She said did not even know her conduct was being investigated as part of the workplace environment assessment until the final report was given to her.

Labour and Employment lawyer Jackie Esmonde, who represented Algu, declined to comment on the Sinai situation, but said that, in general, it was “extremely unusual and procedurally unfair for a workplace investigation to make negative findings against an employee without giving the opportunity to both know about the allegations and respond.”

The documents the Star reviewed contained no examples in support of the findings. Sinai Health did not offer any details when asked about the specific concerns related to Algu.

“We don’t share details or comment about our employees, physicians, scientists, learners or volunteers,” the Sinai spokesperson said. “Our highest priority is to ensure accessible and safe care for all.”

Investigator Gillian Shearer declined to comment, citing lawyer-client confidentiality. She said, “I conducted the investigation fairly and considered all the available relevant evidence.” Osler, Hoskin and Harcourt declined to comment.

Before she was given details of the investigations, Algu was told Sinai had dismissed her complaint about Hershl Berman’s tweet.

Posts on X did not count as workplace conduct in this case, Osler concluded, because the communications were unrelated to Sinai Health and did not become workplace conduct simply because Algu and Berman were both colleagues.

Berman had posted “a picture of my face, my social profile, my tweet, and called me a racist,” Algu said, noting that Sinai had considered his social media as being outside of the workplace. “Yet, somehow my social media was considered workplace,” she said. She also said that she never referenced patients in her social media, while Berman did, yet she was the one called out by the workplace investigator for not considering patient safety.

Concerns over Berman’s social media resurfaced this year during an election to choose the next president of the Ontario Medical Association (OMA). Berman was one of five candidates to lead the prominent advocacy group for a one-year term.

“What is at issue here is not disagreement; it is conduct,” more than 150 doctors told the OMA in a letter in February. Algu, who was by then not a part of Sinai, also signed it. “Publicly branding colleagues as antisemitic, hateful, or aligned with Hamas/extremist groups without due process or evidence crosses from discourse into harassment, intimidation, and reputational attack,” the letter said.

The OMA hired an external evaluator to review the candidates’ social media. While the evaluator found no grounds to exclude Berman from the race, his posts — from late 2024 through December 2025 — were flagged as having used “language frequently characterized by a confrontational and combative tone.” No other candidates’ social media was flagged.

After another candidate soundly won the race, Berman told the National Post his religion was a factor in the treatment he received.

Candidates for OMA presidents and board directors have been subject to social media checks since 2021, and the screening is standard during an election, the OMA told the Star. The vetting “is not focused on personal opinions or positions but on interactions that could impact eligibility to hold office,” a spokesperson said….

Source: A tight-knit Toronto hospital unit cared for the dying. Then, a war thousands of miles away tore them apart