Port du hijab: le SPVM «ouvert» à l’idée pour ses policières
2016/08/27 Leave a comment
Working site on citizenship and multiculturalism issues.
2016/08/27 Leave a comment
Looks like the Kanishka Project, one of the previous government’s rare and good “committing sociology” initiatives, will continue albeit in different form:
As the Liberals prepare to launch their signature anti-terrorism initiative, they have closed the door on a previous one by the Conservative government.
On Thursday, Liberal Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale released a report on the terrorist threat to Canada that said the Islamic State is the main concern. The report also said that a five-year initiative by the Tories that had delivered $10-million, mostly to academics researching terrorism in hopes of finding ways to understand and fight it, had ceased operations in March.
The initiative, known as the Kanishka Project, began in 2011, and the Conservatives promised last year to renew it if they were re-elected. The Liberals pledged a more hands-on approach. Last week, Mr. Goodale said that by the end of the summer, he will appoint an official to advise the government on de-radicalization.
The office of the adviser is expected to cost $7-million to $10-million a year, and the government says it is intended to get civil servants, academics, religious and ethnic communities to work together to find ways to deal with extremists.
The Liberals are calling this a wholly new approach for Canada, but experts say this office may absorb the function of the Kanishka Project.
“In a sense, the new office will be the successor of Kanishka. … There is more continuity than discontinuity,” said Lorne Dawson, a University of Waterloo professor who studies terrorism. The one big difference, he said, is “that there is now a stress on actually doing something in terms of [countering violent extremism].”
In 2012, Dr. Dawson co-founded the Canadian Network for Research on Terrorism, Security and Society, which got hundreds of thousands of dollars a year from Kanishka. Saying the old program blazed a trail for serious study of terrorism, he anticipates the new government office will also finance such work.
The terrorism report said Kanishka was not renewed when its five-year funding ran out in the spring. “Public Safety and its partners continue to publish results and build on the program’s research,” it said, adding that the new counterradicalization office will “foster research on radicalization to violence” among other functions.
Source: Liberals replacing Harper Tories’ anti-terror project with new program – The Globe and Mail
2016/08/26 Leave a comment
Interesting developments and analysis:
UKIP under Farage, by comparison, concentrated more generally on the impact of immigration. So could we start to see more of a specific focus on Islam in the party’s rhetoric?
“It’s quite plausible,” says Rob Ford, a professor of politics at Manchester University and co-author of Revolt on the Right , a book on UKIP. “In some ways, if you just look at some of the raw attitudes, it looks like there’s a very big potential market for it. British views of Muslims are often quite negative, there are a lot of anxieties particularly around cultural practises, cultural integration and so on.”
The party is also in need of a new USP (unique selling proposition) after Britain voted for Brexit, and its old rhetoric on immigration was largely focused on the issue of unskilled immigration from the European Union. Assuming new restrictions are placed on freedom of movement once Britain leaves the bloc, that won’t cut it any more.
But, Ford says, there are caveats to this. First, under the U.K.’s first-past-the-post electoral system, winning even the 20 to 25 percent of the vote that might be highly concerned about Muslim integration is not a recipe for success, unlike in some European countries with more proportional systems.
But also Britain has, Ford says, “been ethnically, racially diverse for longer than many countries and we’ve been actively talking about it for a lot longer than many countries.
“Germany denied that it was even a country of immigration until the late 90s and in France they still won’t gather statistics by race… We’ve had 50 years of discussion and work in terms of setting up and policing certain boundaries of political rhetoric,” Ford says.
An ongoing row in France, and Duffy’s response to it, illustrates his point. Fifteen towns on the French coast have moved to ban the “burkini,” full-cover swimwear worn by some Muslim women. When asked about the bans, Manuel Valls, the country’s prime minister and a politician on the mainstream center-left, responded without hesitation that the burkini was “not compatible with the values of France.”
Duffy [UKIP leadership candidate], by contrast, doesn’t even back the ban, which she calls a step too far. “If a motorcyclist sat on the beach and he wanted his helmet on, that’s up to him. He might sweat a bit. But I’m not going to prescribe what people should or shouldn’t be wearing,” she says.
Duffy says that her policy on Islam is aimed at boosting equality for Muslim women as much as anything else. “I’ve worked with a lot of British Muslim females and they haven’t had the same opportunities that I’ve had or my daughters will have,” she says. Of course, plenty of politicians with far tougher anti-Islam platforms make the same argument.
Still, however cautiously, the issue of British Islam has been forced higher up UKIP’s agenda, and it’s hard to imagine it won’t stay there in some form. UKIP is, Duffy tells Newsweek, “unique as a party in talking about challenging issues and opening the debate. And I think if we don’t start talking about the potential of what radical Islam can do to our country moving forward then we are missing a trick.”
2016/08/26 Leave a comment
More commentary on beachwear by Shree Paradkar:
As reported here in July, a hijab-wearing Scarborough mother was told to leave the pool if she didn’t change her daughter’s long shorts and T-shirt, although they were swimwear. (It was deemed okay for her son to wear that.)
In the United States in June, the American Red Cross was forced to apologize after a social media post elicited outrage over a safety poster that labelled white kids “cool” for obeying the rules and kids of colour “uncool” for disobeying them.
In France, the city of Cannes and 15 towns chose to uphold the nation’s traditions of liberté and egalité by imposing more rules around women’s clothing. On Aug. 12, it banned the burkini — full body-covering swimsuits — on its beaches. The ban does not apply to full-body covering scuba diving suits. Perhaps there was a safety angle to this?
There isn’t. The city’s decidedly non-Muslim mayor had decided burkinis were “the uniform of extremist Islamism, not of the Muslim religion.”
Pools and beaches have also become battlegrounds over modesty — for women.
Beach volleyball matches in Rio provided the perfect showcase to visualize that spectrum of modesty as the uniforms ranged from itsy bikinis and tankinis to full sleeves and full pants (including a hijab option).
Why do so many female competitors wear so little and men compete in tanks and shorts? USA Today asked its nation’s beach volleyball team this question. The communication’s manager said the team’s female athletes choose to wear bikinis, “because there are less places for sand to hide.”
That explanation appears disingenuous.
There is an authentic — and valid — reason to wear so little: vanity. Who wouldn’t want to show off those incredibly sculpted bodies? I know who; those who value modesty as a virtue.
You may or may not be comfortable with that moral code, but if you agree women have a choice to wear little then you agree they have a choice to cover up.
Women’s sports get sexualized to varying degrees and in the highly sexualized beach culture, one set of athletes gets leered at and the other gets jeered at. On that front, neither side wins. Yet, one side is perceived as the “free” and the other as the “oppressed.”
….Going to the seaside can be a time of calm reflection and recreation, so why does stripping down to get into water end up stripping down the notion of inclusiveness?Through the 20th century, going to a pool to swim meant you could afford to pay for it, going to a beach meant you could afford the time for leisure. Both symbolized privilege and luxury, available to a select few.
Gradually opening pools and beaches to all people diluted that privilege. Modern laws don’t allow for direct exclusion, but being offended by what others wear, or how they behave, simply allows the threatened elite to disguise their bigotry.
Source: From France to Sydney, places to swim still a beachhead for bigotry | Toronto Star
2016/08/26 Leave a comment
English media finally caught up to the French media on this story (see earlier Le hijab, nouvelle pièce d’équipement des agentes de la GRC)
The Mounties have adopted a new uniform policy to allow female Muslim officers to wear the hijab.
Scott Bardsley, spokesman for Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, confirmed that RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson recently approved an addition to the uniform policy to allow women officers to wear the head scarf “if they so choose.”
“The Royal Canadian Mounted Police is a progressive and inclusive police service that values and respects persons of all cultural and religious backgrounds,” Bardsley said in an email.
Male members of the Sikh faith have been able to wear the turban as part of the RCMP uniform since the early 1990s, he noted.
That right was won by Baltej Singh Dhillon, a young practising Sikh who wanted to become a Mountie but also wanted to wear a turban on the job.
The federal government’s decision in 1990 to end the ban and allow him provoked emotional debate and widespread protests across Canada.
Bardsley said the new policy is intended to better reflect diversity in Canadian communities and to encourage more Muslim women to consider the RCMP as a career option.
Special RCMP hijab developed
RCMP Staff Sgt. Julie Gagnon said current policy, which came into effect in January 2016, requires an “exemption” to wear the hijab from the commissioner, the only senior officer permitted to approve faith-based accommodations.
Gagnon said the RCMP developed a hijab for applicants or serving female members of the Islamic faith, reflecting “the diversity of the RCMP’s workforce.” It underwent rigorous testing to ensure the design meets “the highest standards of officer safety.”
She said the RCMP currently has no members requesting to wear the hijab on duty.
The only other religious or cultural item allowed is the turban for male officers.
Source: RCMP allows Muslim women Mounties to wear hijab – Politics – CBC News
2016/08/25 Leave a comment
Interesting series of experiments, that take the Implicit Association Test increased mindfulness to a new level:
There are at least two ways to walk from Harlem to Soho: as a white person, and as a black person. With research on “virtual body swapping,” in which participants use a virtual reality headset to enter a body of different race, Americans can wear both pairs of shoes.
“In Harlem, they’ll see the sheer volume of police standing on a corner on just your average Saturday afternoon,” says Courtney Cogburn, an assistant professor of social work at Columbia University. Although white participants might have noticed the police anyway, their experiences as black avatars will make them better understand “the racism that’s in the air,” she says. “It’s ambient.”
Beginning in September, and partnering with Stanford University in a $250,000 research project, Cogburn will equip white people with a virtual reality headset and motion tracking suit. Participants, including supporters of Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, will operate a black avatar as they walk through a virtual New York City, hopefully better understanding systemic racism. Given the recent shootings in Louisiana and Minnesota, in which two white police officers each killed black citizens, Cogburn says this intervention “could certainly be applied to police.” Despite the retaliation in Dallas, where black protestors killed five white officers, the research will not introduce black people into virtual white bodies.
Cogburn’s team will be the first to take virtual body-swappers into a virtual real-world setting, she says. Since 2009, Stadford’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab has put body-swappers in a neutral setting, where they operate avatars of different races and simply look around a room. The goal has been to improve empathy. After just this five-minute experience, participants showed less white preference on an implicit association test, which measures how they associate words such as “love” and “evil” with race.
Body-swapping has proven more effective than simply imagining oneself as another race. In fact, when Stanford researchers asked students to imagine a day in the life of a black person, including attending a job interview, these participants afterward showed more white preference because they had imagined, or “activated,” stereotypes. In similar research related to age, Stanford has gotten participants to virtually enter older versions of themselves, reducing ageism and increasing motivation for financial planning.Europeans have also used body-swapping to boost empathy between races. Mel Slater, a computer science professor specializing in virtual environments at the University of London, explains that white participants in a neutral setting quickly identify with their virtual black avatars. “People don’t go, ‘Wow, I’ve got a black body!’” he says. “They just take it. It just is … The most interesting thing is that nothing interesting happens.”
Virtual body-swapping works by tricking the participant’s brain into viewing the avatar as itself. “The brain doesn’t like uncertainty or confusion,” says Slater. “It tries to come up with answers. The simplest thing it can come up with is that it’s my body.” Slater’s team found that the empathy isn’t just temporary. One week after the body swap, participants maintained lower white preference scores, and Slater expects the effect might last even longer.
The ethics of changing people’s mindsets are unclear. Slayter says virtual body-swapping could be incorporated into games that are designed for general employee or police training. Ideally, white participants would have black avatars, unaware of the intent to increase empathy. “It’s better if the purpose isn’t explicit,” says Slater. However, “if they’re surreptitiously altering people’s attitudes, people would find ethical problems with that.”
Virtual reality holds other limitations. It can make people dizzy, and Slater doesn’t recommend it for children under age 13, as neurologists don’t yet understand how it might affect developing brains. Some say citizens could better develop empathy by spending time with real people of other races, rather than playing around with avatars. Further, in video games, the assignment of racialized avatars has proven to worsen prejudice. When the developers of a game called Rust randomly assigned white players to have black avatars, gamers posted racist rants on blogs, with one declaring, “if I’m black I’m asking for a refund.”
Cogburn says virtual body-swapping can supplement efforts to build real-world bridges, as many Americans don’t naturally spend time with people of other races. She says the real-world setting won’t worsen prejudice because the purpose of her project is to help people recognize racism, not necessarily feel it. “I’m still questioning whether empathy is the goal or if it really is possible,” she says. “What might be more important is to try to understand [racism].” Participants will have nothing at stake, not even points in a video game, as they walk through New York City—its neighbourhoods, its prejudices and its police officers. “It’s a vicarious observation of these things,” says Cogburn. “It’s not actually happening to you, and that’s the point.”
2016/08/25 Leave a comment
Appropriately, this trial and verdict are getting considerable attention:
The monsters of al Qaeda and the so-called Islamic State probably never will be held to account the way the Nazis were at the Nuremberg Tribunals after World War II. The snarled red tape and convoluted politics of today’s international organizations will frustrate such grand designs for justice, even after the self-proclaimed “caliphate” is reduced to dust on the ground and unread footnotes in history.
But the trial going on at the International Criminal Court in The Hague this week gives us a hint of what can be done, and, indeed, what must be done.
The defendant, Ahmad al Faki al Mahdi, served the branch of al Qaeda in North Africa that very nearly took over all of the nation of Mali in 2012, until French troops intervened. The terrorists’ greatest prize was the ancient city of Timbuktu, al Mahdi’s hometown, and he did everything he could to show he supported his fanatical mentors’ gruesome diktats.
But al Mahdi is not on trial for the amputations, beheadings, torture, and rapes associated with the “holy war” waged by al Qaeda, ISIS, and their offshoots.
Al Mahdi is on trial for massacring history.
We have seen a lot of savage iconoclasm over the last 15 years. In 2001, the Taliban brought down the towering twin statues of Buddha in Bamayan, Afghanistan—a prelude to the operation by their allies in al Qaeda, who brought down the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York only a few months later.
More recently we’ve seen the devastation wrought by ISIS on the ancient monuments of Nimrud in Iraq, and those of Palmyra in Syria: winged bulls turned to gravel with jack-hammers, the Temple of Baal erased from the map with high explosives.
These would-be holy warriors claim to have a direct line to God, a unique and exclusive understanding of His Truth. They are determined to destroy anyone and anything that does not fit their view, and they do all this in the name of Islam.
So it is worth noting that al Mahdi is on trial, specifically, for leveling the mausoleums of Muslim saints in a city that was one of the cradles of Islamic civilization, and that the prosecutor who leveled the charges against al Mahdi in court on Monday, Fatouh Bensouda, is a Gambian woman from a large Muslim family. She knows where this guy is coming from, which may account in part for the power and passion of her opening statement.This trial, said Bensouda, is about answering “the destructive rages that mark our times, in which humanity’s common heritage is subject to repeated and planned ravages.”
The mausoleums al Mahdi destroyed were “the embodiment of Malian history, captured in tangible form, from an era long gone yet still very much vivid in the memory and pride of the people who so dearly cherished them.”
“Your honors,” Bensouda told the judges, “culture is who we are.”
Bensouda has been criticized for failing to make the ICC a new Nuremberg. But the criteria she has to work with are suffocating and contradictory.
The court has no jurisdiction over territories where the government is not a party to the Rome Statute that established the court in 1998. So the court has no territorial jurisdiction over the ISIS heartland that straddles Iraq and Syria, neither of which signed on.
2016/08/24 Leave a comment
Good long read on the lessons of the Holocaust as told by Jason Staley whose parents escaped. Nicely nuanced:
My parents explained to me that these pasts meant that they were not Holocaust survivors. My mother told me that in her labor camp, they were hungry, they were put to work, but no one was shooting or gassing them. When they went back to Poland, it was hard, and Jews were hated. But this, she explained, was the fate of Jews. Anti-Semitism was a permanent feature of the world, not special to the Holocaust.
My father’s reaction to describing him as a Holocaust survivor was more severe. He angrily questioned my motivations. Was I seeking a special status as a victim? He urged me to reflect about how offensive this is to those who have to actually live under oppression. He argued powerfully against the stance of the victim. It was morally dangerous, he said, using the actions of Israelis and Palestinians toward one another as an example. He was scornful when he saw signs that I was taking the Holocaust to mean that Jews were special. “If the Germans had chosen someone else,” he often said, “we would have been the very best Nazis.”
Most frequently and passionately, he would reprimand me for taking the Holocaust to be about me, or about my family. The Holocaust was about humanity. It was about what we are capable of doing to one another. It could happen again, it could happen here. The Holocaust was about everyone. Helping to prevent such events from occurring required agency and good moral sense, and good moral sense was not consistent with preferring one’s own people.
My mother’s most frequent advice was about knowing when to get out of a dangerous situation. The moment where one must accept that a situation is genuinely dangerous is usually well past the time when one can exit it. Her advice would come out especially during any patriotic moment. She was afraid I would develop an attachment to a country and would not flee early enough.
My mother and father both believed that normal people could do unimaginably terrible things. As a court stenographer in criminal court, my mother witnessed the racial injustice of the American legal system up close. I remember her sometime in the late 1980s saying to me with a rather flat affect, “They are targeting black people in this country.” That didn’t mean she was about to march out on the street in protest of injustice. That would be a completely incorrect interpretation of my mother. My mother believes that injustice is the normal, unchangeable state of things. My mother believes trust is foolishness. She thinks it is not only naïve to live as if justice were an attainable ideal; it is self-destructive. My mother believes they will kill you if they can.
My father was always critical of Israel’s policies toward Palestinians, convinced that the establishment of the state of Israel was implicated in the horrors of colonialism. He was equally abhorrent of Palestinian violence toward Israeli citizens. I grew up hearing other American Jews speak of Palestinians in pre-genocidal ways; that Palestinians have always wanted to kill the Jews, and must therefore be kept locked away and controlled. Regular exposure to such talk has made me permanently afraid for the safety of the Palestinian people. Comparisons between Israeli treatment of Palestinians and Nazi treatment of Jews are absurd. But my background has made me sensitive to the grimmest of even remote future possibilities. I have exactly the same reactions when I hear such rhetoric directed against Israeli citizens.
I am a philosopher. My calling, at its very basic level, obligates me to question the beliefs with which I was raised. But on this topic — how to live — I was given two answers. Which view do evidence and reason command?
I accept the legacy of my father. But it is impossible for me to shut out my mother’s concerns. Maybe the reality is that all groups are at war for power, and that to adopt an ethic of common humanity is a grave disadvantage. Maybe we should do what we can, but prioritize the safety of our families.
History speaks strongly on my mother’s side. So does my anecdotal evidence. I am white Jewish-American; my sons and wife are black Americans. I cannot retreat from my commitment to these groups. Being interested in the equal dignity of other groups is an additional burden.
It takes work to feel the suffering of Palestinians when I hear of the anger they bear toward my fellow Jews, even though I recognize its clearly justifiable source. It takes much more work to feel the suffering of poor white Americans when I hear it coupled with a thoroughly unjustifiable racism directed against my children. Is it work that I should be doing? Or should I be doing the work of attending primarily to the flourishing of mychildren?
A world in which this ideal is realized is no doubt far-off. The temptation to surrender it is strong. But history has provided us with too many events that show how important it is not to be complicit in making it unattainable.
Source: My Parents’ Mixed Messages on the Holocaust – The New York Times