Le Devoir Éditorial | Une fierté nationale mal placée

More of the proposed Quebec National Museum of History:

On ne peut pas reprocher à François Legault de manquer de persistance en culture. En dépit des quelques revers qu’il a essuyés en ces matières fortes en symbole, son engagement exalte un attachement inusable. Certains diront un attachement téflon tant il n’en fait qu’à sa tête. On en a eu une nouvelle preuve avec l’annonce en grande pompe de la création d’un nouveau musée national — une rareté qui aurait normalement dû lui valoir des hourras.

L’idée de se doter d’un Musée national de l’histoire du Québec n’est pas mauvaise, au contraire. La nation québécoise — irréductible mais fragile fleur francophone posée au creux d’un massif de vivaces anglophones envahissantes — vaut bien cet hommage que nombre de sociétés se sont offert avant nous. Notre fierté nationale pourrait même gagner gros à étendre ses bourgeons sur un tuteur aussi structurant.

Se doter d’un musée national est en effet une excellente façon d’honorer un legs compliqué, à la fois sombre et lumineux, qu’on a fâcheusement tendance à négliger au Québec. Pour cela, le regard que l’on pose sur notre histoire commune doit être capable d’accueil comme d’autocritique, en plus d’être scientifiquement irréprochable, a mis en garde un contingent de spécialistes déconcertés par ce lapin sorti sans consultation du chapeau de M. Legault.

C’est d’abord là que le bât blesse. Le gouvernement a eu beau s’adjoindre les conseils de l’historien Éric Bédard, cela ne l’a pas empêché de multiplier les bourdes en s’improvisant expert dirigiste là où on l’attendait plutôt en pollinisateur inspirant. Invité à préciser sa vision, le premier ministre a commencé par montrer l’étendue de ses oeillères. Notre histoire nationale, a-t-il expliqué, a commencé, rêvé et prospéré par et pour les Canadiens français. Et les autres ? Tous relégués au rôle ingrat de figurants.

Sa façon spécialement cavalière de minimiser l’apport des nations autochtones à la société québécoise est indigne d’une nation qui prétend parler d’égal à égal avec ces peuples. Quiconque replonge dans l’épopée de Champlain — point zéro du récit national caquiste, on le rappelle — sait pourtant qu’il ne pourra le faire sans s’enfarger dans tout ce que ces nations ont pu apporter aux premiers colons, puis plus largement à la société québécoise au fil du temps. Et pas qu’en adversité, mais aussi bien en émulation qu’en imagination.

Son silence radio sur l’apport des autres communautés — on pense aux vagues migratoires, mais aussi aux Anglos — a fait le reste, nourrissant une déferlante de malaises autant chez les spécialistes que chez nombre de Québécois qui ne se sont pas reconnus dans sa vision rétrécie de la nation. Il est vrai que, jusqu’ici, le discours politique n’a pas été à la hauteur des promesses qui viennent avec l’érection d’un musée national moderne, décomplexé et rassembleur.

Bien sûr, l’histoire n’est jamais neutre. Mais un musée digne de ce nom, même national, ne saurait se résumer à une vitrine politique, encore moins à la vitrine d’une seule vision politique. Les Québécois n’ont pas besoin d’un musée de pureté idéologique. Ce qui n’empêche pas le fait qu’il y a du bon dans le projet du gouvernement Legault. Les Espaces bleus n’avaient pas d’avenir : trop chers et sans vision commune. Le Musée national de l’histoire du Québec, érigé à même leurs cendres malheureuses, ne part pas grevé de la sorte.

D’abord, il plantera ses racines dans un écrin magnifique, le pavillon Camille-Roy du Séminaire de Québec, rénové au coût de 92 millions. Ensuite, il arrive sur un terrain encore fertile, celui des musées d’État. S’il est bien fait, son ajout au noyau formé du Musée d’art contemporain de Montréal, du Musée national des beaux-arts du Québec et du Musée de la civilisation (MCQ) permettra de repenser ce qui lie nos musées nationaux entre eux afin d’en faire un réseau exemplaire dont la solidité, si elle s’avère, percolera jusqu’aux musées régionaux.

Le rêve esquissé par François Legault se frottera bientôt à un réel qu’il a, en vérité, mieux balisé que son annonce mal ficelée. Le MCQ, qui aura la tâche de concevoir les contenus et d’aménager les espaces d’exposition de ce nouveau musée national, a en effet les ressources et le savoir nécessaires pour y arriver. Il pourra au surplus compter sur les lumières d’un comité scientifique, de même que sur celle d’un duo d’éclaireurs formé d’Éric Bédard et de Jenny Thibault, qui veilleront sur les destinées historiques et numériques du nouveau musée.

Espérons seulement que le gouvernement Legault aura l’humilité de s’appuyer sur leur vision commune pour la suite du projet. Car le bon récit national, celui qui a le pouvoir d’élever et de rassembler un peuple derrière lui, peut, oui, devenir un formidable legs, pour peu qu’il ne se conjugue pas qu’au « je ». Conjugué aussi au « nous », son engagement en faveur de notre fierté nationale pourrait même constituer un vigoureux — et redoutable ! — cultivar. S’il est planté dans un sol adéquat, bien sûr.

Source: Éditorial | Une fierté nationale mal placée

Immigration minister says protesting government the right thing to do, targeting individuals isn’t

As pro-Palestinian protestors outside accused him of having blood on his hands, Immigration Minister Marc Miller told attendees of the Canadian Bar Association’s immigration conference in Montreal over the weekend that they had every right to be there.

“The people outside have a right to protest,” he said, noting many come from countries that deny that right.

“That’s not the country that Canada is. Protesting me and the government is the right thing to do.”

He noted that suppressing the right to protest leads to frustration and anger taken out in other ways.

That said, there’s a wrong way to go about it, whether it’s encouraging terrorism or targeting Jewish institutions and Jews.

Calling the situation in Gaza “disastrous” and “a humanitarian catastrophe,” the minister said there are charged emotions on both sides of the conflict. But people are feeling targeted and threatened.

“The right to protest comes with a responsibility, and I think it needs to be properly exercised. Don’t do it by targeting individuals and making them feel insecure,” he told those gathered.

“If people confuse the legitimate right to criticize the Netanyahu government with picking on Jews in this country, I don’t want your vote.”

In January, three months into the conflict, the federal government launched a reunification program offering temporary refuge to family members of Canadian citizens and permanent residents — parents, siblings, grandparents, and grandkids — who are in Gaza.

Miller said it was a “rapidly put together and probably singular in the world attempt” to get people’s families out.

It came with a lot of uncertainty, coupled with the additional challenge of an ongoing war and no pre-determined commitment from Israel or Egypt, which control the exit, mainly through Rafah, that it would succeed.

“I wanted to make sure when we announced this program that we didn’t simply issue visas, give false hope and strand people. But we absolutely owed it to Palestinian Canadians to try and get their families out in the face of this desperate situation,” the minister said.

“In government, there are things that you manage and things that you control. This was something we managed, and we took a risk.”

By March, just 14 people had made it through the application process and been approved, prompting Miller to call the program “a failure.”

While the government got Canadians and permanent residents out of Gaza, doing the same for their families proved more difficult.

Two months later, with some slow progress made, the minister said it’s still “very limited in its success.” More than 200 visas have been issued, but frustration and challenges persist.

Despite the recent developments in Rafah, Miller said he has some hope that Canada will be able to get more people out on a humanitarian basis. He’s agreed to expand the program and is committed to growing the numbers, drawing on diplomatic efforts.

However, when even the US can’t influence the situation, he said it’s a sign of the ability of Canada, with even less capacity, to influence it.

Miller is undeterred.

“I won’t be happy until those people are out and safe. This is about saving lives, and we owe it to ourselves to try harder. We could have sat on our hands and done nothing. But we chose to take a risk.”

Asked whether other countries are having more success on this front, Miller said everyone is running up against the same challenges. Still, several have tried to reproduce the program Canada has put in place, including the US, which reached out to ask “how we got this in place so quickly.”

The conversation also turned to the current tension in Canada around housing affordability and immigration in the face of an aging population and labour shortage.

Miller said when it comes to immigration, the reality is this country has no choice given its relatively older workforce.

“We can either increase the number of babies in this country or bring in new migrants. Frankly, we could have a baby boom right now, but we would still need to bridge 20 years through immigration.”

There were seven workers for one retiree when he was young. Today, in Canada, it’s closer to three to one.

“So if we want to maintain all the social programs that have defined the fabric of this country, we have no choice but to welcome qualified workers to help with that,” Miller said.

“Immigration isn’t the only solution, but it is part of solving the bigger problem.”

It comes with a conundrum, however.

The cost of shelter across the country has increased in recent years. And while Miller said that immigrants can’t be blamed for the increase in interest rates, the volume of temporary residents is undeniable.

Historically, temporary residents have made up about two per cent of Canada’s population. In 2023, they accounted for 6.2 per cent.

The government has announced plans to curb the country’s population growth by reining that in to five per cent over the next three years.

In November, after several recent increases, the government also said it would keep the number of new permanent residents steady at 500,000 in 2026. In January, it announced plans to scale back the number of international students by putting a two-year cap on new admissions.

After meeting with his provincial counterparts last week and emerging with an “exceedingly rare” unanimous communique, Miller suggested that one way to decrease temporary residents is to make them permanent.

“(That consensus) reflects the fact that we need to get things right,” he said.

“We can do it as a country, but it isn’t by reproducing the rhetoric that we’re seeing to the south of us or in different countries across the world.”

Source: Immigration mihttp://www.nationalmagazine.ca/en-ca/articles/law/hot-topics-in-law/2024/immigration-minister-says-protesting-government-the-right-thing-to-do,-targeting-individuals-isn-tnister says protesting government the right thing to do, targeting individuals isn’t

Algorithms help people see and correct their biases, study shows

Of interest:

Algorithms are a staple of modern life. People rely on algorithmic recommendations to wade through deep catalogs and find the best movies, routes, information, products, people and investments. Because people train algorithms on their decisions – for example, algorithms that make recommendations on e-commerce and social media sites – algorithms learn and codify human biases.

Algorithmic recommendations exhibit bias toward popular choices and information that evokes outrage, such as partisan news. At a societal level, algorithmic biases perpetuate and amplify structural racial bias in the judicial system, gender bias in the people companies hire, and wealth inequality in urban development.

Algorithmic bias can also be used to reduce human bias. Algorithms can reveal hidden structural biases in organizations. In a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, my colleagues and I found that algorithmic bias can help people better recognize and correct biases in themselves.

The bias in the mirror

In nine experiments, Begum CelikitutanRomain Cadario and Ihad research participants rate Uber drivers or Airbnb listings on their driving skill, trustworthiness or the likelihood that they would rent the listing. We gave participants relevant details, like the number of trips they’d driven, a description of the property, or a star rating. We also included an irrelevant biasing piece of information: a photograph revealed the age, gender and attractiveness of drivers, or a name that implied that listing hosts were white or Black.

After participants made their ratings, we showed them one of two ratings summaries: one showing their own ratings, or one showing the ratings of an algorithm that was trained on their ratings. We told participants about the biasing feature that might have influenced these ratings; for example, that Airbnb guests are less likely to rent from hosts with distinctly African American names. We then asked them to judge how much influence the bias had on the ratings in the summaries.The author describes how algorithms can be useful as a mirror of people’s biases.

Whether participants assessed the biasing influence of race, age, gender or attractiveness, they saw more bias in ratings made by algorithms than themselves. This algorithmic mirror effect held whether participants judged the ratings of real algorithms or we showed participants their own ratings and deceptively told them that an algorithm made those ratings. 

Participants saw more bias in the decisions of algorithms than in their own decisions, even when we gave participants a cash bonus if their bias judgments matched the judgments made by a different participant who saw the same decisions. The algorithmic mirror effect held even if participants were in the marginalized category – for example, by identifying as a woman or as Black.

Research participants were as able to see biases in algorithms trained on their own decisions as they were able to see biases in the decisions of other people. Also, participants were more likely to see the influence of racial bias in the decisions of algorithms than in their own decisions, but they were equally likely to see the influence of defensible features, like star ratings, on the decisions of algorithms and on their own decisions.

Bias blind spot

People see more of their biases in algorithms because the algorithms remove people’s bias blind spots. It is easier to see biases in others’ decisions than in your own because you use different evidence to evaluate them.

When examining your decisions for bias, you search for evidence of conscious bias – whether you thought about race, gender, age, status or other unwarranted features when deciding. You overlook and excuse bias in your decisions because you lack access to the associative machinery that drives your intuitive judgments, where bias often plays out. You might think, “I didn’t think of their race or gender when I hired them. I hired them on merit alone.”The bias blind spot explained.

When examining others’ decisions for bias, you lack access to the processes they used to make the decisions. So you examine their decisions for bias, where bias is evident and harder to excuse. You might see, for example, that they only hired white men.

Algorithms remove the bias blind spot because you see algorithms more like you see other people than yourself. The decision-making processes of algorithms are a black box, similar to how other people’s thoughts are inaccessible to you. 

Participants in our study who were most likely to demonstrate the bias blind spot were most likely to see more bias in the decisions of algorithms than in their own decisions. 

People also externalize bias in algorithms. Seeing bias in algorithms is less threatening than seeing bias in yourself, even when algorithms are trained on your choices. People put the blame on algorithms. Algorithms are trained on human decisions, yet people call the reflected bias “algorithmic bias.”

Corrective lens

Our experiments show that people are also more likely to correct their biases when they are reflected in algorithms. In a final experiment, we gave participants a chance to correct the ratings they evaluated. We showed each participant their own ratings, which we attributed either to the participant or to an algorithm trained on their decisions.

Participants were more likely to correct the ratings when they were attributed to an algorithm because they believed the ratings were more biased. As a result, the final corrected ratings were less biased when they were attributed to an algorithm.

Algorithmic biases that have pernicious effects have been well documented. Our findings show that algorithmic bias can be leveraged for good. The first step to correct bias is to recognize its influence and direction. As mirrors revealing our biases, algorithms may improve our decision-making.

Source: Algorithms help people see and correct their biases, study shows

Rioux | La nazification d’Israël

Useful reminder of past and present naïveté:

L’humour peut-il être ignoble et drôle tout à la fois ? Je l’avoue, il est arrivé que des humoristes qui flirtaient avec l’abject me fassent rire. Comme il m’est arrivé de m’ennuyer avec d’autres trop bien intentionnés. C’est tout le mystère de l’humour. Et c’est toute l’ambiguïté de cette blague qui, cette semaine, a coûté son poste au comique de France Inter Guillaume Meurice, qui avait qualifié le premier ministre israélien, Benjamin Nétanyahou, d’une « sorte de nazi mais sans prépuce ».

Peut-on en rire sans pour autant adhérer à cette infamie sans nom qui consiste à nazifier le peuple de la Shoah ? L’idée n’est pas nouvelle. Quelle jouissance de démasquer le loup déguisé en mère-grand et de dire à la victime qu’elle est devenue semblable à son bourreau. Comme le disait le philosophe Michel Eltchaninoff, rien de tel que de peindre les Israéliens en nazis pour « se libérer de la culpabilité d’une des plus grandes tragédies de l’histoire récente : le génocide des Juifs d’Europe » qui, à de très rares exceptions, n’a jamais été reconnu dans le monde arabo-musulman.

Ce n’est évidemment pas parce qu’on appartient à une droite dure, comme Nétanyahou, et qu’on s’est allié par pur opportunisme politique à des partis extrémistes qui sont la honte d’Israël qu’on est un nazi et qu’on prépare un génocide. Génocide dont on attend encore la preuve sonnante et trébuchante. Les deux millions de citoyens d’origine arabe qui vivent librement en Israël étant la preuve éclatante du contraire.

Les slogans entendus ces jours-ci sur les campus américains, français et canadiens n’en finissent pourtant pas de nazifier Israël, quand ils n’expriment pas parfois un antisémitisme flagrant. Ainsi en est-il du mantra « from the river to the sea » (« du fleuve à la mer »), dont l’origine n’évoque rien de moins qu’une Palestine où Israël aurait été rayé de la carte. Faudrait-il, pour soutenir le peuple palestinien — qui mérite toute notre compassion, répétons-le —, aller jusqu’à qualifier le pogrom du 7 octobre d’acte de résistance ? Ou en taire l’horreur absolue, ce qui revient au même ?

On peut certes comprendre le désir d’une génération élevée en banlieue, dans un moralisme souvent étouffant, de se rejouer la grande épopée de l’opposition à la guerre du Vietnam. « En 67 tout était beau, c’était l’année de l’amour », disait la chanson.

Un demi-siècle plus tard, la mythologie a pourtant pris quelques rides. Si la libération du Vietnam méritait le soutien de tous, il n’en allait pas de même des Viêt-Cong et de leurs alliés communistes, dont le véritable visage nous a été révélé quelques années plus tard par les multiples vagues de boat people et le génocide des Khmers rouges au Cambodge. Un vrai, celui-là, puisqu’il fit 1,7 million de morts.

Un demi-siècle plus tard, malgré l’émotion légitime, c’est pourtant la même naïveté béate qui s’exprime à l’égard du Hamas, dont l’objectif avoué n’est pas de créer un État palestinien, mais de rétablir le califat en Palestine. Et pour cela, d’en finir avec l’État d’Israël.

Serait-ce trahir « la cause » ou « faire le jeu de l’ennemi » que de rappeler à ces militants LGBTQ+ et autres « Queers for Palestine » le destin que leur réserverait la charia advenant une victoire du Hamas ? Quant à celles qui hurlent leur colère souvent légitime contre Israël, savent-elles le sort qu’on réserve aux femmes dans ces théocraties ?

C’est Raymond Aron qui disait que « les hommes font l’histoire, mais ils ne savent pas l’histoire qu’ils font ». Cette naïveté criminelle fait étrangement penser à celle de cette gauche française qui, derrière Jean-Paul Sartre et Michel Foucault, n’avait dans les années 1970 que des mots doux à l’égard de l’ayatollah Khomeini, réfugié dans le petit village de Neauphle-le-Château. Parlez-en à cette jeunesse d’extrême gauche très active à l’époque dans les universités iraniennes, et qui sera littéralement exterminée après la révolution de 1979.

Si on a raison de dénoncer le cul-de-sac politique que représente Nétanyahou, l’émotion légitime que suscitent les souffrances des Palestiniens ne saurait justifier la moindre concession à une organisation qui, en islamisant la cause des Palestiniens au profit d’un pur délire religieux, signe pour ces derniers la plus terrible des défaites. « Ce que cherchait le Hamas, écrit l’ancien ambassadeur de France à Tel-Aviv Gérard Araud, c’est de commettre des atrocités qui rendent tout compromis inacceptable. Je crains qu’il n’ait réussi… »

Source: Chronique | La nazification d’Israël

Nicolas | Racisme anti-palestinien

As mentioned earlier, I think the existing forms of racism, anti-Arab for both Muslim and Christian Palestinians, and anti-Muslim for Muslim Palestinians, cover the essential. The substantive examples raised by Nicolas can be addressed under both:

On apprenait mercredi dans le Toronto Star que la nouvelle version de la Stratégie canadienne de lutte contre le racisme, qui devrait être rendue publique sous peu, n’inclura pas de définition du racisme anti-palestinien.

Cette stratégie, publiée pour la première fois en 2019, « est conçue pour jeter les bases de la lutte contre le racisme systémique par des actions immédiates à l’échelle du gouvernement du Canada ». Plusieurs groupes ont fait pression sur la ministre de la Diversité, de l’Inclusion et des Personnes en situation de handicap, Kamal Khera, pour que le racisme anti-palestinien soit désormais défini et donc reconnu par le gouvernemental fédéral, au même titre que l’islamophobie et l’antisémitisme, le racisme anti-noir ou le racisme anti-asiatique, par exemple. Ça aura été en vain.

Pour l’instant, on continue donc officiellement à dénoncer l’islamophobie, du moins sur papier, laissant de son côté le racisme anti-palestinien se déployer au Canada. Ce n’est pas suffisant. Voici pourquoi.

D’abord, tous les Palestiniens ne sont pas musulmans. De larges pans du mouvement nationaliste palestinien ont toujours cherché à se rassembler autour d’une identité culturelle et d’une situation politique — et non d’une religion. Le keffieh, par exemple, est un symbole à la fois culturel et politique, selon le contexte, mais pas un symbole religieux. Le foulard blanc et noir a pris la signification qu’il a aujourd’hui après avoir été porté durant des décennies par le leader palestinien Yasser Arafat.

Lorsque le parlement provincial ontarien prend la décision de bannir le keffieh de sa chambre législative, comme il l’a fait le mois passé, on empêche l’expression culturelle et politique du peuple palestinien dans son enceinte. Parler vaguement d’« islamophobie », ce serait ici très mal nommer les choses.

En fait, pour bien comprendre le racisme anti-palestinien, il faut savoir qu’il se déploie notamment comme une forme de racisme anti-autochtone. Et ici, je fais très attention à mes mots et aux explications que j’en donne.

Être autochtone est une catégorie politique, et non pas seulement ethnique. Ce n’est pas simplement un terme qui réfère à « qui était là avant ». Il est important de le comprendre si on veut éviter de remonter aux temps bibliques. Le mot « autochtone », dans nos instances internationales, réfère notamment à une catégorie de personnes qui se retrouvent sans État qui parle en leur nom dans le système des Nations unies, parce qu’un État s’est construit « par-dessus » leur territoire ancestral, en quelque sorte. Si le mot référait seulement à de vieilles racines dans une terre, tous les Français chez qui on décèle une forme d’ADN gaulois pourraient participer au Forum des peuples autochtones des Nations unies, pour donner un exemple grossier. Le terme « autochtone » prend une grande partie de son sens à l’intersection de l’« ancienneté » et de la dépossession. C’est en ce sens que je m’exprime.

Lorsqu’un État assied sa souveraineté sur un territoire en dépossédant un autre peuple de ce même territoire, il doit déployer un récit national et un appareil idéologique qui normalise cette dépossession. L’âge d’or du colonialisme correspond avec l’invention de l’idée de terra nullius, par exemple, qui veut que lorsqu’un territoire n’est pas occupé — et par occupé, on veut dire occupé à l’européenne, sujet à des activités économiques « productives » dans une perspective européenne —, il est considéré comme vacant et donc disponible pour la prise de possession coloniale.

C’est aussi en pleine expansion coloniale que Friedrich Hegel et plusieurs autres penseurs européens ont développé leurs idées sur la téléologie de l’Histoire. D’abord, on a tracé une ligne arbitraire entre la « préhistoire » et l’« Histoire », puis on a posé l’État-nation comme l’aboutissement de l’« Histoire » et ainsi hiérarchisé les peuples selon leur « stade de développement ». On a, en quelque sorte, inventé la catégorie de « primitif » — une autre manière de naturaliser qui a le droit d’exercer sa souveraineté sur des terres, et qui peut en être légitimement dépossédé.

Ces idées continuent d’être mobilisées jusqu’à aujourd’hui un peu partout en Occident. Elles permettent notamment à certaines voix pro-israéliennes plus radicales de nier jusqu’à l’existence même de la Palestine, puisque le peuple palestinien ne disposait pas d’un État-nation indépendant avant la fondation d’Israël.

Ces notions nous permettent aussi de mieux comprendre, par exemple, les commentaires de Selina Robinson, qui était ministre de l’Éducation postsecondaire en Colombie-Britannique, lorsqu’elle a affirmé, en janvier, que la Palestine était un « morceau de terre merdique » (crappy piece of land) sur lequel « il n’y avait rien » avant la fondation d’Israël. Ses propos n’étaient pas « islamophobes ». Ils étaient un parfait exemple du racisme anti-palestinien ordinaire, appuyés sur une forme d’actualisation de la doctrine de la terra nullius. Finalement, Selina Robinson s’est excusée, a perdu son poste de ministre, puis a quitté le caucus du Nouveau Parti démocratique provincial.

Le maire de Hampstead, Jeremy Levi, nous a offert un autre exemple de dérapage anti-palestinien. La semaine dernière, il a encore déclaré sur X que le gouvernement canadien devrait « reconsidérer son plan d’immigration pour les Gazaouis », puisque « leurs valeurs semblent incompatibles avec les nôtres ». Il faut savoir que l’idée des « valeurs incompatibles » a été mobilisée durant l’histoire coloniale pour justifier le statut subalterne, « non intégrable » de certaines populations. Le discours est encore souvent employé à l’égard des Palestiniens, notamment dans les espaces médiatiques israélien et américain, pour justifier certaines inégalités ou violences structurelles.

La liste d’exemples pourrait être encore longue. Pour repérer le racisme anti-palestinien dans l’espace public, encore faut-il le comprendre. Pour le comprendre, il faut d’abord le nommer clairement.

Source: Chronique | Racisme anti-palestinien

Elite Colleges Walked Into the Israel Divestment Trap

Valid contrast:

…But there’s a key difference between avoiding fossil fuels and shunning Israel. The institutions that divested from oil and gas made sure to describe it as financially prudent, albeit sometimes with shallow investment logic. This time, Israel’s social license is the only thing that is on the table. And if Israel is on the table, what other countries should lose their social license? How many years must pass since what some believe to be a country’s settler colonialist period or messy wars that kill innocent civilians to make it investable?

And if divestment against Israel is carried out, when should it end? Oil and gas divesting is meant never to end; oil and gas consumption is meant to end. Divestment from South Africa ended with apartheid. So university leaders will be forced to ask an often heterogeneous group of students what would earn Israel its social license back. A cease-fire? A new Israeli government? A two-state solution? The end of Israel as a Jewish state?

The effort to identify every investment with ties to Israel is also fraught. Columbia activists could find information only on pocket-change-size ownership of certain companies, such as $69,000 of Microsoft stock. So protesters are also demanding that colleges disclose all their investments, presumably so students can research the morality of each one. However, some firms that manage parts of an endowment’s money, particularly hedge funds, don’t report individual holdings to investors: asking them for it is like asking for the secret recipe for Coke.

But even if an endowment could provide a list of every underlying investment, it would likely then be inundated for more calls to divest, for more discovered connections — however small — to Israel, and for reasons related to other offenses discoverable with an online search. Why would there not be a Taiwanese student group demanding divestment from China, to dissuade an invasion? Other students demanding divestment from Big Tech, citing students’ mental health? Others demanding divestment from all of it, the hedge funds and private equity funds whose asset managers are not exactly healing American income inequality?

The answer, of course, is that endowments can’t be in the moral adjudication business — and they should never have headed this way. This does not mean that investing should be a returns-at-any-cost exercise. But it does mean that the real world does not always provide objective answers to how to balance benefits and consequences of companies providing products and services: Carbon emissions are bad, but energy consumption is necessary. Microsoft software for the Israeli government may displease you, but Microsoft saying it won’t sell software to Israel would displease others — and probably get itself banned from working with New York State agencies.

Listen to the protesters on divestment. They will not stop. They will not rest.

But neither will the markets. They open every morning, Monday through Friday, and university budgets’ demands on endowments never go away. Tuitions are risingCosts always go up. Colleges should debate deep moral issues and discuss the hard compromises to solve the world’s ills. But we should move those efforts to the lecture halls, away from the investment offices. Divesting is an easy chant. Investing is hard enough as it is…

Source: Elite Colleges Walked Into the Israel Divestment Trap

House passes bill to add citizenship question to U.S. Census

While a citizenship question, like we have in Canada, makes sense,  the blatant politicisation and political purpose of the initiative does not given how it would further reinforce the political weight of rural states compared to more urban ones:

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill Wednesday that would add a citizenship question to the next U.S. Census in 2030, preventing non-citizens or illegal immigrants from being counted toward the allocation of representatives and federal electors in each state.

The Equal Representation Act passed the House by a vote of 206 to 202, along party lines. It now moves to the Senate.

Rep. Chuck Edwards, R-N.C., who introduced the bill in January, called it “commonsense” that only U.S. citizens be counted when it comes to representation. Currently, anyone who participates in the census every 10 years — including non-citizens and undocumented immigrants — is counted for redistricting.

“One of the lesser acknowledged, but equally alarming, side effects of this administration’s failure to secure the southern border is the illegal immigrant population’s influence in America’s electoral process,” Edwards said on the House floor Wednesday.

“Though commonsense dictates that only citizens should be counted for apportionment purposes, illegal aliens have nonetheless recently been counted toward the final tallies that determine how many House seats each state is allocated and the number of electoral votes it will wield in presidential elections,” Edwards added.

The White House has been “strongly opposed” to putting a citizenship question on the census, saying it would be too costly.

“The bill would increase the cost of conducting the census and make it more difficult to obtain accurate data,” the White House’s Office of Management and Budget said in a statement this week.

“It would also violate the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which requires that the number of seats in the House of Representatives ‘be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state,'” the White House added.

“It is unconscionable that illegal immigrants and non-citizens are counted toward congressional district apportionment and our electoral map,” said Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn.

“While people continue to flee Democrat-run cities, desperate Democrats are back-filling the mass exodus with illegal immigrants so that they do not lose their seats in Congress or their electoral votes for the presidency, hence artificially boosting their political power and in turn diluting the power of Americans’ votes.”

Before Wednesday’s vote, Democrats blasted the effort as unconstitutional and a waste of time given its prospects in the Senate.

“This bill is an affront to the great radical Republicans who wrote the original Constitution and the 14the Amendment, which has always made persons, not voters, the basis for reapportionment,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md. “This bill would destroy the accuracy of the census, which may have something to do with its real legislative motivation.”

Source: House passes bill to add citizenship question to U.S. Census

MIREMS: Diaspora and the Representation of Home Conflicts in Canada’s Ethnic Media

Detailed analysis of the major diaspora issues and how they play out in ethnic media in contrast with mainstream and home country media. Some groups have greater diversity of opinions and coverage than others. Overview below:

This discussion paper delves into the reactions of ethnic media in Canada to four distinct conflicts: the alleged Chinese interference in Canadian elections, the assassination of a Sikh leader in Canada, the Russia-Ukraine war, and the Israel-Palestine conflict. By comparing and contrasting the coverage of these events in Chinese, South Asian, Eastern European, and Middle Eastern Canadian media outlets, the paper aims to shed light on the critical role that ethnic media plays in shaping the mindset of Canadian citizens.


The paper argues that ignoring grassroots community media can have significant consequences on the mindset of Canadian citizens, as evidenced by the reactions to these conflicts in ethnic media outlets. This assertion is grounded in several well-established theories in the field of media and social communications analysis, including agenda-setting theory, framing theory, uses and gratifications theory, and cultivation theory.


The case studies presented in the paper provide compelling evidence for the application of these theories in the context of ethnic media in Canada. The chapter on Chinese media’s reaction to alleged election interference reveals how these outlets frame the issue in ways that prioritize the concerns and perspectives of the Chinese Canadian community, potentially influencing their political engagement and attitudes towards the Canadian government.


Similarly, the chapter on South Asian media’s response to the assassination of a Sikh leader highlights the role of these outlets in shaping the community’s understanding of the event and its implications for Canada-India relations. The analysis of Eastern European media’s coverage of the Russia-Ukraine war demonstrates how these outlets serve the specific informational and cultural needs of their audiences, providing perspectives and narratives that may differ from those found in mainstream Canadian media.
Finally, the chapter on Middle Eastern media’s reaction to the Israel-Palestine conflict underscores the power of these outlets in cultivating distinct worldviews and shaping public discourse within their communities.


In conclusion, the paper serves as a call to action for greater attention to and engagement with ethnic media outlets in Canada. By recognizing the power of these grassroots community media in shaping the mindset of Canadian citizens, we can work towards a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of how global conflicts and events are impacting our diverse nation. Future research should continue to explore the role of ethnic media in shaping public opinion, while policymakers must consider the perspectives and concerns expressed in these outlets when crafting inclusive and responsive policies.

Source: Diaspora and the Representation of Home Conflicts in Canada’s Ethnic Media

And Douglas Todd’s article on the report:

Canada’s ethnic media is “the canary in the coal mine,” offering warnings about everything from foreign interference to psychological stresses on newcomers, whether from Iran, China, Russia, India, South Korea, the Middle East or beyond, says Andrés Machalski, president of Multilingual International Media Research (MIREMS).

But governments aren’t taking advantage of the fertile resource. Their lack of understanding of the powerful role played by ethnic media has “enabled Chinese and Indian agents to (impact) public opinion … and provided an open door to homeland subversion of Canadian democracy,” says Machalski.

MIREMS’ 54-page report maintains the media outlets are invaluable for understanding what is going on in scores of diaspora communities.

The report goes so far as to suggest many newcomers suffer from anxiety and depression associated with “complex PTSD” as they try to navigate news and views from their homelands with their new lives in Canada.

Although many of the views expressed in ethnic media are predictable, there is some range of opinion, says the report by MIREMS, which tracks more than 800 media outlets in 30 languages in Canada and worldwide….

Source: Douglas Todd: Canada’s ethnic media reveal tough realities

‘They don’t matter’: Advocates frustrated Ottawa not including anti-Palestinian racism in upcoming update of anti-racism strategy

Maybe I am missing something but wouldn’t anti-Palestinian be covered by a mix of anti-Arab and for Muslim Palestinians, Islamophobia? Not convinced by the arguments and like all one-off proposals, will have implication for other groups, including of course Israelis and Jews.

The broader question is whether the Canadian Anti-Racism Strategy has been effective, the rising numbers of hate crimes suggest it has not, as does the 2023 evaluation of the strategy:

Advocates for Canada’s Palestinian community have been told that a definition of anti-Palestinian racism will be missing from Ottawa’s newest anti-racism strategy, an inclusion they say would have helped Canadian institutions properly recognize and respond to the growing form of hate.

“I’m concerned that members of our community shared potentially traumatic, harmful, personal stories with the Trudeau government and that the government has disregarded those stories and ignored them outright,” said Dania Majid, head of the Arab Canadian Lawyers Association (ACLA).

“That’s going to make our people, our communities, those who participated (in government consultations) feel even more unheard, more unseen, and feel even more like they don’t matter.”…

Source: ‘They don’t matter’: Advocates frustrated Ottawa not including anti-Palestinian racism in upcoming update of anti-racism strategy

John Ivison: CUPE is being held to account for its obsessive anti-Israel vitriol

Words and actions matter. Will be interesting to see how the Marshall lawsuit progresses:

….Keffiyehs are now the cultural appropriation of choice for leftists, including CUPE Local 905 president Katherine Grzejszczak, who wore one during a video meeting with members to discuss remote-working policies, as National Post recently reported. One fellow union member who raised objections to the keffiyeh was told participants were not allowed to talk about anything political. When the Post reporter called Grzejszczak for comment, she said that “intimidating and harassing individuals for wearing traditional cultural clothing is a form of racism.”

At least CUPE is not yet on record as threatening its critics with violence. But a communications officer with the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, Vic Wojciechowski, recently warned U of T professor Kevin Bryan to watch his back after Bryan penned a thread saying the majority of protesters he talked on his campus to were neither students nor affiliated with the university. “There need to be street-based consequences for clumsy buffoons like Kevin,” Wojciechowski tweeted.

This kind of thuggery seems to be where we are heading.

The CUPE-supported rally at the U of T sported a huge banner that bore the legend: “Long live legal armed resistance.” This wording is a variation of the aforementioned tweet on Oct. 7th by CUPE Local 3906, which represents academic workers at McMaster University. That tweet was later taken down because the union said it was not aware of the full scope of the situation on the ground.

The reality was that the massive expression of revulsion across the country shocked even the ivory tower revolutionaries into rethinking their support for slaughter.

But we seem to be inured to such outrages. Students and their public sector union allies can now parade across campuses inciting and glorifying violence without fear of repercussions or even censure.

Source: John Ivison: CUPE is being held to account for its obsessive anti-Israel vitriol