France is proud of its secularism. But struggles grow in this approach to faith, school, integration

Interesting long read (with influence on Quebec approach):

Brought into the international spotlight by the ban on hijabs for French athletes at the upcoming Paris Olympics, France’s unique approach to “laïcité” — loosely translated as “secularism” — has been increasingly stirring controversy from schools to sports fields across the country.

The struggle cuts to the core of how France approaches not only the place of religion in public life, but also the integration of its mostly immigrant-origin Muslim population, Western Europe’s largest.

Perhaps the most contested ground is public schools, where visible signs of faith are barred under policies seeking to foster a shared sense of national unity. That includes the headscarves some Muslim women want to wear for piety and modesty, even as others fight them as a symbol of oppression. 

“It has become a privilege to be allowed to practice our religion,” said Majda Ould Ibbat, who was considering leaving Marseille, France’s second-largest city, until she discovered a private Muslim school, Ibn Khaldoun, where her children could both freely live their faith and flourish academically.

“We wanted them to have a great education, and with our principles and our values,” added Ould Ibbat, who only started wearing a headscarf recently, while her teen daughter, Minane, hasn’t felt ready to. Her 15-year-old son, Chahid, often prays in the school’s mosque during recess. 

For Minane, as for many French Muslim youth, navigating French culture and her spiritual identity is getting harder. The 19-year-old nursing student has heard people say even on the streets of multicultural Marseille that there’s no place for Muslims.

“I ask myself if Islam is accepted in France,” she said in her parents’ apartment, where a bright orange Berber rug woven by her Moroccan grandmother hangs next to Koranic verses in Arabic. 

Minane also lives with the collective trauma that has scarred much of France — the gripping fear of Islamist attacks, which have targeted schools and are seen by many as evidence that laïcité (pronounced lah-eee-see-tay) needs to be strictly enforced to prevent radicalization.

Minane vividly remembers observing a moment of silence at Ibn Khaldoun in honor of Samuel Paty, a public school teacher beheaded by a radicalized Islamist in 2020. A memorial to Paty as a defender of France’s values hangs in the entrance of the Education Ministry in Paris.

For its officials and most educators, secularism in public schools and other public institutions is essential. They say it encourages a sense of belonging to a united French identity and prevents those who are less or not religiously observant from feeling pressured, while leaving everyone free to worship in private spaces.

For many French Muslims, however, and other critics, laïcité is exerting precisely that kind of discriminatory pressure on already disadvantaged minorities, denying them the chance to live their full identity in their own country.

Amid the tension, there’s broad agreement that polarization is skyrocketing, as crackdowns and challenges mount for this French approach to religion and integration.

While open confrontations are still numbered in the dozens among millions of students, it has become common to see girls put their headscarves back on the moment they exit through a public school’s doors.

“Laws on laïcité protect and allow for coexistence — which is less and less easy,” said Isabelle Tretola, principal of the public primary school whose front gate faces the door to Ibn Khaldoun’s small mosque.

She addresses challenges to secularism every day — like children in choir class who put their hands on their ears “because their families told them singing variety songs isn’t good.”

“You can’t force them to sing, but teachers tell them they can’t cover their ears out of respect for the instructor and classmates,” Tretola said. “In school, you come to learn the values of the republic.”

Secularism is one of four fundamental values enshrined in France’s constitution. The state explicitly charges public schools with instilling those values in children, while allowing private schools to offer religious instruction as long as they also teach the general curriculum that the government establishes.

Unlike the United States, where fights over what values schools teach cleave along partisan lines, support for laïcité is almost universal in France’s political establishment, though some on the right criticize it as anti-religion and on the left as a vestige of colonialism….

Source: France is proud of its secularism. But struggles grow in this approach to faith, school, integration

Canada to extend citizenship to children born abroad, restoring rights of ‘lost Canadians’

As largely expected following the Court decision and the government’s decision not to appeal, the residency requirement has emerged as the least objectionable and easiest connection test to manage among the available options. However, it is strange that Bill C-71 isn’t fully consistent with the standard physical residency requirement for new Canadians: “must have been physically in Canada for at least 1,095 days (3 years) during the 5 years before the date you sign your application.” This means a weaker connection test than warranted IMO and curious to see how the government justifies this difference and assesses the impact on the number of people affected.

At least the government is following the normal legislative process in making the change rather than the backdoor shortcut of S-245, to allow for proper committee consideration and debate. It remains to be seen how the Conservatives react on the substance given their legitimate opposition to the S-245 approach.

The number of persons potentially affected is large. Out of the estimated 4 million Canadian expatriates, about half are by descent (i.e., born abroad). Two-thirds of expatriates are living in the USA, with another 15 percent in UK, Australia France and Italy (2017). The number living in other countries has increased from 14 percent in 1990 to 20 percent in 2017.

As we have seen in previous efforts to respond to “Lost Canadians,” the actual number of those who request citizenship proofs is relatively small: an average of 1,500 per year, 2009-22. So while the impact is potentially large, the actual numbers are likely smaller given that for second and subsequent generation expatriates in the USA and EU, largely integrated into their country of residence, Canadian citizenship may not be a priority. On the other hand, it is likely a higher priority for those in other countries with less secure conditions, with Hong Kong being a prime example, and where we see growth in expatriates.

Of course, all of these expatriates will have voting rights, another reversal by this government of the previous government’s five year cut-off. However, despite the talk about the right to vote, actual interest in voting in Canadian elections is minimal among expatriates.

It will be interesting to see what analysis, if any, IRCC provides on the potential impact on its citizenship operations.

Having become a grandparent to a child born abroad, I look at how our the change affects our grandson. Under the current first-generation cut-off, he would not be able to transmit his Canadian citizenship to any future child. Under C-71, he would have to 1,095 cumulative days of physical presence in Canada. So the obvious and easiest strategy for him would be to attend university in Canada and thus start the clock again. Personally, the first generation cut-off did not concern us as we accept that family trajectories and trees evolve and change.

It would be helpful for the government and CIMM to look at my and other scenarios to understand the potential impact of the lack of a timeframe for the physical residency requirement, particularly for temporary workers (TFWP and IMP) which are less straightforward that the situation of my grandson.

Following a court order, the federal government has introduced new legislation to restore the citizenship rights of “lost Canadians” born outside Canada and ensure it doesn’t happen to others in the future.

This legislation would automatically confer Canadian citizenship to persons born abroad to a Canadian parent who is also born abroad beyond the first generation if the parents can pass a “substantial connection test.”

“It will be the first time that the Citizenship Act is actually charter compliant,” said Don Chapman, a staunched advocate for lost Canadians, after Bill C-71 was tabled in Parliament on Thursday. It’s monumental. And it has huge ramifications.”

As a result of the first-generation limit, Canadian citizens who were born outside Canada cannot pass on citizenship to their child born outside Canada; neither can they apply for a direct grant of citizenship for a child born outside Canada and adopted, creating generations of so-called “lost Canadians.”

“We want our citizenship to be fair, accessible, with clear and transparent rules. Not everyone is entitled to it, but for those who are, it needs to be fair,” Immigration Minister Marc Miller told reporters.

“We wanted to take this opportunity to continue to minimize differential outcomes as much as possible for children born abroad…compared to children born to Canadians (in Canada).”

According to the proposed amendment to the citizenship law, parents born abroad who have or adopt children also born outside Canada will need to have spent at least 1,095 cumulative days of physical presence in Canada prior to the birth or adoption of their child to pass on citizenship.

Lost Canadians and their families launched a constitutional challenge in court last year of the two-generation citizenship cutoff rules. Click here to post your thoughts

In December, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ruled that it’s unconstitutional for Canada to deny automatic citizenship to children born abroad because their parents also happened to be born abroad. It gave the federal government six months, until June 19, to repeal what’s known as the “second-generation cut-off” rule and amend the Citizenship Act.

With the looming court-stipulated June 19 deadline to roll out the new scheme, Miller said the government is unlikely to receive royal assent to the bill in time and will have to go before the judge to ask for an extension, which will cause further delays for affected children and grandchildren of Canadians to acquire citizenship and join families in Canada.

“We are still looking at a number of options. We don’t want an extension ad nauseum because there are people that are being prejudiced by this,” Miller explained.

“I have a very uncomfortable role in the interim at applying a test that really should be legislative. But it’s something that will have to speak to the court about. Again, we hope that this can be passed at all stages.”

In 2009, the then-Conservative government changed the citizenship law and imposed the second-generation cut-off on Canadians born abroad, after Ottawa had faced a massive effort to evacuate 15,000 Lebanese Canadians stranded in Beirut during Israel’s month-long war in Lebanon in 2006.

The $85-million price tag of the evacuation effort sparked a debate over “Canadians of convenience” — referring to individuals with Canadian citizenship who live permanently outside of Canada without “substantive ties” to Canada, but who were nonetheless part of the government’s liability.

As a result, the government abolished the then existing “substantial connection” regime and adopted a blanket rule that denies the first generation born abroad the right to pass on citizenship by descent outside Canada to the second generation born abroad.

In January, Ottawa decided not to challenge the court decision, but instead would repeal the existing law and put forward a new bill that’s compliant with the Canadian constitution.

Source: Canada to extend citizenship to children born abroad, restoring rights of ‘lost Canadians’

The press backgrounder:

Bill C-71: An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2024)

From: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada

The Citizenship Act contains a first-generation limit to citizenship by descent, which means that a Canadian citizen parent can pass on citizenship to a child born outside Canada if the parent was either born in Canada or naturalized before the birth of the child. Canadians born or naturalized in Canada before adopting a child born abroad can apply for a direct grant of citizenship for the adopted child.

As a result of the first-generation limit, Canadian citizens who were born outside Canada cannot pass on citizenship to their child born outside Canada, and cannot apply for a direct grant of citizenship for a child born outside Canada and adopted.

On December 19, 2023, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice declared that the first-generation limit for those born abroad is unconstitutional. The Government of Canada did not appeal the ruling because we agree that the law has unacceptable consequences for Canadians whose children were born outside the country.

The government is introducing legislation to make the citizenship process as fair and transparent as possible. Bill C-71 would

  • automatically remedy the status of any person already born who would have been a citizen were it not for the first-generation limit
  • establish a new framework for citizenship by descent going forward that would allow for access to citizenship beyond the first generation based on a substantial connection to Canada

Substantial connection test

Bill C-71 would allow a Canadian parent born abroad who has a substantial connection to Canada to pass on citizenship to their child born abroad beyond the first generation. It would also provide them with access to the direct grant of citizenship for their child born abroad and adopted beyond the first generation.

To demonstrate a substantial connection to Canada, a Canadian parent who was born abroad would need to have a cumulative 1,095 days of physical presence in Canada before the birth or adoption of the child.

Lost Canadians

The term “Lost Canadians” has generally been used to describe those who lost or never acquired citizenship due to certain outdated provisions of former citizenship legislation.

Most cases were remedied by changes to the law in 2009 and 2015. These changes allowed people to gain Canadian citizenship or get back the citizenship they lost. Despite this, additional amendments are needed to include other categories of Lost Canadians and their  descendants who did not benefit from the 2009 and 2015 changes.

Bill C-71 will restore citizenship to any remaining “Lost Canadians,” their descendants and anyone who was born abroad to a Canadian parent in the second or subsequent generations before the legislation comes into force. This includes people who lost their citizenship as a result of requirements under the former section 8 of the Citizenship Act.

Paul: What Does Hollywood Owe Its Jewish Founders?

Of note:

The Jews who founded Hollywood — and make no mistake, the big studio heads were overwhelmingly Jewish — shared several things: ambition, creative vision and killer business instincts.

But more than anything else, the men who were the driving forces behind Paramount, 20th Century Fox, Warner Brothers, Universal, Columbia and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer shared a very 20th-century sense of being Jewish in America. They were assimilationists who considered themselves American above all else and who molded Hollywood to reflect and shape their American ideals.

“Above all things, they wanted to be regarded as Americans, not Jews,” Neal Gabler wrote in his definitive 1988 history, “An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood.” Louis B. Mayer, a co-founder of MGM, went so far as to claim that his birth papers had been lost during immigration and to declare his birthday henceforth as the Fourth of July.

It was troubling, then, that when the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures opened in 2021, it neglected to integrate Jews into its portrayal of Hollywood’s early days and later successes despite obvious attentiveness to other ethnic and racial groups. Beyond a few brief mentions, including Billy Wilder fleeing Nazi Germany, a photo of the MGM mogul and academy founder Louis B. Mayer looming over Judy Garland, and a few scoundrels in an exhibit on #MeToo, Jews were absent. Jewish studio heads, business leaders and actors were almost entirely shut out, an oversight that led to much outcry.

“It’s sort of like building a museum dedicated to Renaissance painting and ignoring the Italians,” the Hollywood historian and Brandeis University professor Thomas Doherty told Rolling Stoneat the time.

When I asked the museum’s former director and president Bill Kramer, now the C.E.O. of the American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, what he made of the omission, he did not acknowledge the error but said museum officials took the criticism seriously. “It was clear that this was something that certain stakeholders were expecting,” he said. “That in some visitors’ minds this was an omission that needed to be corrected.” Did he think the criticism was valid? “It was how people felt. And those feelings were real and feelings are valid.”

The museum has compensated for its neglect by creating what it calls its first permanent exhibit, “Hollywoodland: Jewish Founders and the Making of a Movie Capital,” which opened on Sunday.

The exhibit has three components. The first provides a panoramic view of how the city of Los Angeles evolved to accommodate an influx of immigrants, including Jews, the development of the film industry and the needs of its diverse population, from the Oglala Lakota people to Chinese immigrants, reflected in archival footage and an interactive table map. The second part tracks the history of the city’s studios, and the third screens an original documentary, “From the Shtetl to the Studio: The Jewish Story of Hollywood.” The space is intimate but expansive in its vision and is well executed.

So how were Jews left out in the first place? Some sources told Rolling Stone after the opening that those who might have applied more pressure earlier, chose to lay low during the museum’s development. Some of this reticence surely emerged from the tenor of the moment, with its focus on racial representation and what Kramer referred to as “pro-social” causes — gay rights, women’s equality, the labor movement — which the museum details in a dedicated section and weaves in throughout.

It may also be attributable to an uneasy tension among Jews around their place in America — eager to be integrated, included and successful, while at the same time wary of possible exclusion or alternately, too much notice, inciting a backlash and reanimating underlying antisemitism. The recent outburst of antisemitism that we’ve witnessed on college campuses and in protests against Israel had long been stewing within academia and across culturalinstitutions.

Throughout the Academy Museum’s development, much of which occurred after the rise of campaigns like #OscarsSoWhite, officials made clear that it would emphasize diversity and inclusivity. The museum highlights nonwhite and other marginalized contributors to the industry to help remedy the industry’s long record of exclusion.

“I don’t think you open a cultural institution at this historical moment and not be reflective of a diversity of histories and perspectives,” Jacqueline Stewart, the museum’s current director and president, told me when I asked about the museum’s focus on representation. She pushed back on the criticism. “There werereferences to Jewish filmmakers from the very beginning,” she said, mentioning a clip of a Steven Spielberg Oscar acceptance speech. “That seems to get lost.”

But in bending over backward to highlight various identity groups at every point, the museum unintentionally leaves out part of what makes the movies such a unifying and essentially popular medium: the ability to transcend those differences. In a pluralistic, immigrant nation, Hollywood helped create a uniquely American culture that speaks to a broad audience. That’s part of what we call the magic of movies.

If nothing else, Hollywood is relentlessly evolving, perhaps now more than ever under the threat of A.I., increased economic pressures and consolidation. The Academy Museum, too, continues to change. Much of what I saw in the museum — which must be said is a marvel and a must-see for any film lover — had been switched out for new material since I first visited in June 2022. Elements in the core exhibit are in constant rotation, in part due to fragility of its artifacts, like costumes; in part to reflect the immensity of its collection; and in other cases, in a then overt effort to hit all the bases among competing interests.

If this flux is indicative of the Academy Museum’s stated intent to represent the changing priorities of American audiences, then it also holds the potential to move beyond this current moment, with its intentional and unintended divisiveness.

Source: What Does Hollywood Owe Its Jewish Founders?

Pathways of Black, Latin American and other population groups in bachelor’s degree programs

Of interest and another demonstration of the value of disaggregated data between visible minority groups with of course the “why” questions harder to answer:

This article fills this gap by documenting various aspects of the postsecondary experience of different population groups with regard to bachelor’s degree programs. The findings suggest that different population groups registered very dissimilar experiences.

For example, Chinese students ranked near the top in bachelor’s degree enrolment rates; graduation rates; enrolment in math-intensive science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) programs; and (among students who initially enrolled in STEM) STEMgraduation rates. By contrast, Black students consistently ranked near the bottom and trailed Chinese students by a considerable margin on all of these measures. Latin American students also ranked fairly low in most measures.

Meanwhile, other groups had varied experiences depending on the outcome. While White students ranked low in terms of bachelor’s degree enrolment rates, they ranked high in terms of graduation rates. White students also ranked low in math-intensive STEMenrolment rates, but among students who initially enrolled in STEM, their STEM graduation rates were among the highest. By contrast, Korean students were among the most likely to enrol in a bachelor’s degree program, but once in these programs, their graduation rates and math-intensive STEM enrolment rates were about average.

These results are important as they point to specific stages in the pursuit of higher education where choices and outcomes diverge across population groups, which could contribute to understanding the differences in labour market outcomes that exist across population groups. Understanding why certain population groups are less likely to graduate from a bachelor’s degree program would require information on the reasons for dropping out or switching programs. These may include academic difficulties, financial constraints or even favourable labour market opportunities. …

Source: Pathways of Black, Latin American and other population groups in bachelor’s degree programs

New report sheds light on housing issues, wage gaps, employment numbers in Black, African Nova Scotian communities

Of note but not terribly surprising with considerable similarities elsewhere in Canada:

A “first-of-its-kind” report released Wednesday is presenting statistical data on Black communities in Nova Scotia.

The report focused on six key areas, including: population, labour, income, education, housing and well-being.

The African Nova Scotian Prosperity and Well-being Index report(opens in a new tab) represents a crucial step towards understanding and addressing economic disparities Black and African Nova Scotian communities face.

Council members with the Road to Economic Prosperity(opens in a new tab) says the data collected reflects the experience of African Nova Scotians, including historical challenges like anti-Black racism.

Housing statistics

According to the report, compared to the overall Nova Scotian population, the Black Nova Scotian community has higher shares of households living in unaffordable housing, inadequate housing that doesn’t fit the number of people living in them, and unsuitable housing, meaning homes that require “major repairs.”

While 7.3 per cent of Nova Scotian households live in core housing need, the share almost doubles to 13.2 per cent for Black Nova Scotians.

The report found that less than half of Black households in Nova Scotia — 45.8 per cent — owned their own homes.

Wage gap statistics

On average, the index report found a Black Nova Scotian will earn only 85 cents in income for every dollar earned by a non-visible minority in the province.

The average Black Nova Scotian with a bachelor’s degree or higher made only 79.2 per cent of the income of the average Nova Scotian with the same education levels in 2020, according to the report’s findings.

Employment statistics

The age-adjusted unemployment rate for Black Nova Scotians remains above the figure for the overall population: 4.7 per cent higher in 2016, and 1.3 per cent higher in 2021, according to the report.

Nova Scotia’s Black population

Census data included in the index also shows that between 2016 and 2021, the Black population in Nova Scotia grew more quickly than Nova Scotia’s population overall, a trend that was led by international migration, primarily from Nigeria.

In all, 28,220 Nova Scotians self-identified as Black, representing three per cent of the provincial population. The fastest-growing groups were Black men and women between the ages of 20 and 44.

The report makes a 14 recommendations, including that the province’s Black community expand its data sources by co-operating with universities, community groups and governments.

Another recommendation calls on all orders of government to recognize descendants of Nova Scotia’s historic 52 Black communities as a “distinct people.”

Although the information gathered in the report may not come as a surprise to members of the Black community, the council says it’s important to share the findings with other community political leaders to help push for change.

“When you review the data, the circumstances for Black Nova Scotians is not ideal. Education, we are showing improvements around education but we are still very much over-represented in core housing needs and over-represented in those needing adequate housing. I would just say it doesn’t paint a pretty picture but it does show the reality,” said Shaekara Grant, co-chair of Road to Economic Prosperity youth council.

The group hopes to continue their research and present data every three years.

“The index is a measuring tool. You know the old adages, ‘What doesn’t get measured, doesn’t get changed.’ So, this is a tool that we are hoping advocacy groups and community groups can use in those areas, which they are working to bring about some positive change,” said Irvine Carvery, co-chair of Road to Economic Prosperity advisory council.

The council says they are working with Statistics Canada to come up with better ways to gather data that reflect the African Nova Scotian experience in their census work.

The Road to Economic Prosperity Plan is a five-year economic development strategy developed and owned by the African Nova Scotian community to address systemic issues and improve economic and quality of life outcomes for African Nova Scotians.

The plan is led by leaders from African Nova Scotian communities and implemented in collaboration with public, private, post-secondary and community partners.

More statistics from the African Nova Scotian Prosperity and Well-being Index report(opens in a new tab) can be found online.

Source: New report sheds light on housing issues, wage gaps, employment numbers in Black, African Nova Scotian communities

Barbara Kay: Radical Islam’s western fangirls

Not a great fan of Kay in general but I have to admit having similar questions (as with LGBTQ). Remember a tweet from one asking why Iranian Canadians were not similarly supportive with the obvious reason most of them fled the Islamic Republic of Iran:

….Hamas’s leaders knew that in these quarters, their atrocities would be perceived through a political rather than a moral lens. So they correctly assumed their pogrom would be characterized as “resistance” rather than wanton iniquity.

Hamas terrorists didn’t even shy away from filming themselves torturing women and children, which they should have considered a risk. After all, plangent appeals for the world to condemn Israel’s alleged genocide in Gaza, based on the war deaths of their own women and children, are a staple of the pro-Palestinian party line. The sight of the bloodied and raped female victims on October 7 could have been — should have been — a deal-breaker for feminists everywhere.

But it seems Hamas knew their female audience, too. One of the striking features about Hamas’s useful-idiot entourage is the robust support it enjoys from progressive women, in glaring contrast to the robust revulsion that should have prevailed among feminists.

Some women have publicly denied the vicious sexual torture inflicted on Israeli women, or shrugged it off as a sidebar to the sacred mission of “resistance.” This, they parrot, may entail “any means necessary,” including the degradation of women for no purpose other than malicious male pleasure. Evidence of western women’s indifference to Israeli women’s victimhood can be found in the fact that UN Women waited for months after the pogrom before condemning the rapes or Hamas.

A subset of anti-Zionist women appear to have taken their support to the next level. On some campuses, protesters are taking part in Islamic prayers. At UCLA, and elsewhere, to the consternation of some Muslim women living under Islamic regimes where the hijab is a symbol of oppression, some white female students bowing down in submission to Allah have taken to wearing hijabs in solidarity with their Palestinian comrades. Some young people have even reportedly converted to Islam as a result of the Israel-Hamas war, and others may soon follow suit….

Source: Barbara Kay: Radical Islam’s western fangirls

Richler: Is the Jewish moment in North America over?

Interesting long read:

….But later tides have washed the North American beach clean for other groups to land and make their mark. Jews, by virtue of their success, are seen as a part of the establishment now. Not allies, as Jews were to African Americans during the civil-rights era, but “white-adjacent” and fair targets for shunning. We are living, now, in a time in which our “common humanity” matters less than the particular, than the difference in our identities so often brandished to set a community apart. It may only be passing, but at least for today whatever qualities we may share falter before the imperative of fair representation so that where, earlier, Jewish authors dominated bookstore shelves, the cinema, Broadway and television, now a story by a Jew is unlikely to be chosen by, say, the CBC, over a Black, Indigenous, Asian, South Asian or Muslim one.

Which is a positive and as it should be. Jewish novels are not so novel, their stories, their idiom are familiar, and any reader, any patron of any art, craves the new and what it teaches for good reason. Through art we learn about each other and how to share the spaces, real and abstract, that we live in. Other communities’ stories are invigorating the arts and it is their turn for good reason.

But for Jews there is a negative in this receding from public view and therefore interest that is, when it comes to immigration and settlement, the ordinary historical order of things. For the integration of Jews into North American life – what the writer and critic Dara Horn, author of People Love Dead Jews, has called the diaspora’s “fantasy” of acceptance – was, in North America, realized. And this acceptance was doubly important to Jews because it constituted, in the second half of the 20th century, a mirroring of the establishment of the nation of Israel, a state for a stateless people, and the hopes it represented. The stark truth is that a loss of security in either country brings its own existential peril: No place in America or no place in Israel, each dour prospect augurs in a new iteration of the precarity Jews knew in the Middle East and Europe for two millennia.

How did this come to be? Well, through simple demographics for a start, the 20th-century waves of Jewish immigration vastly superseded by the arrival into this continent of peoples whose own traumatic histories either do not intersect with the Jewish ones or contradict them. This demographic shift is one that politicians, many caught off guard, have been compelled to recognize – we are democracies, after all – and especially after its furious acceleration by the entry into social and political arenas of younger generations for whom terms such as “the Holocaust” and “genocide” have markedly different meanings.

No longer is the Holocaust a literal burning – instead, a confluence of horrid circumstances that may even be inadvertent is enough. No longer is genocide the realization of the meticulously planned and organized murderous intent of a specific, targeted people. It can be cultural, or, as we are seeing today in Gaza, a crushing, deleteriously ham-fisted and ultimately self-defeating military campaign that is the result of a profound and inalienable existential fear in a grievously injured population whose motives there is no will to understand, let alone permit. In this age in which “lived experience” is ultimately what validates a truth, the manner in which Jews remember both the Holocaust and the Nazi attempt at genocide is not shared. Jewish references are historical and effectively redundant. They are not this generation’s, and useful only as weapons to be turned back against Israel and the Jewish “Zionist” by activists and also governments benefiting from the distraction – Colombia, Nicaragua, Russia, South Africa, Turkey. (I used to think that, yes, to be anti-Zionist or anti-Israel did not necessarily mean a person was antisemitic but now, what with Jews basically regarded as colonists “from the river to the sea” – well, I’m not so sure.)…

Source: Is the Jewish moment in North America over?

It was once a center of Islamic learning. Now Mali’s historic city of Djenné mourns lack of visitors

Sad:

…Djenné is one of the oldest towns in sub-Saharan Africa and served as a market center and an important link in the trans-Saharan gold trade. Almost 2,000 of its traditional houses still survive in the old town.

The Grand Mosque, built in 1907 on the site of an older mosque dating back to the 13th century, is re-plastered every year by local residents in a ritual that brings together the entire city. The towering, earth-colored structure requires a new layer of mud before the rainy season starts, or it would fall into disrepair.

Women are responsible for carrying water from the nearby river to mix with clay and rice hulls to make the mud used to plaster the mosque. Adding the new layer of mud is a job reserved for men. The joyful ritual is a source of pride for a city that has fallen on hard times, uniting people of all ages.

Bamouyi Trao Traoré, one of Djenné’s lead masons, says they work as a team from the very start. This year’s replastering took place earlier this month.

“Each one of us goes to a certain spot to supervise,” he said. “This is how we do it until the whole thing is done. We organize ourselves, we supervise the younger ones.”

Mali’s conflict erupted following a coup in 2012 that created a power vacuum, allowing jihadi groups to seize control of key northern cities. A French-led military operation pushed them out of the urban centers the following year, but the success was short-lived.

The jihadis regrouped and launched relentless attacks on the Malian military, as well as the United Nations, French and regional forces in the country. The militants proclaimed allegiance to al-Qaida and the Islamic State group.

Sidi Keita, the director of Mali’s national tourism agency in the capital of Bamako, says the drop in tourism was sharp following the violence….

Source: It was once a center of Islamic learning. Now Mali’s historic city of Djenné mourns lack of visitors

Silverstein: The blind spots in diversity and inclusion

From Pizza Pizza, some interesting broader ways of looking at diversity in terms of use of health and wellness plans:

When Pizza Pizza decided in 2021 to form a diversity and inclusion council, one of the first things we did was send out a survey designed to give us a foundational snapshot of our workforce.

The results told us about 60 per cent of corporate employees who participated were from racialized groups and more than 40 per cent were women. Almost 80 per cent said they viewed Pizza Pizza as a diverse organization.

Despite the inherent limitations of survey data, our results were a good starting point for building our initial slate of diversity and inclusion policies and programs. But we knew it wasn’t enough.

A key challenge with diversity and inclusion efforts is they tend to address only the diversity that’s visible and known, and organizations often have limited insight into the full range of interests and needs within their ranks. This limited perspective is caused by a number of reasons, including companies’ reliance on employees’ self-disclosure as well as the widespread use of tick-box questionnaires that leave little room for anything that falls outside pre-defined diversity groupings.

Consequently, many organizations must navigate forward with blind spots in their strategy, potentially missing opportunities to strengthen their culture and corporate brand. But how do you address blind spots you don’t know exist?

You need to think – and look – outside the box.

At Pizza Pizza we’ve started to use data analytics to find hidden patterns of inequality as well as unexplored areas of opportunity to strengthen our diversity and inclusion strategy. One example of how we’re doing this is through analysis of aggregated, anonymized data pertaining to use of company-sponsored health and wellness benefits. Do data patterns show, for example, more frequent use of our family resources? Are there increased claims for particular drug categories or health services, such as mental health or physiotherapy?

We undertake this and other types of data analyses with the goal of identifying unmet needs we could potentially address with new programs. For example, we might learn from our analysis that we need to expand our focus on wellness. This insight could also lead to actions that ensure stronger awareness of the resources available to employees, and that our leaders are trained to handle conversations around physical and health wellness challenges.

This data-driven approach doesn’t apply to all blind spots. Some instances of “unconscious bias” and inequity are hard to substantiate, but we know that when they happen, they erode an organization’s culture of inclusion. Consider, for instance, a department’s habit of automatically assigning overtime work to employees with no spouses or children. Or think about the manager who answers emails during meetings while lower-level team members sit and wait quietly. Would that manager behave that way in the presence of a peer or a more senior leader?

Ultimately, building a solid strategy – one with minimal blind spots – is about instilling and nurturing the right values within the organization. We do this by training leaders and team members and by having ongoing conversations about diversity. We also do this by asking questions.

Since we launched our first employee engagement survey in 2021, we’ve continued to ask what and how we can do better to make our employees feel like they belong. Through one survey we learned that our team members felt there was a need for more inclusive language. That prompted us to work with our partners at Pride Toronto to organize lunch-and-learns focused on inclusive language along with allyship.

These sessions proved to be relevant beyond the 2SLGBTQI+ context. Inclusive language and allyship, we all learned, are useful in virtually any dialogue or circumstance.

We know that as the country’s demographic makeup evolves, our diversity and inclusion strategy will inevitably run into more blind spots. Our increasingly multigenerational, racialized and gender-diverse workforce continues to be vulnerable to all manner of unconscious bias, which is why we also continue to fortify the strong culture we’ve built so far.

We know there are emerging needs among our team members that are likely to grow in urgency in the coming years, as many start families or, as we’re seeing with our more experienced workers, become caregivers to aging parents. We’ll need to adjust our programs accordingly.

As it is today, an evidence-based approach will be critical going forward, along with an ongoing commitment to a truly diverse and inclusive culture.

Amy Silverstein is the senior director of People for Pizza Pizza Ltd.

Source: The blind spots in diversity and inclusion

Half of racialized people have experienced discrimination or unfair treatment in the past five years

Latest GSS. Interestingly overall observation “Between racialized groups, there were no significant differences in experiences of discrimination.”

But “For instance, nearly half of Black people experienced discrimination or unfair treatment in a workplace setting (48%). This was significantly more than other racialized groups (39%) or non-racialized people (41%). Black people were also more than twice as likely to report discrimination when seeking housing (13%) compared with other racialized groups (6%) or non-racialized people (6%).:

Over one in three people (36%) aged 15 years and older living in Canada have experienced some form of discrimination or unfair treatment in the five years prior to the latest wave of the Canadian Social Survey. These experiences occurred in a variety of settings—while attending school, applying for jobs, working, shopping, and seeking healthcare, among others. The results, based on new data from the survey collected from January to March 2024, suggest that while the proportion of self-reported incidents of discrimination has remained relatively stable since 2021, discrimination and unfair treatment continue to disproportionally affect racialized groups, Indigenous people, women, 2SLGBTQ+ populations, people living with disabilities, and young adults. 

Discrimination and unfair treatment is a headline indicator in Canada’s Quality of Life framework. This framework enables the federal government to identify future policy priorities, to build on previous actions to strengthen evidence-based decision-making and budgeting, and to improve the well-being of Canadians. 

Racialized people, especially Canadian-born Black people, are more likely to face discrimination

Using pooled data from six waves of the Canadian Social Survey, it is possible to examine the intersection of various characteristics of people who have experienced discrimination. From 2021 to 2024, just over half (51%) of racialized people aged 15 years and older reported experiencing discrimination or unfair treatment within the five years prior to the survey. This was nearly double the proportion (27%) recorded for non-racialized people. Between racialized groups, there were no significant differences in experiences of discrimination. 

Reflecting the diversity of intersectional identities in Canada, experiences of discrimination varied across intersecting identities of racialized people and immigrants. Consistent with previous findings, reports of discrimination were more common among the Canadian-born racialized population (57%) than among racialized people who recently immigrated to Canada (48%) or who immigrated more than 10 years ago (49%). This difference was most pronounced among Black Canadians, with Canadian-born Black people being significantly more likely to report having experienced discrimination (71%) than either recent (51%) or established (59%) Black immigrants. 

The higher prevalence of experiences of discrimination among racialized groups was perceived to be largely motivated by race or ethnicity. Specifically, discrimination based on race or skin colour was the leading perceived reason for discrimination against racialized people (66%). This was followed by discrimination due to ethnicity or culture (49%), accent (28%), and language (27%). 

Discrimination is also more common among other historically marginalized groups such as 2SLGBTQ+populations, Indigenous people, and people with a disability

Chart 1 
Discrimination in the five years prior to the survey, perceived reason for discrimination, by sex and total population, Canada, 2021 to 2024

Chart 1: Discrimination in the five years prior to the survey, perceived reason for discrimination, by sex and total population, Canada, 2021 to 2024

Reasons behind discriminatory treatment varied among groups, as did the actual prevalence of discrimination. For instance, the leading perceived reasons behind discrimination and unfair treatment against 2SLGBTQ+ populations were sexual orientation, physical appearance, and sex. This population was also nearly twice as likely as the non-2SLGBTQ+ population to face some form of discrimination or unfair treatment in the five years prior to the survey (61% versus 32%). 

Among First Nations people living off reserve, Métis, and Inuit, 46% reported experiences of discrimination, compared with 33% of non-Indigenous people. The reasons for these experiences were largely perceived to be due to Indigenous identity and physical appearance. Indigenous people (23%) were also nearly twice as likely to be discriminated against due to a physical or mental disability compared with the non-Indigenous population (12%). 

Elevated levels of discrimination were also recorded for people living with a disability. In all, 44% of people with a disability reported experiences of discrimination, compared with 32% of people without a disability. The most frequently-cited perceived reasons for discrimination against people with a disability were due to physical or mental disability, physical appearance, and age. 

Age and sex also played a role in both prevalence of and perceived reason for discrimination. Experiences of discrimination consistently decreased with age, from a high of 45% among those aged 15 to 34 to a low of 17% among people aged 65 years and older. This may be explained by the fact that the racialized population and people who are 2SLGBTQ+ tend to be younger

Perceived reasons for discrimination varied by people in different age groups, with race or skin colour (38%) and physical appearance (38%) being the most common reasons among those aged 15 to 34, and age (50%) being the most common reason for people aged 65 years and older. There were also sex differences in prevalence of discrimination: 37% of women reported experiences of discrimination, compared with 30% of men. Women were more often discriminated against because of their sex or age, while for men, discrimination was more often on the basis of their race or skin colour, ethnicity or culture, language, accent, or religion. 

The work environment is the most common context where discrimination is reported

Chart 2 
Discrimination in the five years prior to the survey, situation in which discrimination was experienced, by sex, Canada, 2021 to 2024

Chart 2: Discrimination in the five years prior to the survey, situation in which discrimination was experienced, by sex, Canada, 2021 to 2024

There were differences in the context in which discrimination was experienced across groups, though the workplace (41%) was the most common location of discrimination or unfair treatment, whether it was while working, applying for a job, or seeking a promotion. This was followed by discrimination experienced in a store, bank, or restaurant (33%) and while using public areas (29%). 

While differences in the prevalence of discrimination did not significantly differ between racialized groups, the contexts in which they occurred did. For instance, nearly half of Black people experienced discrimination or unfair treatment in a workplace setting (48%). This was significantly more than other racialized groups (39%) or non-racialized people (41%). Black people were also more than twice as likely to report discrimination when seeking housing (13%) compared with other racialized groups (6%) or non-racialized people (6%). 

Conversely, Chinese people were less likely than other racialized groups to report experiencing discrimination while attending school (17% versus 23%), in the workplace (26% versus 44%), when crossing the border into Canada (5% versus 8%), and when seeking housing (3% versus 8%). Similarly, reports of discrimination towards Chinese people were lower than reports of discrimination against non-racialized people in the workplace (41%) and against non-racialized people when seeking housing (6%). 

People who experience discrimination also report lower measures of quality of life

Chart 3 
Discrimination in the five years prior to the survey, confidence in selected types of institutions, Canada, 2021 to 2024

Chart 3: Discrimination in the five years prior to the survey, confidence in selected types of institutions, Canada, 2021 to 2024

Experiences of discrimination and unfair treatment may influence overall perceptions of health and wellbeing. People who experienced discrimination in the five years prior to the survey compared with those who did not were more than twice as likely to report fair or poor mental health (31% versus 14%), were less likely to report high life satisfaction (37% versus 57%) and were less likely to report high levels of meaning and purpose (46% versus 63%). And while two-thirds of people who experienced discrimination (66%) reported that they always or often had someone they could depend on, this was lower than those who had not experienced discrimination (79%). 

People who experienced discrimination were also less likely to report a strong sense of belonging to their local community compared with people who did not experience discrimination (39% versus 51%). Furthermore, they were less likely to report confidence in various institutions, including the police, school, courts, Canadian Parliament, and media. These results were consistent with a previous study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic using crowdsourced data

Source: Half of racialized people have experienced discrimination or unfair treatment in the past five years