Multiculturalism | Multicultural Meanderings

Would-be terrorist Chiheb Esseghaier is clearly insane, but should that even matter in court?

2015/08/31 Leave a comment

The small interesting fact that emerged from the ongoing trial of Chiheb Esseghaier, convicted of terrorism in the Via train plot, subject of a psychiatric assessment and awaiting sentencing:

There are also plenty of mentally ill terrorists, says Paul Gill, a senior lecturer in security and crime science at the University College London. In a recent study, he found 40 per cent of lone-actor terrorists suffered from some kind of mental illness and 40 per cent of those were diagnosed schizophrenics.

“And just because they had histories of mental illness doesn’t make them irrational, spontaneous actors,” Gill said. “Many of them, they were just as likely to engage in really rational, thought-out planning as the guys without mental health problems were.”

Source: Would-be terrorist Chiheb Esseghaier is clearly insane, but should that even matter in court?

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with Chiheb Esseghaier, lone-wolf, Paul Gill

The Real Muslim American Threat? It’s Against Us – The Daily Beast

2015/08/31 Leave a comment

Dean Obeidallah on white extremism against American Muslims:

We have alarmingly reached an ugly place in America with anti-Muslim sentiment. And while Donald Trump has not targeted Muslims with his rhetoric (at least not yet), his fear mongering will no doubt embolden others to spew hate versus various minority groups, including Muslims.

And worse, this type of divisive language can inspire violence as we saw last week in Boston when two men attacked a Latino homeless man. After the assault, one of the attackers told the police: “Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported.”

Interestingly one of the two Boston attackers had also been convicted of a hate crime for assaulting a Muslim man shortly after 9/11. Thus again proving that bigots tend to hate more than just one minority group.

I would predict we will see even more plots to kill Muslims in America or at least attempts to gin up the hate toward the Muslim community. This, of course, makes ISIS ecstatic because the terror group would use any attacks on American Muslims as proof that the West hates Islam and that Muslims should join them.

I wish I could be more optimistic, but I’m a realist. My only hope is that our media starts covering these terror plots to make it clear that the threat of “radical Americans” is very real.

Source: The Real Muslim American Threat? It’s Against Us – The Daily Beast

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with American Muslims, Dean Obeidallah, USA

What was it like meeting the national defence and multiculturalism minister of Canada? | CanIndia NEWS

2015/08/29 Leave a comment

Interview with Minister Kenney with Indo-Canadian media. He provided the best government explanation for the removal of pre-Permanent Resident time credit towards citizenship to date (the explanations by both Minister Alexander and officials during C-24 hearings were unconvincing):

He spent about forty-five minutes in the Can-India office as we quizzed him on important issues—national security, immigration (he was previously immigration minister) and of course jobs and multiculturalism which are my pet peeves. The minister was well-prepared and easily navigated the tough questions we had.

No, he said foreign students will not reduce the job opportunities available to our kids. Nor will attaining PR status be easy for them. I was both surprised and happy to hear Mr. Kenney acknowledge that some institutions have made education a business and want to increase enrolment of foreign students but it didn’t assuage my fears that it would happen anyway. The government knows, I thought to myself, now when will they do something about it. It’s a huge concern that many parents with college and university-going kids like me, have today.

He brought up the subject of many new Canadians not even being aware that a federal election would soon take place because they were not engaged. Naturally I asked how the Conservative Party had planned to address that. Mr. Kenney’s answer was neat though evasive and a bit contradictory. He said today immigrants were more aware and that jobs and economic progress was the best way to engage them. I agree with his philosophy a successful person will integrate better and naturally be more engaged. While it is largely a game of chance, it is my observation that it takes newcomers at least five years to find their groove (if they are lucky that is). What happens to political and community engagement in the meanwhile? What about the hundreds who have been here for years and are still disillusioned, will they ever be brought into the fold?

He dwelt on how communities create ghettoes that prevent new Canadians from fully integrating and assimilating. It’s what I have gone about at length… how ethnic ties are stronger and far outweigh loyalty to Canada. I support his staking a stand on the matter. Why is it a party ideology and not a national strategy? Current trends indicate that many politicians seem to have adopted the approach of businesses towards their multicultural clients—that of trying to cater to communal needs and sentiments in order to ‘hook’ them.

Source: What was it like meeting the national defence and multiculturalism minister of Canada? | CanIndia NEWS

Filed under Multiculturalism

Debate about the women’s debate missed a bigger point: Antoinia Maioni

2015/08/29 1 Comment

In addition to federal under-representation, the chart above indicates provincial representation. Of note, British Columbia and Alberta have achieved gender parity in cabinet:

If we really want to raise consciousness about women in this election, let’s start with the glaring fact that women are still sorely under-represented in politics and that the face of this election campaign is dominated by male politicians. Notwithstanding that three of Canada’s provinces are now led by women premiers, federal politics has yet to become gender-friendly. The presence of Elizabeth May as leader of the Green Party is the exception that proves the rule: powerful parties (as in, parties that expect to gain power in Ottawa) are not populated or led by as many powerful women as men.

By international comparison, as my colleague Elisabeth Gidengil has pointed out, women are still few and far between in Canadian politics (we rank 49th worldwide in terms of women elected to legislatures). There are myriad reasons why women are less likely to choose, or be successful at, a political career, that range from obvious societal realities (family and children) to more subtle yet significant reasons (workplace culture and boys’ clubs) to enduring structural obstacles (money, power, influence). And in the Canadian case, these are exacerbated by a political system that concentrates power at the top, and a first-past-the-post electoral system that allows fewer entry points for women seeking office.

Even though political parties have worked toward recruitment – or even quotas – the presence of women is relatively weak. One aspect is the plight of so-called “sacrificial lambs”: tabulating data from the past five Canadian general elections, political scientists Melanee Thomas and Marc-André Bodet found that female candidates are still more likely to run in ridings their parties expect to lose. Another is “the higher you go, the fewer you find” phenomenon of women in political party leadership that Sylvia Bashevkin revealed decades ago.

Today, some of the key party players behind the scenes are powerful women; the national campaigns are being led by Jenni Byrne (Conservatives), Anne McGrath (NDP) and Katie Telford (Liberals). But for voters, the election is not about who is in the backroom, the war room, or even the pundits’ panels. And for us, the public persona of political leadership – the faces and voices that we see and hear – remains resolutely male.

The real women’s issue in this election campaign should not be about the merits of a separate debate, but how these issues matter to all Canadians and why the main leaders debating them are all men.

Of course, under-representation of visible minorities is also an issue:

Source: Debate about the women’s debate missed a bigger point – The Globe and Mail

Filed under Government, Multiculturalism Tagged with Antoinia Maioni, Politics, women

Lutte contre la radicalisation: les cégeps irrités par le plan de Québec

2015/08/29 Leave a comment

As always, the challenge lies in implementation, so I can partially understand their reaction:

La Fédération des cégeps se dit insultée que le gouvernement Couillard, dans son plan de lutte contre la radicalisation, se donne un pouvoir d’enquête et de sanction envers toute école – y compris un cégep – où seraient propagés des propos haineux ou qui serait le théâtre de comportements inquiétants.

«Nous, on se pose encore des questions sur la meilleure façon de contrer la radicalisation. Si le ministre [de l’Éducation], lui, sait quoi faire, qu’il nous le donne, le guide!», lance en entrevue avec La Presse Bernard Tremblay, président-directeur général de la Fédération des cégeps, qui entend bien présenter un mémoire aux auditions sur le projet de loi 59, qui se tiendront dans quelques semaines.

La question de la radicalisation se pose avec une acuité particulière dans les cégeps depuis quelques mois.

Cet hiver et ce printemps, deux jeunes qui fréquentaient le collège de Maisonneuve ont été arrêtés, tandis que quatre autres ont bel et bien mis le cap sur la Syrie. Il y a aussi eu cette controverse autour des locaux loués à Adil Charkaoui, qui a menacé le collège de Maisonneuve de poursuites quand le cégep a envisagé de mettre fin au contrat signé avec lui.

Dans la mesure où les cégeps se sont de tout temps ouverts à la communauté, à qui peut-on louer des locaux sans crainte? Qui risque de propager un discours haineux? Ne risque-t-on pas des poursuites si l’on refuse de louer des locaux aux uns mais pas aux autres?

Ces questions donnent de sérieux maux de tête aux contentieux des cégeps. La réponse appropriée est d’autant moins claire que les personnes qui demandent à louer des locaux ne se présentent pas toujours sous leur vrai jour, mais se décrivent parfois «comme des personnes qui viennent donner des cours de yoga ou d’impôts», relève M. Tremblay.

Dans l’immédiat, au collège de Maisonneuve, des enseignants et d’autres membres du personnel ont été formés pour être à l’affût de tout comportement problématique. Le collège de Maisonneuve travaille aussi avec la psychiatre Cécile Rousseau, directrice de l’Équipe de recherche et d’intervention transculturelles à McGill, pour tenter de mieux dépister les jeunes qui risquent d’être attirés par des gens radicaux. Cela dit, il n’y a pas que le groupe État islamique qui pose problème. Comme l’indique la Fédération des cégeps, les propos de droite véhiculés par les skinheads sont aussi très préoccupants. Et les cégeps, comme la population en général, ne sont pas à l’abri de l’islamophobie, dont il faut aussi se garder, a fait remarquer M. Tremblay.

Source: Lutte contre la radicalisation: les cégeps irrités par le plan de Québec | Louise Leduc | Éducation

Filed under Multiculturalism

Court backs Conservatives’ funding cut to ‘anti-Semitic’ Arab group

2015/08/29 Leave a comment

Finally picked up by the English language press:

An appeal court has upheld the Conservative government’s decision to cut funding to a “radical and anti-Semitic” Arab-Canadian group once headed by a Liberal candidate.

In 2009, then-Citizenship and Immigration minister Jason Kenney cut $1 million in annual funding to the Canadian Arab Federation, arguing that the group’s leadership had repeatedly expressed support for Hamas and Hezbollah. The Federation had a long track record of “expressing hateful, antisemitic views, and glorifying terrorists,” said Kenney in a Wednesday email to the National Post.

The group has subsequently failed in two lawsuits to have the funding reinstated. The Federal Court upheld Kenney’s decision in 2014, followed more recently by the Federal Court of Appeal.

“I have been on public record disagreeing with the approach taken by the current administration of the Canadian Arab Federation,” said Omar Alghabra, Liberal candidate for Mississauga Centre and a president of the group between 2004 and 2005.

He added, “at the end of the day, it’s government’s prerogative to make decisions on what to fund and what not to fund.”

The Canadian Arab Federation had been paid an annual sum of $1 million in exchange for providing language-training services to new immigrants.

In severing ties with the group, Kenney’s office had cited several specific incidents, including a CAF executive attending a Cairo conference where Hamas and Hezbollah delegates were present, and a CAF-organized rally in which the Hezbollah flag was flown. Last year, a decision by Federal Court Justice Russel Zinn wrote that, based on the Ministry’s evidence, “CAF appears to support organizations that Canada has declared to be terrorist organizations and which are arguably anti-Semitic.”

Source: Court backs Conservatives’ funding cut to ‘anti-Semitic’ Arab group

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with Canadian Arab Federation, Minister Kenney, Omar Alghabra, settlement funding

Who are the middle class?

2015/08/28 Leave a comment

Miles Corak’s latest with a great chart comparing the richest 10 percent, the poorest 40 percent, and those in the middle in terms of share of income.

Economics for public policy

One economist recently suggested that there are as many as 156 definitions of the middle class. If this statistical potluck isn’t complicated enough, pollsters also tell us that a very large fraction of the population describe themselves as “middle class.”

You can see why politicians have made the “middle class” an election issue, but also why they might hesitate to answer the question: “Who are the middle class?”

It isn’t a contradiction for many people to feel they are in the “middle” even if their incomes are well above average or well below. There’s a certain truth to this because most Canadians share a set of common concerns that go beyond just their incomes.

You are “middle class” if you aspire to a better tomorrow, and have a hope for growth and progress in your circumstances; you are “middle class” if you are struggling with uncertainty, and worried if…

View original post 566 more words

Filed under Multiculturalism

Why Dropping ‘Anchor Baby’ Is a Problem for US Politicians | TIME

2015/08/28 Leave a comment

Good article on the history of the term “anchor babies” in the US, and how it has evolved into an offensive term (in Canada, the term generally used is birth tourism, where the numbers are tiny):

This about-face stirred debates about who should decide what’s offensive and who shouldn’t. Was an American institution kowtowing to liberals? Or was a dictionary being descriptive about how a word is truly perceived among English-speakers? When Oxford Dictionaries quietly added their definition after that controversy settled, they tagged it with a bright orange offensive label. Those signs are, Oxford editor Katherine Martin says, not chosen by lexicographers making emotional decrees but affixed as guidance for people who want to use the language intelligently.

Often when language gets accused of being offensive, public figures and media shift to more neutral ground, which can lead to some exhausting phrasing. (When the AP banned their journalists from using undocumented immigrant and illegal immigrant, for instance, standards editor Tom Kent suggested to TIME that a more precise description might be “foreigners in the United States in violation of the law.”)

Martin says one problem with anchor baby is that there is no natural alternative, overwrought or otherwise—and not for the neutral reason suggested by Bush, whether or not he meant to insult anyone. “There is no neutral term for this because it is a term that is intended to be derogatory,” she says.

One indication of that intention, as the Washington Post‘s Amber Phillips points out, is that the idea it describes doesn’t entirely make sense in practice. As TIME explained in 2011, “the law says the parents of such a child must wait till she is 21 for her to be allowed to sponsor them to live and work legally in the U.S., and research shows that the vast majority of children of illegal immigrants are born years after the mother and father have arrived in the U.S.”

Regardless, the phrase has stuck. And, while debate over its use can actually lead to discussion of important issues like candidates’ positions on birthright citizenship (Bush is for it; Donald Trump, who also uses the term, is against it), that stickiness is just one more reason for conscientious politicians to steer clear of it, says linguist Zimmer. “The difficulty is that those pithy words and phrases are much more memorable and work their way into the public consciousness,” he says. “And once they’re there, they are difficult to dislodge.”

Source: Why Dropping ‘Anchor Baby’ Is a Problem for Politicians | TIME

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Multiculturalism Tagged with anchor babies, USA

Is ‘racial colour-blindness’ hurting our children?

2015/08/28 Leave a comment

The risks of colour blindness to identity (US study):

A new study by Social Psychological and Personality Science, When societal norms and social identity collide, asks this question in relation to how minority children living in western countries see both themselves and others. “Their racial background is often integral to their identity and how others perceive them,” stated the study’s authors Kristin Pauker, Evan Apfelbaum and Brian Spitzer. “Yet, talk of race is taboo.”

The study came to this conclusion after gathering 108 American-raised Latino, Asian, Black and Caucasian children between the ages of 9 and 12 and asked them to play a game similar to “Guess Who.” Each child was given 40 photos and told they had to ask as few questions as possible to figure out which card the other person was holding.

Children who come under the “visible minority” umbrella, it seems, were just as likely to avoid the topic of race.

“It is troubling that pressures to adhere to colour-blind norms override talk of race, even among racial minority children,” wrote the authors. In fact, only 40 per cent of the children asked questions like “are they Black?” or “are they White?” in order to win the game.

Afterwards, about 58 per cent said it would have been rude or offensive to ask those types of questions, while 23 per cent insisted it would be extremely racist. “Teachers are particularly important social referents for instilling norms regarding race,” noted the study.

Is ‘racial colour-blindness’ hurting our children? | Globalnews.ca

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with children, race