Howard Anglin: What did you think they meant by ‘decolonization’ anyway?

2023/10/16 Leave a comment

Painting an overly broad brush but nevertheless interesting take on the differences among individuals and groups on how they use the term:

Just as Parliament’s recent reminder of the complexities of the Eastern Front and the existence of “literal Nazis” gave Canadians reason to reconsider our casual use of that term in day-to-day debate, perhaps the live-streaming of a 21st century pogrom will make our leaders and our media think twice before blithely tossing around words like “racist” and “hate” to describe merely disapproved beliefs.

As Orwell once said of the word “fascism,” these words have become so devalued by over-use in our political phony-wars that they often seem to have no meaning except to signify “something not desirable.”

Shielded from most of the world’s problems, we have become too comfortable describing minor offences in terms that have truly vile referents in the world beyond our shores. An obvious example this week is the term “decolonization,” which has been eagerly adopted by Canadian governments, universities, elementary schools, libraries, bookstores, and even coffee shops. Most people who implement these policies probably think of “decolonization” as something benign like the inclusion of more representative works and stories from underrepresented—and in Canada especially Indigenous—voices. If that is all it means, and if “representation” doesn’t become an excuse for sacrificing intellectual rigour and aesthetic quality (and it shouldn’t and needn’t), then it is a good thing.

Within this broad majority, however, I would distinguish between those who are earnestly working to bind our society together and tend sensitively to old wounds, and those who go further, embracing the symbols of the revolutionary counter-culture while turning a blind eye to its real-world implications. Among the latter are the sort of people who wear Che Guevara t-shirts to show that they are the “good guys,” not because he took sadistic pleasure in shooting reactionary peasants and boasted that “Hatred is the central element of our struggle! Hatred … so violent that it propels a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him [a] violent and cold- blooded killing machine.” They don’t mean that Che, of course, if they’ve even bothered to learn who he was.

Beyond this majority, there is a smaller group for whom the idea of “decolonization” has a harder edge. They welcome it as a chance to turn the tables on our country’s historically-dominant European majority, not by supplementing our traditional symbols with new ones but by disparaging them as shameful and displacing them. These are the people who saw the burning of churches two summers ago and took pains to explain why the (often Indigenous) congregations had it coming. They are motivated by a retributive impulse that is often indistinguishable from revenge (or in the case of the white progressives who make up much of this class, masochistic self-flagellation). Unfortunately, this group is the movement’s avant-garde. Their energy and ideas drive and direct the policies in practice, while the well-meaning are carried along because they don’t have the words or courage to distinguish their good intentions from this destructive agenda.

But as we learned this week, there is buried within this last group a hardcore faction that would go even further. When they talk about decolonization, they mean it literally, with all its blood-soaked consequences. Symbolic change won’t cut it for them; they want action. They are the ones who read Frantz Fanon’s Damnés de la terre(and Sartre’s revolting introduction) not with the detached pose of most Western progressives but with lurid visions of incarnadine vengeance. They read things like “Violence is a cleansing force. It frees the native from his inferiority complex and from his despair and inaction; it makes him fearless and restores his self-respect” and they don’t just believe it intellectually, they howl for it viscerally, palpably, urgently.

Twitter has exposed them as cheerleaders of rape and infanticide, of “literal racism,” and “literal hate.” Sure, they were tweeting from the safety of their faculty lounges with the security of tenure and they might not be so sanguine about murder when it isn’t mediated through a small screen, but this much was clear: they saw the same images that sickened and revolted normal people and their first reaction was to justify and celebrate them. They rushed into the digital public square to explain that the shooting of young people attending a “peace” concert was an act of “anticolonial resistance,” they denied that settlers were “civilians” (and so off-limits for targeted killing), and they wondered, rhetorically, what everyone thought the words “[p]ostcolonial, anticolonial, and decolonial” meant? It’s a question their colleagues should be thinking hard about today, especially those with “settler” in their bios.

It was a revelatory moment. Perhaps these armchair Amins and tenured Tourés have spent so long insisting that “words are violence” that they can no longer tell the difference between a micro-aggression and a massacre. Perhaps they have spent so much time in a world of relative truths that they can’t bring themselves to accept the objective reality of evil when it bares its fangs. And perhaps we collectively bear some of the blame for this. Our schools, businesses, and governments have ignored or indulged them for so long that they may have believed, with good reason, that there would be no consequences for airing their zealotry this time too. But now that we’ve seen it, we should not forget it. We need to make sure they play no further role in shaping Canadian social policy. They have done far, far too much damage already.

Source: Howard Anglin: What did you think they meant by ‘decolonization’ anyway?

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with

Jamie Sarkonak: Multicultural ‘awareness months’ fail to raise awareness

2023/10/16 Leave a comment

Unfortunately, she has a point. But they are important to specific communities and provide opportunities for political announcements and events.

Was essential part of the job when working at multiculturalism, drafting press releases and ministerial and other speeches and talking points:

October is Women’s History Month. It’s also Latin American Heritage Month. And German Heritage Month. And Canadian Islamic History Month. And 2SLGBTQQIA+ History Month (though this has not been recognized by the federal government — yet). Some provinces recognize this to be Canadian Library Month.

It’s a fairly busy time in our modern update to the old liturgical calendar. Instead of numerous saintly feasts, we get cultural awareness months, remembrance days and the like. Paradoxically, there are now so many of these observances that they don’t seem particularly worth observing at all. Everyone is special, so no one is.

Who actually celebrates these things? I don’t. October, to me, is simply “Halloween Month.” For the most part, these events — which don’t come with the benefit of time off, as statutory holidays do — seem to be an opportunity for corporations to market themselves and for public-sector communications staff to have something to write about.

In the federal government, efforts to fill the multicultural calendar are fairly recent. A 2017 list of Canada’s “important days” marked only 26 special events (back then, October’s only observance was Women’s History Month). In 2023, that number has more than doubled to 62, with many of the additions recognizing some flavour of cultural heritage. The number of LGBT-related observances on the list went from zero to six, indicating a new significance for the once under-the-radar demographic.

The list of “commemorative days” on the federal government’s website picks and chooses what to highlight, which makes it a decent gauge for identifying the priorities of whoever is in the driver’s seat. Other observances have been officially designated, but they aren’t on the list.

Examples include the obscure National Hunting, Trapping and Fishing Heritage Day in September and Pope John Paul II Day in April, both of which were established in 2014. Also established in 2014 was Lincoln Alexander Day, which actually did make the cut for the current federal government’s calendar. It celebrates the first Black member of Parliament (Alexander had many other achievements).

Why an emphasis on identity? Probably because of our national multiculturalism policy. Government departments and Crown corporations are beholden to the Canadian Multiculturalism Act, which states that Canadian policy involves the “recognition and appreciation of the diverse cultures of Canadian society” — hence, awareness months.

In their annual accountability forms to prove to Canadian Heritage that they’ve been adhering to the multiculturalism policy, departments must provide examples of actions taken to “promote and celebrate the historical contribution and heritage of communities of all origins to Canadian society.”

In its latest set of responses, CBC explained that it complied with the law by observing Asian Heritage Month, National Indigenous History Month and Black History Month. The Bank of Canada noted the same occasions, with the addition of Holocaust Remembrance Day.

Canadian Heritage dutifully carries out Parliament’s instructions to grow the list of observances. Irish Heritage Month and Emancipation Day (celebrating the abolition of slavery) were the “two new commemorative date initiatives” of 2021.

“These commemorative dates present an excellent opportunity for Canadians to learn more about the richness of the cultures and the historical contributions of these communities, and reflect upon both the proud moments in our history as well as the darker moments, to better shape our futures,” the department wrote in its annual report. “The Government of Canada looks forward to celebrating these new dates which play an important role in raising awareness of the richness of Canada’s cultural diversity.”

That is, the more calendar days celebrated, the better we’re upholding multiculturalism.

Holocaust remembrance and the end of slavery mark historical events of significance — they make sense to recognize. It’s important to keep memories of the Canadian past alive. In a similar vein, there’s a day dedicated to the first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, and a day dedicated to a Swedish man who became Canada’s first honorary citizen for helping save more than 100,000 Jews from Nazi persecution. These additions to the calendar are worthwhile.

But broader heritage celebrations seem odd to build the national calendar around. Black History Month, one of the older awareness months intended to highlight stories that often went untold, seemed much more significant back when it was fairly unique. Now, it’s lost in the crowd.

Going forward, the list can still grow. We still lack heritage months celebrating the English (though we have one for the Irish), the Spanish (though we have one for the Portuguese) and the Japanese (though we have one for the Philippines). There are months that celebrate Jewish, Islamic and Hindu heritage — but nothing for the Buddhists or Christians.

More days could be added, which would be consistent with government policy. But to what end? As the calendar grows, the significance of each day shrinks. Anyway, happy Halloween Month.

Source: Jamie Sarkonak: Multicultural ‘awareness months’ fail to raise awareness

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Rioux: Terroriste, mais encore…

2023/10/14 Leave a comment

Of note:

Ce n’est pas un hasard si le mot razzia nous vient d’Algérie. Depuis le Moyen Âge, Arabes et Ottomans menèrent des razzias ininterrompues sur les côtes méditerranéennes, où ils capturaient des otages qui étaient ensuite vendus comme esclaves, jetés dans des harems ou réduits aux travaux forcés.

Ce n’est pas un acte de guerre, mais une razzia à la puissance mille qu’a perpétrée le Hamas le 7 octobre dernier en pénétrant dès l’aube en territoire israélien pour « tuer du Juif » et assassiner plus d’un millier de militaires, de civils, de femmes et d’enfants confondus. Sans oublier de rafler une centaine d’otages qui serviront de boucliers humains, de monnaie d’échange ou de chair humaine dans des exécutions diffusées sur les réseaux sociaux afin de terroriser les mécréants.

Ceux qui font profession d’aveugles n’y verront qu’un attentat de plus dans la longue histoire du conflit israélo-palestinien. Nous sommes pourtant devant le pire carnage commis depuis 1945 à l’égard de civils juifs, assassinés pour la seule raison qu’ils étaient juifs. Sur leur chemin, les djihadistes ont abattu 260 jeunes qui participaient à la rave party Supernova. Quand ils ne les ont pas égorgés ou violés. Des fous de Dieu surgis d’un autre âge face à l’insouciante jeunesse mondialisée de Tel-Aviv, le contraste ne pouvait être plus étourdissant. Pour nombre de juifs, dont le secrétaire d’État Antony Blinken, cela n’évoquait rien de moins qu’un pogrom.

Certes, cette offensive poursuivait aussi des objectifs politiques. Il s’agissait de torpiller les accords d’Abraham, qui étaient sur le point de réconcilier diplomatiquement Israël et l’Arabie saoudite. Une alliance particulièrement inquiétante pour l’Iran, principal soutien du Hamas. Notamment parce qu’elle montre que juifs et musulmans peuvent vivre en harmonie, comme l’illustrent les 150 000 Israéliens qui visitent chaque année les Émirats arabes. Autre vision intolérable pour le Hamas, car le moindre signe de réconciliation signerait son arrêt de mort.

Ce carnage n’a donc rien à voir avec la cause nationale palestinienne, et encore moins celle d’un État indépendant. Il s’inscrit au contraire dans la lignée des grands attentats islamistes du 11 septembre, de Charlie Hebdo et du Bataclan.

Le mot terrorisme, que la prude CBC et l’extrême gauche française se refusent à prononcer, est d’ailleurs largement insuffisant pour désigner cette organisation islamiste, antisémite et totalitaire qui tient Gaza sous sa férule. Ses crimes vont bien « au-delà du terrorisme », pour reprendre les mots du bédéiste Joann Sfar. Car le Hamas n’a rien d’un banal mouvement de libération qui aurait commis quelques attentats. Créé en 1988, il est la branche palestinienne des Frères musulmans, nés en Égypte dans les années 1920, qui ont notamment soutenu l’alliance entre Hitler et le grand mufti de Jérusalem. Ici, l’oumma remplace la nation, l’islamisme le nationalisme, et le califat l’État démocratique.

Radicalement opposé aux voix libérales palestiniennes — que les Frères musulmans ont d’ailleurs souvent éliminées physiquement —, le Hamas n’a jamais eu d’autres buts que d’islamiser la société palestinienne et d’empêcher que ne s’impose une direction laïque soucieuse des intérêts nationaux de son peuple. « La mort sur le chemin de Dieu est la plus éminente des espérances », proclame sa charte fondatrice qui stipule aussi que « la bannière d’Allah » doit flotter « sur chaque pouce de la Palestine ». L’État palestinien ne pouvant être, à la rigueur, qu’une étape avant l’expulsion complète des Juifs de la région.

L’idée qu’avec le temps, le Hamas deviendrait un interlocuteur sérieux apparaît aujourd’hui comme un leurre. Cette organisation a toujours agi afin de faire capoter toute perspective de paix et de création d’un État palestinien. C’est ce qui faisait dire au journaliste israélien Stéphane Amar, que nous avions interviewé à Tel-Aviv, en 2016, que « le rêve des deux États est mort depuis longtemps ». Il ne pourrait renaître que le jour où Israël, seule démocratie du Moyen-Orient, trouverait un interlocuteur qui ne souhaite pas son extermination.

Nous avions alors constaté sur place combien la seconde Intifada, avec ses attentats kamikazes contre les civils, avait achevé de tuer tout espoir de paix, anéantissant du coup la gauche israélienne depuis longtemps ouverte au compromis. Tant que l’islamisme dominera le mouvement palestinien, la théorie des deux États demeurera un mythe. Quel État dans le monde souhaiterait la création à ses frontières d’une théocratie doublée d’un État terroriste ?

Les véritables défenseurs du peuple palestinien aujourd’hui ne sont pas ceux qui, trop heureux de s’en laver les mains, renvoient dos à dos les potentats du Hamas et le gouvernement démocratiquement élu de Benjamin Nétanyahou. Ce sont ceux qui combattent l’islamisme dans l’espoir que renaisse un jour un leadership palestinien digne de ce nom.

Le temps de juger les graves erreurs de Nétanyahou viendra bien assez vite. On peut compter sur le peuple israélien pour cela. Comme pour exiger une riposte ciblée et proportionnée. Mais, pour l’instant, constatons que la guerre que mène le Hamas pour détruire Israël n’a rien d’une lutte nationale et tout d’une guerre de civilisation.

On pourrait rêver d’un autre combat. Mais on ne choisit pas ses ennemis. C’est eux qui nous choisissent.

Source: Terroriste, mais encore…

Filed under Multiculturalism, Radicalization Tagged with ,

Kheiriddin: The ‘decolonization’ movement will condemn us to the brutality of our past

2023/10/14 Leave a comment

Valid commentary on the limits of “settler colonial” and decolonization language. Assume NDP MPP Jama is not going to leave Canada despite being “a politician who is participating in this settler colonial system.”

While history is always being reviewed and revised, that it is different from being erased, as we have to know the past in order to bring about a better present and future:

After 24 hours of outrage, Ontario NDP MPP Sarah Jama has apologized.

On Tuesday, Jama posted on Twitter that she was “reflecting on my role as a politician who is participating in this settler colonial system, and I ask that all politicians do the same. #FreePalastine (sic).” This was followed by a lengthy statement in which she condemned Israel, where, she said, “For 75 years, violence and retaliation rooted in settler colonialism have taken the lives of far too many innocent people.”

This earned her a rebuke — but not a demand for resignation — from NDP Leader Marit Stiles. Jama now says that she understands “the pain that many Jewish and Israeli Canadians, including my own constituents, must be feeling.” But as of Thursday morning, her original post remains up, and Jama remains in caucus.

Jama’s statement illustrates the absurd lengths to which the “decolonization” movement has been taken. Today, the word “decolonization” has lost all meaning. It has become a trope for overthrowing whatever order someone finds offensive.

Decolonize Palestine of Jews. Decolonize Canada of white people. Decolonize language of words that might cause offence. Decolonize the math curriculum of Eurocentric “ways of knowing.” Never mind that much of modern mathematics was developed by Arabic mathematicians — history doesn’t matter, only dogma does.

But history does matter. And in modern times, a lot of it is revisionist. It fails to note that many of the colonized people of today were once colonizers themselves, and vice versa. Jews may be considered settlers in Israel by some people in 2023, but they were subject to thousands of years of oppression there, including by the Roman Empire, the Crusaders and the Ottoman Empire.

As a result, the Jewish people became scattered throughout the world, and had no haven to flee to when Adolf Hitler dragged six million to the gas chambers, before finally being allowed to return to their ancestral homeland.

In North America, the descendants of Irish Catholics would be considered “settlers” by Indigenous people. But Catholics in Ireland were displaced by British and Scottish settlers in the 1600s, setting off centuries of conflict, the partition of Ireland and Northern Ireland and the Troubles, which claimed over 3,500 lives at the end of the last century.

In Canada, Quebec francophones would also be considered “settlers” today, despite themselves having been conquered by the British at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham and spending 200 years seeking to become “maître chez nous” (masters in our own house), mostly but not exclusively by political means.

Canada’s First Nations were also both conquered and conquerors. Over the past 500 years, Indigenous people were systematically colonized by Europeans, who moved into their territories, waged war on them and eradicated their traditional way of life through the reserve system, the pass system, residential schools and other means.

But before the Europeans arrived, Indigenous nations made war on each other, engaging in both guerrilla tactics and sophisticated battles. The Haida Nation routinely conducted slave raids down the West Coast. The Iroquois Confederacy warred with the Huron-Wendat. War was as much a part of Indigenous societies as it was in other parts of the world.

Today, few people talk of these things: Indigenous peoples are portrayed as harmonious and peace-loving, while non-Indigenous people are seen as aggressive and violent. But we should talk about them, and in light of what’s happened in Israel, maybe we finally will.

Human history is a miserable river of blood, and all our ancestors bathed in it. We will never erase the sins of the past. All we can do now is move forward and decide what we will and will not tolerate today and in the future.

We can choose to stand for the principles of human rights and dignity. We can stand for equality of races and sexes. We can stand for the rule of law and democracy. We can say never again will we force children into slavery, or “re-education,” or murder them in their beds.

These concepts, it should be noted, are not “colonial.” As African political philosopher Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò writes in his brilliant work, “Against Decolonization: Taking African Agency Seriously”: “The problem is that many of our decolonizers too easily conflate modernity and westernization.”

For example, he rejects the argument that capitalism is colonial and discusses how colonialism actually blocked the economic aspirations of millions of Africans. Táíwò does not reject things such as western legal systems and the scientific method simply because they were not derived from African thought. He argues that to do so implies that colonized people have no agency and cannot decide for themselves what path to follow.

The colonization lens has become a trap that pits group against group, nation against nation. It ignores the common principles that led to the recognition after the Holocaust that war was not “a continuation of politics by other means,” as Carl von Clausewitz famously put it, but something to be avoided. If we’re ever going to put a stop to the cycle of violence, we must first stop dividing ourselves into “colonizers” and “colonized” and recognize that we are all just one thing: human beings condemned to sharing space with each other.

Terrorism, such as the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas last weekend, doesn’t make the world a better place. It won’t create an independent Palestine. It won’t lead to progress of any kind, for anyone. All it does is drag us back to the brutal past from which humanity has striven for centuries to escape.

Source: The ‘decolonihttps://apple.news/AjKtDEd9rQ0qMsa39ekIv5Qzation’ movement will condemn us to the brutality of our past

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Globe editorial: The right way to deal with a Nazi memorial

2023/10/14 Leave a comment

Sensible:

The question, then, is what to do about those monuments that glorify what should be a shameful moment for the men who served in the Waffen SS and cause for sombre reflection by Canadians, particularly the Ukrainian community?

…

Source: The right way to deal with a Nazi memorial

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Douglas Todd: Foreign-student dreams being crushed in greedy Canada

2023/10/13 Leave a comment

More on exploitative education industry practices for international students, with complicity among governments, education institutions (particularly private), consultants and others.

Not convinced, however, that “taxpayers would be willing to spend more on higher education to support domestic students and protect foreign students from being taken advantage of:”

The record number of international students in Canada is an “asset that is very lucrative,” according to Immigration Minister Marc Miller.

And he’s not kidding. With Canada’s official foreign student numbers at 800,000, and CIBC bank economist Benjamin Tal informing the Liberal cabinet the actual figure is more like 1.3 million, it’s often boasted people on study visas bring about $30 billion a year into the country.

Much of that lucre in Canada, put together by wealthy and middle-income families around the world, goes toward more than 1,600 Canadian public and private learning institutions. The rest is funnelled into the wider economy, including the pockets of big-city landlords.

But a prominent Vancouver businessman and educational philanthropist, Barj Dhahan, who works in higher education in both India and Canada, uses the word greedy to describe the organizations and individuals raking in windfall profits from international students.

The co-founder of the Canada India Education Society, which collaborates with the University of B.C. and Punjabi organizations to educate thousands of students and nurses in India, said he hears stories each week from families of foreign students about how Canada is exploiting and even abusing them.

“They come here because they’ve been sold a dream. And their dreams are dashed,” Dhahan said.

Many international student are upset, or even in despair, when they discover Canadian rents are extreme, their schooling is often shoddy, especially in small private schools, tuition fees are four to eight times that of domestic students, decent jobs are hard to get and their chances of becoming Canadian citizens are low.

Last week, it was learned through access to information that, in 2021, Ottawa’s Immigration Department conducted a survey of 3,700 international students, which found an overwhelming 87 per cent plan to apply for permanent residence in Canada. That’s a spike from 70 per cent in 2020.

Vancouver immigration lawyer and researcher Richard Kurland, who obtained the internal government survey, said there is no way that many aspiring foreign students will be able to obtain coveted citizenship, since there is intense competition for spots.

Given that many families around the planet have literally “bet the farm” to finance their children’s education abroad in hopes they will get immigrant status, Kurland, a frequent adviser to Parliament, believes Canada has a moral obligation to warn of the likelihood of crushed expectations.

The reputation of Canada, and its educational system, is being damaged both here and abroad, says Dhahan, who is also founder of the $45,000 Dhahan Prize for Punjabi Literature and a major contributor to international programs at UBC, Carleton University in Ottawa, and other institutions.

In addition to questioning the cost and quality of education at Canada’s often-tiny private colleges and language schools, most of which rely almost entirely on foreign nationals, Dhahan is appalled tuition fees for foreign students have soared at many of the country’s large public universities.

Dhahan points, for instance, to how UBC now frequently charges a foreign student seven times more than a domestic student. For instance, one year in UBC’s undergrad arts program costs an international student about $45,000, while the rate is $5,800 for a domestic student. The price tag on other programs can be much higher.

Tuition fees for international students are also exorbitant, he said, at most public and private colleges, where students from India are by far the biggest cohort of international students. Chinese students make up the largest group of international students at universities.

Given that many Canadian universities and colleges don’t want to rely so heavily on foreign students to survive, Dhahan believes taxpayers would be willing to spend more on higher education to support domestic students and protect foreign students from being taken advantage of.

Dhahan said it’s disturbing that a lot of foreign students whose parents are not rich are being encouraged by immigration consultants here and abroad to sign up for six-month programs at some of Canada’s more than 900 private schools, mainly so they can gain a work permit.

“Canadian governments have no policing resources to monitor how many actually study, or how many stay in Canada beyond the six-month program,” Dhahan said. “There is no determination as to who leaves and who stays.”

Since the vast majority of foreign students want to eventually become Canadian citizens, Dhahan and Kurland say they are vulnerable to victimization by seedy employers.

Some desperate students, according to Dhahan and recent reports, are paying employers kickbacks worth tens of thousands of dollars to fill out a government form called a labour market impact assessment, which allows them to work longer in Canada so they can apply for permanent resident status.

Listening to troubled families and students over the years, Dhahan has also heard many variations on news media reports about landlords taking advantage of foreign students.

“I would say the reputations of our world-class public colleges and universities are being tarnished right now.” Good quality public institutions are being lumped together with dubious private ones, Dhahan said. And both, he said, are often demanding “rapacious” and “unjust” tuition fees.

In a reference to the West’s past history of colonialism, which often led to the exploitation of the people of developing nations, Dhahan said: “It’s colonization all over again. Just in a different way.”

Source: Douglas Todd: Foreign-student dreams being crushed in greedy Canada

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Nicolas: La vérité, le temps, le pouvoir et la paix

2023/10/13 Leave a comment

Balanced and relevant reflections:

Quatre choses fondamentales semblent nous filer entre les doigts et échapper à notre vue, alors que le monde tente de prendre acte de la violence en Israël et à Gaza.

La vérité. Nul besoin de s’étendre face au malheureux mélange du journalisme en crise, de l’explosion de l’intelligence artificielle et de l’effondrement de Twitter (renommé X). Les petits crochets « vérifié » ne garantissent plus la crédibilité de personne, les services de modération du contenu et de vérification des faits des plateformes ne sont d’aucune efficacité et les fausses informations abondent. Résultat : il n’a jamais été aussi difficile de s’informer en ligne d’un conflit où les actions — et les morts — évoluent d’heure en heure.

Le temps. Bien des observateurs ont comparé l’attaque du Hamas contre des civils israéliens, y compris beaucoup d’enfants, samedi, à Pearl Harbour ou au 11 septembre 2001. Ce qu’on essaie de transmettre par cette image, c’est le sentiment d’une brèche. Il n’y a jamais eu autant de morts du côté israélien, tout comme les Américains n’ont pas l’habitude d’être attaqués sur leur propre sol. Les États-Unis ont disposé de temps pour entrer en deuil national, puis réagir : la guerre du Pacifique qui s’est soldée par deux bombes atomiques d’un côté, la guerre en Irak et la déstabilisation du Proche-Orient de l’autre.

On ne dispose pas, ici, de temps. La contre-offensive de l’armée israélienne à Gaza est déjà en cours. Le nombre de civils décédés monte d’heure en heure, dont là aussi, beaucoup d’enfants. Vu le déséquilibre des forces en présence, on craint ce qui suivra.

La quasi-totalité de la classe politique canadienne a condamné les manifestations propalestiniennes du week-end, comme si chaque personne dans la rue était là pour « célébrer » l’attaque du Hamas, et donc des morts juives. Bien qu’il y eût, certes, parmi les organisateurs, des personnages aux objectifs hautement condamnables, bien des participants en étaient mal informés et se montraient plutôt profondément inquiets, ainsi que solidaires du peuple palestinien, plus largement.

Comment peut-on vouloir envoyer ce message de soutien aux Palestiniens alors que les corps des victimes du Hamas sont encore chauds ? Parce qu’il n’y a pas de temps, justement. Toutes les préoccupations, les peurs, les colères et les deuils s’empilent les uns sur les autres, se blessent et s’enterrent les uns les autres. Dans un conflit où les émotions sont aussi à fleur de peau, le manque de temps envenime tout.

Le pouvoir. C’est une chose de souhaiter une couverture médiatique équilibrée et qui met de l’avant une représentation juste des points de vue de chaque partie impliquée, de chercher à traiter avec respect chaque victime de la guerre. C’est indispensable, même. C’en est une autre de gommer, de perdre de vue, ou de feindre de ne pas remarquer comment le pouvoir et ses iniquités affectent différemment chacun des camps.

Un exemple criant, parmi tant d’autres. D’un côté, Gaza fait l’objet d’un blocus depuis des années, et l’Égypte ne permet la sortie que de quelques personnes au compte-goutte au poste frontalier de Rafah, qui est d’ailleurs bombardé par Israël depuis le début de la semaine. De l’autre, on planifie avec l’appui de la communauté internationale des évacuations de l’aéroport de Tel-Aviv, où une proportion importante des Israéliens a une double citoyenneté, et d’où on peut circuler dans le monde sans visa.

Tout le monde cherche à fuir devant la peur, la peur atroce, la terreur, les morts. La peur peut être aussi grande de chaque côté. La peur est propre à chacun. La peur ne se mesure pas. Les moyens de fuir, eux, se mesurent.

La paix. J’ai le sentiment que chaque reportage, chaque entrevue doit se terminer sur un « avez-vous l’espoir de voir la paix un jour » ? Non seulement c’est cliché, mais il est aussi irritant de voir la paix présentée comme un processus qui appartient à une poignée d’hommes qui accepteraient un jour de parlementer autour d’une même table.

La paix n’est pas qu’un état politique, c’est une action que l’on peut choisir de mener, ou non, chaque jour. La paix est un moteur derrière nos gestes et nos paroles aussi.

On se souvient tous du « soit vous êtes avec nous, soit vous êtes avec les terroristes » de George W. Bush au lendemain du 11 septembre. C’était là une logique guerrière, qui a mené tout droit à la guerre réelle. Cette logique est manichéenne. Elle prend toute entreprise de contextualisation comme une injure, et est persuadée que de chercher à comprendre les actions du camp adverse, c’est les justifier, les excuser ou même s’en solidariser.

Cette logique guerrière pullule. Elle accélère la droitisation de la société civile israélienne et prend sa gauche, qui souhaite une Palestine libre, en étau — alors que cette gauche est essentielle aux efforts de paix. Elle mène à des tensions douloureuses au sein des communautés juives d’ici, et rend d’autant plus ardue et coûteuse le partage de perspectives qui dissonent d’avec celles des grandes associations. Elle soutient tout autant le processus de radicalisation qui a permis l’émergence du Hamas et marginalisé le leadershipde l’Autorité palestinienne. La logique guerrière refuse de faire la distinction entre le soutien à une Palestine libre et un cri de ralliement terroriste. Elle ramène du même souffle toute la population d’Israël, et même tout le peuple juif, à l’administration de Nétanyahou.

La paix, comme choix à la portée de tous, c’est le choix de faire de la place dans son esprit et dans son coeur à plusieurs émotions et vérités en même temps. La paix cherche à comprendre à la fois le rôle du trauma de l’Holocauste et des siècles d’antisémitisme dans la charge symbolique que porte Israël, les 75 ans de délocalisation, d’oppression et de marginalisation du peuple palestinien, le rôle du colonialisme dans le contrôle britannique du territoire palestinien au moment où il a été donné à Israël et le pouvoir continu de l’Occident sur la région depuis. La paix cherche à écouter tout, entendre tout, faire assez de place pour tout.

Anthropologue, Emilie Nicolas est chroniqueuse au Devoir et à Libération. Elle anime le balado Détours pour Canadaland.

Source: La vérité, le temps, le pouvoir et la paix

Filed under foreign policy, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

John Ivison: Tolerating the glorification of terror and slaughter is societal suicide

2023/10/12 Leave a comment

Of note:

Sukhdool Singh, an alleged gangster, was gunned down in Winnipeg last month, in a tit-for-tat killing between rival gangs.

Singh was wanted in India for extortion and murder, and was alleged to have links to the Khalistan Tiger Force, which has been designated a terror organization by the Indian government. He is said to have escaped to Canada on a forged passport in 2017 and India has been trying, unsuccessfully, to extradite him ever since.

Singh’s case is instructive because it is at the heart of the dispute between Canada and India. The Indians say Canada has offered a safe haven for Khalistani terrorists in return for votes from the Sikh community.

Canada says that its hands are tied because freedom of speech is protected under the Charter of Rights.

By its actions, the Canadian government has also endorsed the recent findings of the House of Commons justice and human rights committee that concluded suspects could be abused and tortured if returned to India and a host of other countries. Only six people were extradited to India between 2002 and 2020 and none of them were suspected Khalistani terrorists.

Canada is seen as being soft on terror, with some justification.

Its record on clamping down on terror financing is abysmal, as noted by B.C.’s Cullen commission into money laundering, which found that the federal Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre (FINTRAC) is ill-equipped to share intelligence with law enforcement. Proof of FINTRAC’s impotence is the lack of any charges laid between 2009 and 2016, even though it uncovered 683 transactions linked to terror financing

The government is in the process of beefing up its efforts against money laundering and terror financing, with a number of proposed legislative changes aimed at giving FINTRAC and law enforcement more powers.

But Canada’s perennial balancing act with rights and freedoms leads to much hand-wringing. For example, the Canada Revenue Agency has been accused of unfairly targeting Muslim-led charities, leading to calls for the agency to suspend its terror-financing investigative unit. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed his sympathy for what he called the systemic Islamophobia in the CRA.

However, the atrocities that the world has witnessed over the course of the past weekend in Israel may tilt that balance away from the indulgence that has prevailed.

The scenes that played out on Saturday night in Mississauga, with joyous crowds cheering and honking horns, as if their team had just won the World Cup, were abhorrent. This was the glorification of the mass murder of children, such as the 40 dead babies discovered at the Kfar Aza kibbutz in southern Israel. This was celebration of Hamas’ deliberate and systemic targeting of civilians to kill as many as possible.

To his credit, Trudeau renounced such scenes in his remarks at a Jewish community centre in Ottawa. “The glorification of death and violence and terror has no place anywhere, especially here in Canada. Hamas terrorists aren’t a resistance, they’re not freedom fighters, they are terrorists and no one in Canada should be supporting them, much less celebrating them.”

Canada has a law against displaying hate — Section 319 of the Criminal Code, which says that anyone who incites hatred against an identifiable group where incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of an indictable offence.

But such is the power of section 2b of the Charter when it comes to freedom of expression, it has been used sparingly — just 20 times between 2001 and 2019.

That is a good thing. I am proud to live in a country where truth cannot be put down by persecution. As John Stuart Mill said about free speech, conflicting doctrines often share the truth between them.

But it is quite another thing to witness fellow citizens lionize rape and murder.

In 2015, the Senate committee on national security and defence released a report in the wake of the terror attack on Parliament Hill.

It made a number of recommendations that were never enacted, including establishing a “no visit” list of identified ideological radicals and working in Muslim communities to create an effective counter-narrative to Islamic fundamentalism.

But one conclusion that it drew has special resonance today — that our hate laws should be updated to ban the glorification of terrorists, terrorist acts and terrorist symbols. The committee said it recognized issues with the Charter of Rights but noted that France and U.K. have similar laws.

There are clearly issues with what constitutes “glorification” — a grey zone where there may not be specific calls for action. France’s law appears to go too far: one 25-year-old man was handed a suspended sentence for scribbling “Vive Daesh” (aka ISIL) on a toilet wall.

Yet, antisemitic chants calling for the destruction of Israel, or in the case of Canada’s Khalistanis, building a carnival float that celebrates the assassination of Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi (as happened in Toronto in 2023) create the conditions for violence. The British law includes a clause that specifically says the offence occurs when members of the public might reasonably be expected to infer that what is being glorified is being proposed as conduct that should be emulated.

The introduction of such legislation may go a long way to healing the rift with India — and that cannot be done quickly enough.

We are entering a period of what historian Niall Ferguson has predicted will be a “cascade of conflict,” where Russia, Iran and China will do their best to overturn the international order by testing a fiscally overstretched America in three theatres: Eastern Europe, the Middle East and the Far East. It will be no surprise to anyone if China makes an illegal move in the South China Sea in the coming weeks.

Canada needs to recognize that, in W.B. Yeats’ words, anarchy is loosed upon the world and innocence is drowned; that “the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

We need to stand with our allies, even if we don’t often like what they do. India’s Narendra Modi is a thin-skinned chauvinist; Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu may be corrupt and is certainly incompetent.

As the former Shin Bet chief, Ami Ayalon, told Le Figaro, the Netanyahu government is largely responsible for the divisions that created an opportunity for Hamas, with its controversial push for justice reforms and a policy that marginalized the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

But these flaws pale in comparison to the what the great autocracies would have in store for us.

I’m haunted by a quote in Avi Shavit’s superb history of Israel: My Promised Land, where he talks about the vitality of the nation. “And yet, there is always the fear that one day, daily life will freeze like Pompeii’s.”

For too many Israelis, life did indeed freeze this weekend. The existential threat there is palpable. Canada cannot allow pluralism and reasonable accommodation to plant the seeds of our self-destruction.

Source: John Ivison: Tolerating the glorification of terror and slaughter is societal suicide

Filed under Multiculturalism, Radicalization Tagged with , , , ,

Sean Speer: Shocking pro-Hamas, anti-Israel rallies lay bare the limits of Canadian pluralism

2023/10/11 Leave a comment

Expect to see more similar commentary. The formal limits are essentially our laws and regulations with informal limits even harder to enforce consistently. Without getting into “both side-ism,” the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and repression of Palestinians draws insufficient coverage and commentary. But the barbarism of Hamas needs to be condemned without reservation:

As Palestine supporters continue to organize themselves in different Canadian cities to effectively demonstrate in favour of Hamas’s abhorrent attacks on the State of Israel, the inherent tensions and limits of pluralism have been laid bare for everyone to see. 

Pluralism is a key part—arguably the key part—of Canada’s conception of itself and our common citizenship. The country’s basic promise is one of peaceful co-existence. Our institutions, norms, and practices are set up to accommodate a multiplicity of viewpoints and persuasions concerning the most fundamental questions about justice, human flourishing, and what constitutes the good life. 

Pluralism is also a key—arguably the key part—of my own worldview. Although, as I’ve grown older, I’ve become more comfortable in my own thinking about these questions, I’ve also grown less comfortable with the idea of imposing my answers on others. Our own limitations (what Kant referred to as our “crooked timber”) invariably constrain the individual pursuit of truth. The public square should therefore be a crowded, complicated, and contentious marketplace of ideas. The state must resist imposing a singular conception of truth on the society. 

Yet pluralism cannot be an open-ended promise either. Just because our ability to discern the truth may be imperfect and incomplete doesn’t mean that we should give into an empty relativism. Some ideas are bad and wrong. We cannot permit our pluralistic commitments to provide license for those who reject our society’s basic values or even wish to do it harm. Pluralism cannot be a one-sided surrender to illiberal and reactionary forces. 

We’ve witnessed in recent days these tensions and limits inherent to Canadian pluralism. While most of us mourned and lamented the inhumanity of Hamas’s terrorist attacks on Israel, a small minority among us have defended and even celebrated them. These individuals and organizations have relied on Canada’s promise of freedom to countenance and glorify the indiscriminate violence of a group designated as a terrorist organization by our own government. 

There have been pro-Palestinian demonstrations across the country that have effectively affirmed Hamas’s terrorism. The videos from these pro-Hamas rallies in cities such as Mississauga and Montreal have been shocking. It must be said that rallies in support of a terrorist organization that has carried out a systematic campaign of killing women and children are incompatible with Canadian values.

Meanwhile, groups such as the Muslim Association of Canada and National Council of Canadian Muslims (which according to online records have received more than $1.34 million in federal funding between them since 2018) may be more careful in their messaging, but they’re still ultimately equivocal about what the world has witnessed. Their tendency towards “two-sideism” and other prevaricating devices have obscured the extent to which they implicitly affirm Hamas’ narrative. If in the face of overwhelming evidence of brutality and cruelty against Israelis your first instinct is to lament “the tyranny and terrorism of the Zionists” or criticize Israel’s democratic leadership, you’ve for all intents and purposes exposed your true character. 

Which it must be said is fair enough as far as some pluralistic protections go. One can oppose the current Israeli government or even critique the State of Israel itself and of course still find him or herself able to avail Canada’s protections of freedom of conscience or expression. We cannot and should not police one’s thoughts per se. But it certainly doesn’t mean that radical groups are entitled to taxpayer dollars or that individuals who cross the line from reasonable disagreements to the promotion and glorification of violence shouldn’t face sanction. 

These basic observations shouldn’t in and of themselves be controversial. Our commitment to pluralism must be uncompromising up and until it comes to undermine the basic security and stability of our own society. As my former boss Brian Lee Crowley has often said: “[we cannot permit] our list of freedoms to become our suicide note.”

Drawing these lines is of course complicated. Our default assumption must be highly permissive. Just because an idea is controversial or at odds with the majority’s views isn’t a reason to exclude it from the public square. The health of our society is measured in part by our willingness to protect ample space for such views. Imposing parameters around the public square therefore comes with great risk. Those parameters can be misapplied, misread, or even wielded by those whose primary goal is to constrain ideas that don’t match their own preferences. Just because it’s hard, however, doesn’t mean that it’s a task that we should shrink from. 

There are perspectives that should rightly be denounced, marginalized, and precluded from receiving public dollars. Even if one is squeamish about laws and policies that criminalize acts like the glorification of terrorism, there ought to be a minimum agreement that we have a collective responsibility to condemn such behaviour in order to effectively raise its social costs and signal to those inside and outside of our society that our pluralism isn’t a license for depravity or violence. 

Canada has essentially bet its future on pluralism. As our population gets more and more diverse, the multiplicity of views will grow and pluralism will be crucial for managing our diversity. I think it’s a good bet. Unlike some conservatives, I’ve tended to disagree with the instinct to mock Prime Minister Trudeau’s assertion that “diversity is our strength.” I think it’s broadly true. But if our pluralism isn’t principled, if it doesn’t involve some limits, then diversity will cease to be our strength and may eventually become the source of our undoing. 

Source: Sean Speer: Shocking pro-Hamas, anti-Israel rallies lay bare the limits of Canadian pluralism

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Participation in Canadian society through sport and work

2023/10/11 Leave a comment

Some interesting gender and population group differences. Male participation in sports higher than female, and considerable differences among different groups. Cost of participation is a greater issue among visible minorities.

Overall, most felt that cultural differences were appreciated in the workforce, with significant lower numbers of Black, Korean and Chinese persons. Black and Korean persons also reported higher levels of discrimination and racism:

With more than 450 ethnic or cultural origins reported in the 2021 Census, the rich diversity is reflected in all spheres of Canadian life, where people in Canada live, play and work. New data from the Survey Series on People and their Communities (SSPC), collected from May 5th to July 25th 2023, provide insight into this diversity, with information on sport and political engagement, as well as workplace cultures and shared values.

This release focuses on participation in sport and experiences at work, which are key indicators in Canada’s Quality of Life Framework and the Social Inclusion Framework. Together with information on the experiences of different population groups, these data help provide a valuable understanding of social inclusion, equity and diversity within different aspects of Canadian society.

About half of Canadians participate in sport

Involvement in sport is just one example of participating in Canadian society, and represents a key well-being indicator in the Quality of Life Framework. While playing a sport is consistently ranked as the most common form of civic engagement, the prevalence, motivations to play, and barriers to participate vary by gender, racialized group, and immigration status.

Throughout Canada, people from all walks of life participated in some type of sport in the 12 months preceding the survey, with slightly more than half (55%) of people aged 15 years of age and older reporting participating in sports such as soccer, ice hockey, swimming and running. Overall, men (62%) were more likely to participate in sports than women (49%).

Across the majority of all population groups, the participation rates of men were higher than those of women, but the difference was most pronounced among Filipino (55% of men versus 29% of women) and Black (66% of men versus 42% of women) populations where men were much more likely to play sports than women. The Arab population also showed discrepancy between men and women’s sports participation, with high rates for men. Indeed, 7 in 10 Arab men played a sport compared with just under one-half of Arab women (48%).

Overall, for both women and men, the Korean (62%) and Chinese (62%) populations were among the most likely to have played sports, and this remained true for men and women in these groups (69% for both Korean and Chinese men, and 55% for both Korean and Chinese women). Meanwhile, the least likely groups to report sport participation were South Asian (46%) and Filipino (41%) populations.

What is the most popular sport? It varies!

Among those who participated in some type of sport over the previous 12 months, swimming was the most common, reported by over one-third (35%) of people. This was closely followed by cycling (33%) and running (27%).

The popularity of specific sports varied across racialized groups. Swimming topped the list overall but was the leading sport for only the non-racialized population (37%), West Asians (36%) and Koreans (36%). Running was the favourite sport among the greatest number of racialized groups. Chinese (40%), Japanese (35%), Southeast Asian (35%), South Asian (33%) and Black (32%) populations participated in running, more than any other sport, as well as people belonging to two or more racial or cultural groups (i.e., multiple racialized groups) (37%).

Soccer was another popular sport among racialized groups. It was most common among the Arab population (40%) and was the second most common sport for Black respondents (31%).

In general, the Canadian-born population was more likely to have participated in winter sports such as ice hockey, skating, skiing and snowboarding, compared with immigrants, who were more likely to have played soccer, tennis or basketball.

Most people play sports for health and fitness

Playing sports can be done recreationally or competitively, though most people played recreationally over the previous 12 months. Overall, 83% of sports players reported playing sports recreationally, outside of a club or league. This was sometimes done in combination with more structured recreational programs, through a club or league, such as group fitness, intramural sports, or sport clubs. Almost one-quarter (24%) played recreational sports, while a smaller share (11%) said they were registered in a competitive sport.

When asked what motivates them to participate in sports, 82% of people who took part in sports cited physical health and fitness, followed by fun, recreation or relaxation (70%), mental health benefits (65%) and doing activities with friends (54%.)

Cost of participating is a common barrier to sport participation for racialized groups

Overall, a lack of interest (35%) was the most often cited by respondents as a reason for not playing sports over the previous 12 months. This was the case for both men and women, and was seen across all racialized groups. Two other commonly cited reasons for not playing sports were lack of time (33%) and age (24%).

The cost of participating was reported as a barrier by 11% of people who did not play sports. This was more often cited by Koreans (20%), West Asians (20%) and Latin Americans (17%), who were nearly twice as likely as non-racialized Canadians (10%) to cite this barrier.

Immigrants were more likely than their Canadian-born counterparts to indicate lack of time (37% for immigrants versus 30% for Canadian-born people) and age (28% versus 24%) as barriers to participating in sports.

Women more likely to say cultural differences enrich their workplace

Work constitutes a significant domain of life, characterized by connections that can profoundly impact health, economic well-being, job satisfaction, and career advancement. Just as engaging in physical activity can positively influence overall well-being, experiences at work play a pivotal role in fostering feelings of inclusion and respect within the workplace.

Just under half of those who worked over the previous 12 months stated they felt that cultural differences enrich their workplace (46%). Women (49%) were more likely than men (44%) to say they felt that cultural differences enriched their workplace.

For nearly all racialized groups, more than half felt that cultural differences enrich the workplace (ranging from 41% to 65%). While 43% of those not belonging to a racialized group indicated that they felt cultural differences enriched the workplace, this group was the most likely to indicate that there were no cultural differences in their workplace (16%).

More than half (54%) of immigrants said they felt that cultural differences enrich their workplace, compared with 43% of the Canadian-born population. Additionally, immigrants (10%) were less likely than Canadian-born respondents (15%) to indicate that there were no cultural differences in their workplace.

Around 85% of Canadians feel cultural differences are respected in the workplace

Around 85% of Canadians who have worked at a job or business in the previous 12 months felt that cultural differences were respected in their workplace. Racialized groups (81%) were less likely than non-racialized Canadians (86%) to feel that cultural differences were respected in their workplaces. Japanese (87%), Latin American (86%) and Arab (86%) people, in addition to those who do not belong to a racialized group, were most likely to say that they felt that cultural differences were respected. However, Black (74%), Korean (74%) and Chinese (81%) people in Canada were least likely to believe that diversity was valued in their workplace. Immigrants (82%) were less likely to indicate that cultural differences were respected in their workplace than the Canadian-born respondents (86%).

More than one-fifth of Black and Korean people in Canada report having experienced unfair treatment, racism or discrimination while at work

Around 12% of those who worked in the previous 12 months indicated that they had experienced unfair treatment, racism or discrimination while at work. Women (15%) were more likely than men (10%) to report having experienced some type of unfair treatment.

Among those reporting experiences of some type of unfair treatment in the workplace, race or skin colour was the most common reason (29%), followed by sex (27%) and age (23%). Among women, the top basis of unfair treatment in the workplace was sex (37%), followed by race or skin colour (25%). For men, race or skin colour was the top reason (35%) followed by ethnicity or culture (27%).

All racialized groups were more likely than the non-racialized group (10%) to report having been subjected to some type of unfair treatment in the workplace. However, Black (26%) and Korean (20%) people in Canada were most likely to experience some type of unfair treatment. Immigrants (15%) were also more likely than the Canadian-born (11%) to experience some type of unfair treatment while at work.

Race and skin colour was one of the top reasons for reporting some type of unfair treatment at work for those belonging to racialized groups, ranging from a high of 78% among Black people to 28% for Latin American people. Ethnicity or culture was another common reason, especially for South Asian (50%) and Arab (48%) groups. Another commonly reported reason for some type of unfair treatment among Arab people in Canada was religion (45%). Having an accent was a top reason cited by Latin American people, which was as common for this group as ethnicity or culture (40% for both reasons). 

For immigrants in Canada, the main reasons reported for experiencing some type of unfair treatment while at work was race or skin colour (46%), and ethnicity or culture (38%), followed by accent and language (28% each).

The analysis of sports and cultural diversity in the workplace only covers two of the many facets of Canadian society that can be examined. Future analysis using the SSPC on topics such as shared values and political engagement will continue the contribution to a greater understanding of the experiences of different groups of Canadians.

Source: Participation in Canadian society through sport and work

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →