Anne Applebaum: In Britain, anti-Semitism is back | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

2018/02/15 Leave a comment

Applebaum on the mainstreaming of antisemitism and some of the possible reasons:

Anti-Semitism is back. Not just as a nasty little fringe sentiment, and not just in the Breitbart comment sections. Not just in social media either, although anyone who posts or tweets and has a Jewish-sounding surname (and even many who don’t) has had to get used to the fact that social media is a perfect conduit for language that would once have been too filthy to use.

The best antidote is not to care; that is what the “block” button on Twitter is for. But when the sentiments begin to creep into mainstream institutions in European countries, then some deeper analysis is required. Here, I am going to bypass the would-be authoritarians of central Europe — some of whom have lately fallen all over themselves trying to live up to old stereotypes. I am instead going to write about reasonable, pragmatic Britain, where both major political parties have lately been incubating distinctly un-British forms of conspiracy thinking and paranoia.

Weird forms of anti-Semitism on the far left of the British political spectrum have been around for some time. The former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, is famous for, among other things, having compared a Jewish journalist to a Nazi. He also accused the Jews of collaborating with Hitler, a statement that got him suspended from the Labour Party last year. Once an outlier, Mr. Livingstone is now mainstream. Over the past couple of years, as the party has moved left, internal party squabbles have broken out over a Holocaust denier being invited to speak at a fringe event during a party conference, over a local council candidate who posted anti-Semitic comments, over a member of the Labour Muslim Network accused of the same and so on.

Some of the lines of paranoia seem to stretch back to the “rootless cosmopolitanism” propaganda of the old Eastern Bloc. Remember that Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, is a former writer for the Morning Star, a pro-Soviet British publication that furtive-eyed young people used to hand out on street corners. Some of it seems to be coming from the Muslim community. There are constant calls to do something more about it — to stamp it out, to protest, none of which ever quite seems to solve the problem.

But the other side of the British political spectrum is catching up. Here, the sources of the conspiracy theories are different: the international alt-right and the authoritarian states of Eastern Europe. Nigel Farage — the pro-Brexit, anti-European friend of President Donald Trump and Steve Bannon — has mused aloud about the vast power of the “Jewish lobby.” The Daily Telegraph, once the reliably conservative newspaper of the English shires, has picked up that theme, too.

On Feb. 8, the paper ran an extraordinary front-page headline splash about George Soros, the Jewish financier, and his “secret plot to thwart Brexit.” The same story — also reported in more ordinary language in other British papers — in fact concerned a non-secret donation that is by no means unique. There are several anti-Brexit groups in Britain with private funding from wealthy people, just as there are several pro-Brexit groups with private funding from wealthy people.

The headline — in a newspaper owned by two genuinely secretive billionaires who live in what is considered an offshore tax haven — was accompanied by an article that repeated some of the slander about Mr. Soros that has been peddled for years, starting in Russia and then spreading west, including the fact that his foundation, which supports democracy and free speech in that part of the world, was chased out of Russia and Uzbekistan — as if that were a mark against it. The following day, the Daily Mail — a newspaper owned by a billionaire — and the Sun — a newspaper owned by Rupert Murdoch, a nonresident billionaire — picked up the same story with the same imagery. The latter referred to Mr. Soros as a “puppeteer.”

The most charitable explanation is that the Telegraph, in conjuring the age-old specter of a secretive Jew manipulating politics behind the scenes, did not know what it was doing. The less charitable explanation is that it was dog-whistling on purpose. The Sun and the Mail almost certainly could care less.

Still, this is new, even by the low standards of British tabloids. Why is it happening now? My best explanation is that the British, having unmoored themselves from Europe, are experiencing an unfamiliar sense of powerlessness. The campaign to leave the European Union told them they would “take back control.” Instead, negotiations with the EU have forced a humiliating series of concessions. Although the deadline is only a year away, the most important questions are still unresolved, because the ruling Conservative Party is too badly divided to resolve them. Hard choices on trade deals and the status of Northern Ireland have not been made because they will make too many people angry. The Labour Party, meanwhile, maintains strategic ambiguity and says  little.

As centrists and pragmatists retreat, wounded, from political life, new fantasies and fantasists blossom in the vacuum. Surely it can’t be the case that a directionless Britain is floundering; surely someone else must be to blame for all of this chaos and ill will. Some seek scapegoats, others uncover conspiracies. Maybe it’s unsurprising, then, that the oldest scapegoats and the most familiar tropes are among them.

via Anne Applebaum: In Britain, anti-Semitism is back | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Filed under Antisemitism Tagged with ,

Fewer Americans gave up their citizenship in 2017 | New York Post

2018/02/15 Leave a comment

The latest numbers:

For the first time in five years, the number of Americans renouncing their citizenship decreased in 2017, government records show.

Renunciations for the year fell 5.1 percent, to 5,133 — after a four-year climb to a record 5,411 in 2016, according to the IRS.

But the real story lies in the fourth quarter, when the number of renunciations tumbled 71 percent from the same period in 2016.

While a direct cause for the decline is not known, it was in the fourth quarter that buzz began to build around a tax cut.

Taxes, and the fact that citizens living abroad still owe the IRS, are often cited by those giving up their citizenship as the reason for the move. President Trump signed the tax overhaul bill into law on Dec. 22.

Fewer Americans feel they must employ the life-altering tactics of Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin, pop star Tina Turner and socialite-songwriter Denise Rich — all of whom cut their US tax liabilities by renouncing their US citizenship.

The departures so angered Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) that he introduced the Ex-Patriot Act in 2012, aka the Saverin Bill, in an unsuccessful attempt to keep tax dodgers from stepping on US soil again.

Marc J. Strohl of international tax firm Protax Consulting Services, sympathizes with Schumer.

“We have every right to be upset with Americans who walk out of here with millions in their pockets,” Strohl said.

The CPA also noted that since 2010 the number of expatriates exceeded 1,000 in every year but one.

“Most everyone who wanted to leave has already left,” he concluded.

via Fewer Americans gave up their citizenship in 2017 | New York Post

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Criticism of religious groups is good for religion – David Millard Haskell

2018/02/14 Leave a comment

While I disagree with some of his points regarding the term Islamophobia, his points on the benefits of religion being subject to criticism are valid:

The fruits of the Liberals’ anti-Islamophobia motion, M-103, that called for study and recommendation on religious discrimination in Canada, were revealed Feb. 1. The committee overseeing the issue released their report “Taking Action Against Systemic Racism and Religious Discrimination Including Islamophobia.”

The report has just two recommendations that specifically focus on Islamophobia. The first echoes the report title saying the government should “actively condemn systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia.”

The second is more substantive suggesting that Jan 29 “be designated as a National Day of Remembrance and Action on Islamophobia, and other forms of religious discrimination.”

For the last year Canadian Muslim groups, led by The National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), have lobbied government to make Jan 29 a Canada-wide anti-Islamophobia day. The date marks the 2017 deaths of six Muslim Canadians gunned down in their Quebec City Mosque.

While Liberal MPs and leading Muslim organizations are supporters of the initiative, a Forum Research poll conducted a few weeks ago showed only 17 per cent of Canadians approve of designating such a day. Conversely, half disapprove; the rest don’t know or are ambivalent.

For many Canadians, overly broad definitions of “Islamophobia” lead them to reject the day of action. Some definitions of the term insist any criticism of Muslim people or Islamic practices — be it political, cultural, or religious — qualifies as Islamophobia.

In their critique of the Liberals’ report, the Conservatives noted 26 definitions of the term were used by witnesses appearing before the committee and some of those, if enforced, would lead to significant erosion of free expression.

The NCCM itself has, in the past, shown it favours a definition of Islamophobia that maximally curbs criticism against their faith. In a guidebook it helped produce for the Toronto Board of Education last year, the group endorsed a definition of the term that stated, in addition to prejudice or hate directed against Muslims, “dislike” directed “toward Islamic politics or culture” also qualifies as Islamophobia.

After protests from various community groups, that definition was amended.

The NCCM’s impulse to shield Islam from criticism may be linked to a particular understanding of Muslims’ sacred texts. Certain sections of the Qur’an and Hadith specify that insulting Allah’s word or his messenger is not permitted.

Whatever is motivating members of the NCCM or others of like mind to shut down critique of Islam, such thinking is misleading and misplaced. It’s misleading because it conflates criticism and discrimination. It’s misplaced because religion is at its best when subjected to constant and fervent critique. Criticism leads to necessary correction.

Some “case studies” from the world’s largest religion, Christianity, prove this point.

In the recent past, Christianity in the West, specifically its conservative Protestant variety — evangelicalism — has been exposed to a steady stream of invective for its treatment of homosexuals.

Of course, being subjected to public and media scorn isn’t enjoyable for evangelicals. On several occasions they’ve rightly complained about unjust criticism. However, overall, the process has led to a “conversion experience.”

In its most recent national survey of religious Americans, Pew Research Center determined that between 2007 and 2017, evangelicals’ support for same-sex marriage rose from 14 per cent to 35 per cent. Among younger evangelicals, Gen Xers and Millennials, acceptance rose to 47 per cent.

Ongoing sociological research in Canada suggests these same trends are reflected among our evangelicals.

While exposure to criticism can make religion better, sheltering it from critique makes it worse. Again, we can look to Christianity for our example.

Last year when speaking before the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors about the Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandals, Pope Francis blamed a religious culture hostile to challenge for the tragedies that occurred. “The old practice… of not facing the problem,” he said, “kept our consciousness asleep.”

In the West, unchecked abuse is not isolated to the Catholic Church. We now have examples of Muslims committing similar, long-standing transgressions in the absence of critique. Most dramatic is the sex trafficking ring of Rotherham, England.

From the late 1980s until the 2010s an organized group of Muslim men abused over 1,000 young girls. Official investigations concluded school, social service, and government personal were aware of a problem but didn’t speak out fearing their comments would be viewed as Islamophobic.

While fear of seeming bigoted may drive some non-Muslims to keep quiet, most Canadians — Muslim and non-Muslims alike — who want to restrict criticism of Islam are more nobly motivated. They believe that such action fosters unity in society.

But censorship is an acid, not a glue, when it comes to progress and social cohesion.

Source: Opinion: Criticism of religious groups is good for religion

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with , , ,

Hidden Cost of Federal Recognition of Native American Tribes | Time

2018/02/14 Leave a comment

Similar to some of the recent discussions regarding Métis identity and the implications of the recent increases in those self-identifying as Métis (see “White settler revisionism” threatens Métis-Crown reconciliation), Arica L. Coleman, author of That the Blood Stay Pure: African Americans, Native Americans and the Predicament of Race and Identity in Virginia, looks at the US situation and the interplay with Black identities:

For a Native American tribe, federal recognition comes with a host of benefits, including housing, health and education funding. But the process of achieving that recognition from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) can be difficult — particularly because the BIA requires tribes to demonstrate continuous existence as an Indian entity from colonial times to the present. That’s a standard that, as recent news shows, doesn’t match up with the reality of American history.

On Jan. 30, President Trump signed H.R. 984, the Thomasina E. Jordan Indian Tribes of Virginia Federal Recognition Act of 2017, which granted federal recognition to six Virginia state-recognized Native American tribes via a special act of Congress rather than through the usual BIA process. The recognition means that members of the six tribes have achieved sovereign (albeit limited) status. Virginia Senators Tim Kaine and Mark Warner hailed the bill as having “righted a historical wrong.”

Yet the story of federal recognition for those six tribes—the Chickahominy, the Eastern Chickahominy, the Upper Mattaponi, the Rappahannock, the Monacan, and the Nansemond—also shows that at least one particular “historical wrong” remains unaddressed. In fact, their story illuminates a central problem with the way Indian recognition is managed on the state and federal level, as it is based on a problematic idea of racial purity.

The history behind that idea — that racial purity specifically requires the demonstrable absence of African-American ancestry — goes back to none other than Thomas Jefferson. His blood politics became the cornerstone of Virginia (and later federal) Indian policy, which poisoned Black-Indian relations and divided the families of those who struggled to maintain an Indian identity by seeking formal recognition.

As I demonstrate in my book That the Blood Stay Pure: African Americans, Native Americans and the Predicament of Race and Identity in Virginiainterracial intimacy between people of African descent and American Indians dates back to the early colonial era in Virginia. The Virginia General Assembly enacted its first proscriptions against interracial marriage in 1691, but this law only applied to intimacies between whites and non-whites. And, as noted by Jack D. Forbes in his book Africans and Native Americans: The Language of Race and the Evolution of Red-Black Peoples, by the end of the colonial period, enslaved Indians were classified as Negro along with their black enslaved counterparts.

By the late 18th century, in adherence with the idea that “one drop” of African blood defined a person as black, white settlers advocated for the state to stop recognizing Indian identity (and tribal land ownership) on the idea that the Native American identity had been lost due to intimacy with black Virginians. To wit, free Native Americans were classified on the census not as Indian but as free people of color or mulattoes.

By the end of the 19th century, the remnants of the state’s Powhatan people began to push back against the state-sanctioned reclassification of their identity with a dogged resolve. In order to do so, they embraced an identity not based on who they were, but rather on who they were not: black.

While complicated definitions of racial categories were not unique to Virginia, the state’s residents had another factor to deal with. Among the state’s most elite families were many that claimed descent from John Rolfe and Pocahontas. They were proud of their Native American heritage, but they were also adamant that they were white, and had to reconcile that idea with the widespread desire among the Virginia elitefor the Commonwealth to be the nation’s leading example of racial purity. So when the state enacted its Racial Integrity Act in 1924, it defined whiteness using the “Pocahontas Exception,” which spared those families from being forced to identify as colored, and thus subjected to Jim Crow.

But this raised the specter for the act’s backers that the Virginia Indian community would subvert the law to marry white people and “contaminate” the white gene pool. So, in the aftermath of the law’s passage, Walter Plecker, Virginia’s Vital Statistics Registrar, declared war on the Virginia Indian community. Plecker, who called Indians “Negroes in feathers,” sought to obliterate the Virginia Indians using what many have called “pencil genocide,” disallowing the use of the term Indian as a racial designation on government documents.

In the same period, the Virginia Indians found a steadfast ally in anthropologist Frank Speck of the University of Pennsylvania. Speck spent three decades among the Powhatan Tribes and became a fierce advocate for their formal recognition. In his monographs about the Powhatan Tribes, he significantly downplayed the historical kinship ties between blacks and Indians. In this view, these tribes were distinct from other Indian tribes and the state’s black population, because they had only intermarried with whites for nearly two centuries. Hence, Speck certified that the Powhatan Indians were racially pure.

During the 1930s and ‘40s, Speck lobbied the Federal Census Bureau to classify members of the Powhatan Tribes as Indian, despite Plecker’s strong opposition. The 1940 battle was a draw, as the bureau decided that the designation would be permitted, but with an asterisk to indicate racial uncertainly. Also at this time, prominent citizens began lobbying state and federal officials with petitions that certified that the Powhatan Tribes were of white-Indian only ancestry.

The resistance continued during World War II as three Caroline County residents were jailed for refusing to enlist in the Military as colored. One draftee of the Rappahannock Tribe expressed that he would rather go to jail than “go down in history as a negro.” Resistance to the “colored” classification also affected Powhatan Indian education; Indian schools only went to eighth grade. Because Virginia Indian children could not attend white schools and Powhatan parents refused to send them to colored schools, many Powhatan children did not attend high school. (Others, after Speck’s lobbying, completed high school at Federal Indian residential schools in North Carolina, Kansas and Oklahoma).

Even after Virginia’s schools were “integrated” after the Brown Supreme Court decision, the fallout from Speck’s campaign continued.

First, during the 1980s the Virginia Council on Indians (VCI) was established and eight tribes, seven of which were descendants of the former Powhatan Confederacy, received state recognition by a special act of the Virginia General Assembly. Second, tribal leaders and their anthropologist advocate Helen Rountree were appointed to the council to oversee Indian Affairs throughout the Commonwealth and to make recommendations to the VGA for tribes seeking state recognition. Third, in 1998, six of the eight state-recognized tribes began their efforts toward seeking federal recognition.

Yet, by 1990, the VCI established state recognition criteria based on the same BIA criteria for which tribal leaders sought and have now received exemption: the idea of continuous existence as a purely Indian entity. Hence, once the standard was adopted, the VCI did not grant a single Virginia Tribe a favorable recommendation for state recognition.

Even after last week’s historic signing, Plecker’s and Speck’s legacies are alive and well, in the idea that intimacy with blacks invalidates Indian identity. Broken friendships, disrupted kinship relations, and deep-seated animosities testify to the damage wrought by these men. Yet, as Lynette Allston, Chief of the Nottoway Tribe, told me just prior to submitting the tribe’s petition for state recognition, ”We are Indian people of white and black ancestry, and we won’t deny any part of who we are.”

via Hidden Cost of Federal Recognition of Native American Tribes | Time

Filed under Aboriginal, Multiculturalism Tagged with

How to support celebrating Canada’s Black heritage and challenge racism: Tiffany Gooch

2018/02/14 Leave a comment

A bit of a laundry list and given resource and other constraints, some guidance in terms of relative priorities would be helpful (I always start with improved data!):

At the end of January, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the official Canadian recognition of the UN Decade for People of African Descent, which runs from 2015 to 2024.

The gesture was three years late and largely overlooked by traditional media, but for some, the very act of a sitting prime minister acknowledging anti-Black racism — and making a public commitment to dealing with it — was a moment of historical significance.

The fight against anti-Black racism in Canada is not new. Generations of Black community members have been tirelessly carrying out this work across the country with insufficient support from government. It’s worth reading through the #BlackLivesCDNSyllabus developed and updated by Anthony Morgan and Huda Hassan for Canadian context.

As a next step, strategies and plans should be developed that include milestones for cross-ministerial policy collaboration with budgeted allocation, public and private partnerships, and sincere, thoughtful regional community consultations to guide the process.

There are opportunities for the private sector, unions, academic institutions, community-based organizations, and individuals to participate in seeking to understand, celebrate, and most importantly, support the advancement of the challenging work ahead.

Some key targets for these plans should include national celebrations of emancipation alongside official apologies for the enslavement of Black people in Canada and the systemic, anti-Black racism that continues to permeate Canadian institutions.

Aug. 1 should be a national holiday celebrating emancipation in Canada. Perhaps as a part of the federal recognition of the decade, the Greatest Freedom Show on Earth in Windsor, Ont., could come alive once more.

On the heels of Canada 150, we have an opportunity to band together to preserve and celebrate Black Canadian history and cultural contributions, beyond the month of February alone. There are extraordinary institutions — specifically many churches, built as sanctuaries and celebrations of Black Canadian freedom — well past observing their sesquicentennials.

Churches like Salem Chapel BME, where Harriet Tubman herself worshipped and organized to emancipate hundreds of enslaved Black families through a courageous journey to reach Canadian soil.

While we study and celebrate Black history let’s take a closer look at both the present and the future we want to create. The federal government should follow provincial leadership and gather disaggregated data, so we can see with numbers how our policies are having a disproportionately negative impact on Black Canadians.

It’s also important to remember that the African diaspora in Canada is beautifully diverse. We have different experiences, and will have different definitions of what success looks like as the Canadian acknowledgement of the decade is carried out.

We must also consider that it is real intergenerational trauma we are exploring and seeking to rectify. In the process, Black Canadians live in different stages of grief that impact how individuals contribute to this mentally and emotionally exhausting dialogue and work.

The federal government has taken an important step forward, and I hope that an equity lens can be applied in the development of policy with consideration to unique barriers faced by Black women, persons with disabilities, and members of the LGBTQ+ community.

Tangibly this means policy focus and investments in education, poverty reduction, health equity and especially mental health supports necessary for the success of Black Canadians.

This means acting on our responsibility to respond promptly to the issues facing Black communities at this very moment. This includes cannabis legalization, which should be rolled out with a proactive pardoning approach that ensures individuals with previous cannabis related convictions are not restricted from participating in the legal market.

It requires action to improve the experiences and outcomes of Black workers as they come forward with stories about the racism and micro-aggressions faced when training and working within their respective sectors. It further requires taking an honest look at public and private sector leadership positions and sponsoring a definition of diversity that goes beyond gender.

It means not turning a blind eye to the disproportionate impact of the global migrant crisis on Black families seeking refuge within our borders, and working to correct the systemic injustices, like the risk of deportation of children and youth in care that the case of Abdoul Abdi has shown us.

I challenge Canadians to aspire to global leadership, beginning by taking an honest look at our own shortcomings and contributing to the powerful role we can play as a country in creating better outcomes for people of African descent, both within and outside of our borders.

via How to support celebrating Canada’s Black heritage and challenge racism | Toronto Star

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with ,

UK: Home Office citizenship fees ‘scandalous’

2018/02/14 Leave a comment

Not just cost recovery. as in the case of expensive US and Canadian fees, posing a barrier to integration:

The Home Office has been criticised for making more than £800m from nationality services over the past six years.

Young people who have citizenship rights – including thousands born in the UK – have to pay up to £1,000 to register formally as citizens.

Campaigners claim the fees, which they say many youngsters cannot afford, are a “terrible injustice” and “nothing short of a scandal”.

The Home Office says the fees are fair and fund the wider immigration system.

What is registration?

Nationality services include naturalisation fees, registration fees, and other nationality-related payments. Naturalisation is the process of applying to become a British citizen.

Registration is the process where someone who has an existing right to British citizenship – for example, through residency, parentage, or birth – but does not currently hold citizenship, applies to obtain it.

If a young person does not register, and does not otherwise gain settled status, they could risk being subject to immigration controls, despite having grown up British.

Fees have risen since 2011, and the cost of registering two children has more than tripled due to fee increases and the abolition of second child discounts.

Another freedom of information response showed registrations cost the Home Office £264 to complete, despite applicants being charged £936 in the 2016-17 financial year.

Samson Adeola, 18, from Walthamstow, had to borrow money to pay his fees last year and said he was angry the Home Office was making so much money.

Mr Adeola, who was born in Nigeria, moved to London with his family when he was five and although had rights to citizenship, did not hold it.

He said without it, if he was going on to university, he would be forced to pay significantly higher tuition fees as an international student.

He also said he had missed out on the chance to perform in the opening ceremony of the London 2012 Olympics because he did not have citizenship at the time.

“It was very difficult for my mum, going around finding the money [for the Home Office fees],” he said, adding the family borrowed a “substantial amount” from their local church.

Chart showing the changes in fees for nationalist services

He said the family still had not repaid all the money, and he had taken a job as a pizza delivery boy to contribute.

“Balancing it with schoolwork is difficult – last night I got back really late,” he said.

“It’s really tiring and draining and it can take your mind off your studies.”

He said it was “really upsetting” the fees were so high, “especially for people who can’t scrimp and save the money together, and can’t put forward an application because of the cost”.

The family will also have to pay for each of Mr Adeola’s siblings, aged 10 and 15, to register if they want British citizenship, despite the fact the ten-year-old was born in the UK.

Solange Valdez-Symonds, director of the Project for the Registration of Children as British Citizens said: “For the Home Office to be exploiting this to make vast sums of money to spend on its immigration responsibilities is nothing short of a scandal and an especially terrible injustice to those children who cannot afford the Home Office’s fees.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “When setting fees, we also consider the benefits that a successful applicant is likely to gain and believe that it is right that those who use and benefit directly from the system make an appropriate contribution towards meeting associated costs.

“British nationality applications are not mandatory and many individuals decide not to apply.”

Source: Home Office citizenship fees ‘scandalous’

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

McGill admits to anti-Semitism not being a factor during re-elections: Gil Troy

2018/02/14 Leave a comment

Gil Troy, a professor at McGill, on the antisemitism anti-Zionism distinction or non-distinction:

Following an investigation into the incident, McGill University concluded that anti-Semitism was not a factor when students at the Student Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) general assembly in October prevented the re-election of three pro-Israel students who dared to oppose the BDS movement.

Yet McGill’s report made three serious mistakes: it ignored how modern anti-Semitism hides behind anti-Zionism; it implied that whereas universities put the burden of proof on racists, sexists and homophobes rather than their victims, the burden of proof regarding anti-Semitism at McGill falls on Jews, not Jew-bashers; and, most outrageously, while concluding there was no anti-Semitism at the Oct. 23 assembly, it proved that there was anti-Semitism before and afterwards – yet barely objected to it.

This is a volatile subject. The investigator, Professor Spencer Boudreau, approached his task calmly and honourably. He concluded that because BDS and Israel were issues in the vote, the outcome reflected political differences, not religious bigotry.

On one hand, his report tries to distinguishing between unacceptable Jew-hatred and hostility toward the Jewish state, which Israel’s supporters must tolerate, so our hostility toward Israel’s enemies will be tolerated, too.

Unfortunately, Boudreau misses the obsessive way that BDS supporters target Israel, which, as a Jewish state, attracts particular venom. Boudreau should have considered Natan Sharansky’s 3D test of anti-Semitism, which illustrates that when Israel is demonized disproportionately, judged by double standards and delegitimized, the assaults go from the realm of the normal to the pathological – from political debates, to Jew-hatred.

Similarly, reading the internationally recognized definition of anti-Semitism, which was drafted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, would have provided context and clarity. That definition explains that modern anti-Semitism includes “the targeting of the State of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity,” “Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel” and “Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the State of Israel.”

Would support for any other country have triggered this unprecedented rejection? If the SSMU had rejected a Francophone who supported Quebec separation, would that be tolerated and dismissed as just politics?

While ignoring modern anti-Semitism’s masquerade, the report also ignored campus norms about how bigotry is dealt with. Alleged micro-aggressions are taken seriously and victims’ perceptions predominate on compus. Yet Noah Lew’s feelings as a Jew experiencing unwarranted hatred were not treated as gingerly.

Beyond the subtleties is the fact that the report “buried the lede,” as reporters say. Indeed, in a report that found no evidence of anti-Semitism at McGill, Boudreau wrote: “I cannot stress enough that social media generally proved to be a most negative and at times disturbing platform.” He noted that some students posted “ad hominem” and “abusive attacks” and that a post made by the pro-BDS group Democratize SSMU contained “anti-Jewish tropes.”
Those words suggest that anti-Semitism did occur at McGill. Saying it didn’t occur at the SSMU but occurred elsewhere is like the pest controller saying, “Don’t worry, there are no pests in the attic,” while leaving them in the basement.

Furthermore, reporting that Democratize SSMU’s post was deleted and apologies were made implies that no harm was done, even though the report admits that “harm had been done” – and recognizes that this lynch mob-like atmosphere (my characterization) may have made Lew extra sensitive to such insults.

As a McGill professor and patriot, I wish that this report convinced me that there was no anti-Semitism at the university. But the report found rats in the basement. Someone within the McGill community must address this problem honestly, thoughtfully, constructively and aggressively. I don’t want any donors cutting funds to McGill, or any students refusing to enrol. But I also don’t want administrators and faculty using this whitewash with dark stripes to dodge their moral responsibility to make sure that every member of the McGill community feels respected and accepted, even if they dare to be pro-Israel, or even Zionist.

via McGill admits to anti-Semitism not being a factor during re-elections – The Canadian Jewish News

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Gender gap shows high-tech sector still stuck in the past — and it could prove costly [immigration numbers as well]

2018/02/13 Leave a comment

The article focusses on the ongoing gender gap in tech. However, the report (The Digital Talent Dividend) has the above chart showing the large share of immigrants. Unfortunately, there is no breakdown by group but unlikely to differ from other surveys of diversity in tech (strong representation of Asian visible minorities, weak representation of Blacks):

via Gender gap shows high-tech sector still stuck in the past — and it could prove costly – Technology & Science – CBC News

Filed under gender, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

L’internet joue un rôle crucial dans l’intégration des immigrants, selon une étude

2018/02/13 Leave a comment

Not much new here but nevertheless useful to have the study. Recommendations relate to reduced cost of internet (considered expensive) and more public access points (I had thought that libraries were filling that gap):

L’internet joue un rôle crucial dans l’intégration des immigrants au pays, autant pour se trouver un emploi que pour comprendre la culture de leur terre d’accueil, révèle une étude.

Celle-ci a été entreprise par des chercheurs de l’Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM), qui voulaient comprendre si et comment l’internet favorisait l’intégration.

Rien ou quasiment rien n’existait sur le sujet, a expliqué en entrevue téléphonique l’un des auteurs, le professeur Christian Agbobli, du département des communications sociales et publiques. L’étude a aussi été rédigée par Magda Fusaro, professeure au Département de management et technologie de l’UQAM et titulaire de la Chaire de l’UNESCO en communication et technologies pour le développement.

Leur conclusion? L’internet joue un rôle majeur pour les immigrants.

«Ils nous ont dit: “on a besoin d’internet” et “on ne peut pas fonctionner ici sans internet”», rapporte le professeur Agbobli, aussi cotitulaire de la Chaire de l’UNESCO.

Ils s’en servent même plus depuis leur arrivée au Canada que dans leur pays d’origine, a fait remarquer M. Agbobli.

Plus de la moitié des répondants ont inscrit que leur consommation d’internet avait augmenté de plus de 51% depuis qu’ils ont posé leurs valises au Canada.

Et cela parce que leurs réseaux existants dans leur ancien pays les aidaient à se trouver un emploi, par exemple, alors qu’ici, dépourvus de contacts, ils se fient beaucoup à l’internet pour la recherche d’un boulot. C’est le cas pour plus de 75% d’entre eux, est-il indiqué dans l’étude.

Les immigrants qui ont participé à l’étude résident au Canada depuis moins de 10 ans, et un sous-groupe évalué y était depuis moins de trois ans.

Les immigrants du Canada avaient presque tous (70,9 %) une connexion internet à leur maison et le téléphone cellulaire intelligent est l’équipement qu’ils utilisent le plus pour naviguer sur la toile.

Ils s’en servent aussi pour obtenir une foule de services, comme ouvrir un compte bancaire, se trouver un logement, des ressources dans leur quartier, et aussi pour comprendre les coutumes locales, comme savoir comment les gens se saluent. Ils vont aussi y lire les journaux canadiens, ajoute le professeur.

«Ça m’a beaucoup aidée, a déclaré une répondante. Vous pouvez trouver de l’information sur les sites internet du gouvernement et trouver les bénéfices pour enfants, et actuellement j’applique pour la citoyenneté et vous pouvez y trouver toute l’information.»

L’un des sites internet les plus sollicités par ces nouveaux arrivants est Google map, a souligné M. Agbobli.

Beaucoup de femmes immigrantes ont indiqué que cela les aidait à se déplacer d’elles-mêmes et ainsi être plus autonomes sans craindre de se perdre dans la ville.

«Par exemple, si mon mari prend la voiture, je peux facilement me déplacer parce que j’ai l’internet et je peux vérifier quel autobus passe près de ma maison, alors je ne suis pas tout le temps dépendante de mon mari, pour qu’il m’amène d’une place à l’autre. C’est l’une des choses les plus importantes pour moi», a relaté une autre répondante, dont le témoignage est retranscrit dans l’étude.

L’internet brise l’isolement, a fait valoir le professeur. «Et il devient »un lieu«, un »mode de vie«».

Évidemment, les immigrants se servent aussi de l’internet pour rester en contact avec leur famille et leurs amis dans leur pays d’origine.

La plus grande majorité des répondants étaient âgés de 30 à 39 ans, plus de 65% ont un diplôme universitaire et près de 80% d’entre eux sont des femmes. «Ce qui crée un biais dans l’interprétation des données, mais répond au biais qui avait été généré par la recherche elle-même», peut-on y lire. Car les femmes faisaient partie de l’un des trois groupes (avec les jeunes et les nouveaux arrivants) sur lesquels la recherche voulait plus spécifiquement se pencher. «Car les femmes sont souvent plus vulnérables dans le processus migratoire», fait valoir le professeur.

Les auteurs de la recherche formulent aussi des recommandations. D’abord, ils suggèrent au gouvernement de rendre l’internet plus accessible: les coûts sont élevés au Canada, ont constaté bon nombre d’immigrants. Un plus grand accès au wifi dans des lieux publics serait apprécié, disent-ils.

Aux organismes d’aide aux immigrants, ils suggèrent des cours sur l’usage d’internet, pour mieux les outiller et qu’ils puissent en faire un usage plus précis et efficace.

La collecte de données de l’étude a été faite en 2016. L’équipe a choisi de mener cette recherche dans les quatre provinces qui accueillent le plus d’immigration, soit l’Ontario, le Québec, l’Alberta et la Colombie-Britannique. Elle a été menée à l’aide d’entretiens en personne et de questionnaires.

via L’internet joue un rôle crucial dans l’intégration des immigrants, selon une étude | Stéphanie Marin | National

Filed under Immigration, Integration Tagged with ,

ICYMI – Bagnall: Could cloud services signal the end of ‘big zombie IT projects’ in government?

2018/02/13 Leave a comment

Still will face the same management challenges as conventional IT and the particular difficulties governments have in fixing and sticking to specifications. But certainly worth exploring:

As federal government announcements go, this one could have been a real snooze-fest.

Treasury Board President Scott Brison and Carla Qualtrough on Wednesday jointly unveiled a new information technology policy that had been in force for months, involving a once-obscure branch of technology called cloud services.

But their short show-and-tell, delivered on Facebook Live, hinted at something more profound taking place.

Brison in particular has accepted the idea that big government has to change the way it builds and manages its IT infrastructure — and that cloud services, which allow departments to lease computer capacity a bit at a time from private sector firms such as Amazon Web Services or Microsoft Azure — offer the way to do it.

“We can’t be a Blockbuster government when we’re serving a Netflix citizenry,” he said in comparing a defunct video rental business with a video-streaming company.

Brison appeared to be taking aim in part at Shared Services Canada, the government’s central computer services agency, which reports to Qualtrough. Since its formation in 2011, Shared Services has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in new data centres to house information and software that underpins programs ranging from the Canada Pension Plan to Statistics Canada’s census.

While the data centres are fresh and modern, Shared Services hasn’t impressed many federal departments because it’s been slow and inflexible in setting up new online services and ordering the new hardware.

Over the past year, smaller departments have forced the issue by quietly running their own pilot projects using Azure and other cloud providers. Private contractors now have dozens of cloud-based IT procurements in the works, such as applications designed to make scientific or business data available to the public.

Brison, whose department sets the overall policy for government IT, has reportedly been impressed with what cloud technology can do. On Wednesday he enumerated key benefits, such as how departments using cloud services can experiment with software applications a bit at a time, learning from the inevitable mistakes along the way.

“It’s better to learn the lessons early,” he said in an apparent reference to IT disasters such as the botched rollout of the Phoenix Pay system, “than to have big zombie IT projects rumbling on, trapped under the tyranny of sunk costs.”

How would Phoenix have developed in a cloud-based world? We could actually have an opportunity to find out if Qualtrough opts to restart the entire project. Nothing on that prospect Wednesday, though.

Of course, it’s very early days in the cloud services revolution. Qualtrough, who also seemed very much on board, noted her department had negotiated 22 contracts to date with companies that are selling cloud services to seven government departments and agencies, including Correctional Service Canada.

However, the value of these contracts — which are brokered by Shared Services in exchange for a fee — barely tops $2 million. This is a tiny fraction of Shared Services’ annual budget of more than $1.5 billion.

And there’s the other matter of security. Most of the government’s data is secret (a Protected B or higher classification), and Shared Services still has a monopoly over storing this information. Wednesday’s announcement was for unclassified stuff such as government websites that are to be viewed by the public.

Private contractors are suspicious that Shared Services is relying on security designations to retain its share of the government’s IT business.

It’s not clear how long its monopoly will last. Qualtrough noted the government is mulling further changes that would allow departments “in the future” to store even secret data in the cloud — one of the reasons tech giants such as Google and Amazon have been adding data centres in Canada.

This much is clear: providers of cloud services have secured their foothold in government. If they deliver as promised, this could be the beginning of the end of monster IT failures. There’ll be many small ones, to be sure. But the egregious example of Phoenix Pay has taught us that’s a much better way to run.

via Bagnall: Could cloud services signal the end of ‘big zombie IT projects’ in government? | Ottawa Citizen

Filed under Government Tagged with , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →