Liberal MPs ask universities if calling for genocide of Jews violates codes

[marshwiggle]

This is in Canada, and it's Liberal, (not Conservative) MPs asking.

Liberal MPs ask universities if calling for genocide of Jews violates school codes

Five Liberal members of Parliament are asking 25 Canadian university presidents to say whether calling for a genocide against Jewish people or the elimination of Israel violates their school policies.

Simple answer: Calling for genocide of any group should violate codes. I doubt there will be as much problem with clarity on this as in the US.

[Diogenes]

This is in Canada, and it's Liberal, (not Conservative) MPs asking.

Liberal MPs ask universities if calling for genocide of Jews violates school codes

Five Liberal members of Parliament are asking 25 Canadian university presidents to say whether calling for a genocide against Jewish people or the elimination of Israel violates their school policies.

Simple answer: Calling for genocide of any group should violate codes. I doubt there will be as much problem with clarity on this as in the US.

Please go listen to the NYT Daily podcast from the other thread I recommended. At the beginning of the infamous US hearing, the soundbites not aired ad nauseum included all Presidents actively denouncing genocide in their intro statements. Their stumbling to answer congressional gotchas, while cringey, is not the whole answer.

[marshwiggle]

This is in Canada, and it's Liberal, (not Conservative) MPs asking.

Liberal MPs ask universities if calling for genocide of Jews violates school codes

Five Liberal members of Parliament are asking 25 Canadian university presidents to say whether calling for a genocide against Jewish people or the elimination of Israel violates their school policies.

Simple answer: Calling for genocide of any group should violate codes. I doubt there will be as much problem with clarity on this as in the US.

Please go listen to the NYT Daily podcast from the other thread I recommended. At the beginning of the infamous US hearing, the soundbites not aired ad nauseum included all Presidents actively denouncing genocide in their intro statements. Their stumbling to answer congressional gotchas, while cringey, is not the whole answer.

Really! The presidents think genocide is bad! Wow!

</sarcasm>

The issue is not whether they think genocide is bad, but whether students publicly calling for it are over the line. That's only a problem if the presidents don't want to offend said students. It has nothing to do with academic speech.

[Parasaurolophus]

Calling for genocide is a hate crime in this country,so the answer is straightforward in a way it isn't in the US.

They are, however, asking in bad faith. They don't actually mean "calling for genocide". They mean things like chanting slogans which Israel has decided to equate with calls for genocide--when uttered by anyone other than Likud.

[onthefringe]

Calling for genocide is a hate crime in this country,so the answer is straightforward in a way it isn't in the US.

They are, however, asking in bad faith. They don't actually mean "calling for genocide". They mean things like chanting slogans which Israel has decided to equate with calls for genocide--when uttered by anyone other than Likud.

Exactly, depending on speaker and point of view "intifada" and "from the river to the sea" may be spoken and heard with different intents. And when it's college students doing the chanting you need to remember that they almost certainly don't understand the nuances (hell, I don't understand the nuances), and also their brains aren't ripe yet.

[marshwiggle]

Calling for genocide is a hate crime in this country,so the answer is straightforward in a way it isn't in the US.

They are, however, asking in bad faith. They don't actually mean "calling for genocide". They mean things like chanting slogans which Israel has decided to equate with calls for genocide--when uttered by anyone other than Likud.

Exactly, depending on speaker and point of view "intifada" and "from the river to the sea" may be spoken and heard with different intents. And when it's college students doing the chanting you need to remember that they almost certainly don't understand the nuances (hell, I don't understand the nuances), and also their brains aren't ripe yet.

That's why the adults in the room need to be telling them why what they're saying isn't appropriate, rather than just admiring their "youthful enthusiasm" and "naivete".

[Parasaurolophus]

Calling for genocide is a hate crime in this country,so the answer is straightforward in a way it isn't in the US.

They are, however, asking in bad faith. They don't actually mean "calling for genocide". They mean things like chanting slogans which Israel has decided to equate with calls for genocide--when uttered by anyone other than Likud.

Exactly, depending on speaker and point of view "intifada" and "from the river to the sea" may be spoken and heard with different intents. And when it's college students doing the chanting you need to remember that they almost certainly don't understand the nuances (hell, I don't understand the nuances), and also their brains aren't ripe yet.

That's why the adults in the room need to be telling them why what they're saying isn't appropriate, rather than just admiring their "youthful enthusiasm" and "naivete".

Those aren't calls for genocide, though.

And when students have said awful, morally bad, and stupid things--e.g. the group that called Hamas's attack 'heroic' (also not a call for genocide)--the university has intervened appropriately.

[Ruralguy]

Keep in mind that many people, including some posting here, specifically criticized those college presidents for not explicitly saying that genocide was bad in their answers. Apparently they had done so earlier. Perhaps they should have repeated it, its hard to say. I said and still believe that their answers were fine as isolated answers to the specific question. But the questioner was really asking a moral question (as the podcast elucidates), so they probably should have re-affirmed their moral beliefs when answering the question, lest they get mired in legalese and bureaucratic talk (which, lets face it, they did).

[marshwiggle]

I think it's the same problem that happened after George Floyd's death with all kinds of people failing to denounce looting and vandalism, because the felt that the intense emotion people felt was understandable. Part of learning to be a mature adult is learning to control your actions, regardless of the strength of your emotions, but many people in positions of leadership have abdicated their responsibility to deliver that message.

It's not helping young people to give them the impression that if they're REALLY, REALLY upset about something they can basically do whatever they want.

[kaysixteen]

In various other contexts as well in recent months, reading and listening to tv commentary, I have noticed that 'genocide' is becoming a rather overused, nigh-onto-meaningless buzzword.

[Ruralguy]

I think what people are sort of thinking (who agree with these sorts of conclusions) is the following:

If you call for an uprising against Israel you are essentially calling for war--> Most soldiers in Israel (and a large majority of civilians) are Jewish--> Wars will obviously kill people--> most will be Jewish--> therefore if you call for an uprising against a mostly Jewish nation it will lead to a war that will get a lot of jews killed--> therefore, genocide---.therefore call for "uprising" is tantamount (in their view!) to calling for genocide.

The same reasoning can be used for any group, and more or less has been.

Though I can see the steps that lead to such conclusions, its one of those arguments for which the somewhat weaker links add up to create a very weak argument.

That being said, those calling for "uprisings" and such should indeed be aware of what those words will mean to others. I am not calling for abridging speech. I am calling for more teachable moments.

[dismalist]

The other claim of genocide is against Israel, that it has been conducting genocide against the residents of Gaza. Would Israel really have wanted to do this, it would have been all over by now.

[Wahoo Redux]

Calling for genocide is a hate crime in this country,so the answer is straightforward in a way it isn't in the US.

They are, however, asking in bad faith. They don't actually mean "calling for genocide". They mean things like chanting slogans which Israel has decided to equate with calls for genocide--when uttered by anyone other than Likud.

Exactly, depending on speaker and point of view "intifada" and "from the river to the sea" may be spoken and heard with different intents. And when it's college students doing the chanting you need to remember that they almost certainly don't understand the nuances (hell, I don't understand the nuances), and also their brains aren't ripe yet.

That's why the adults in the room need to be telling them why what they're saying isn't appropriate, rather than just admiring their "youthful enthusiasm" and "naivete".

People are allowed to have opinions, even bad opinions. 

It's not really the "adults" right to tell people what is "appropriate," no matte how young the speaker is (obviously, not talking about the little children you are raising).  One can only counteract hate speech with your own more humane opinion. 

Freedom of speech is a very dangerous thing, as is freedom of religion and most other freedoms while we are at it.

[eigen]

Calling for genocide is a hate crime in this country,so the answer is straightforward in a way it isn't in the US.

They are, however, asking in bad faith. They don't actually mean "calling for genocide". They mean things like chanting slogans which Israel has decided to equate with calls for genocide--when uttered by anyone other than Likud.

Exactly, depending on speaker and point of view "intifada" and "from the river to the sea" may be spoken and heard with different intents. And when it's college students doing the chanting you need to remember that they almost certainly don't understand the nuances (hell, I don't understand the nuances), and also their brains aren't ripe yet.

That's why the adults in the room need to be telling them why what they're saying isn't appropriate, rather than just admiring their "youthful enthusiasm" and "naivete".

Wait, just to be clear... Are you coming out against free speech on campus, here? That... seems to be against years of arguments you've made.

[marshwiggle]

Calling for genocide is a hate crime in this country,so the answer is straightforward in a way it isn't in the US.

They are, however, asking in bad faith. They don't actually mean "calling for genocide". They mean things like chanting slogans which Israel has decided to equate with calls for genocide--when uttered by anyone other than Likud.

Exactly, depending on speaker and point of view "intifada" and "from the river to the sea" may be spoken and heard with different intents. And when it's college students doing the chanting you need to remember that they almost certainly don't understand the nuances (hell, I don't understand the nuances), and also their brains aren't ripe yet.

That's why the adults in the room need to be telling them why what they're saying isn't appropriate, rather than just admiring their "youthful enthusiasm" and "naivete".

Wait, just to be clear... Are you coming out against free speech on campus, here? That... seems to be against years of arguments you've made.

Nope. That's where I'd point them to things like a code of conduct (which is the origin of this thread). It's not hard to make it clear to people that there is a pretty broad range of what they can legally say, there  is narrower range of what they can say without opening themselves to public criticism. So, admins can point out that certain speech won't get students expelled, but it doesn't exhibit the kind of character and values that educated people are expected to have.


It's ironic that many of the most vehement criticisms of Israel (and possibly Jews in general) are from a generation of people who define "harm" in such broad terms and with such huge consequences that people are to be fired for comments they make. The "cancellers" are much less judicious in their speech than what they demand of others. Pointing out that sort of inconsistently is well within the purview of administrators and faculty.