York University’s reception of George Galloway — and the Toronto area university’s legal threats against Galloway protesters — reminded me of an old joke from the Jim Crow American South.
A line of white men are waiting to cast their votes. The polling officer presents each white man with an elementary school reader and asks him to read a line aloud. The white men sound out, “the cat is fat,” “the mice are nice,” and so on. The polling officer congratulates them for passing the literacy test. At last, an old black farmer steps forward. The polling officer pulls out a medical school text book on diseases of the esophagus and points the farmer to the most obscure passage. “What’s it say here?” The farmer looks at the dense type and answers sadly, “It says this old man ain’t voting today.”
The point of the story is that institutions sometimes have two sets of rules. The institution may say, “All literate men may vote.” But the institution actually practices the rule, “Only white men may vote.”
That’s how things operate at York. They have their formal rules. And then they have their real rules.
The George Galloway event at York casts a clarifying light on the university’s “real rules.”
To understand those real rules, let’s compare two events: George Galloway’s undisrupted speech at York University earlier this week–and Daniel Pipes’ aborted speech at York University in February of this year.
In one way, of course, this comparison is utterly odious. Daniel Pipes is one of the world’s leading academic experts on the Middle East, the author of 12 books, and the holder of many distinguished academic positions. George Galloway, by contrast, was suspended from the House of Commons in 2007 after it found that a fund under Galloway’s control received upwards of ￡200,000 diverted from Iraq’s Oil for Food program.
Yet the militant anti-Israel community at York apparently finds the distinguished professor as odious as the pro-Israel community finds the disgraced former MP. That equation may say more about the two communities than it does about either man — but still, the equation sets the stage.
In February, a student group invited Daniel Pipes to speak at York. The university told the group that Pipes would be allowed to appear only on condition that the student group pay the (high) costs of policing the event. The students declined to pay the money and instead cancelled the event.
Galloway was likewise invited by a student group, the York Federation of Students (YFS). As with the group that invited Pipes, YFS was held responsible for policing costs. But since York collects a compulsory student fee on behalf of YFS, this student group had abundant resources to pay the costs of policing. And just to reinforce the message, the university threatened legal action against potential disrupters of Galloway’s speech. The speech proceeded without interruption.
But when Pipes’ appearances on campus were threatened, the university took no legal action against potential disrupters. Before a 2003 appearance by Pipes, the York campus was papered with incitements to disrupt his talk. The threat of disruption in 2010 led directly to the cancellation of Pipes’ talk.
With Galloway, it was the speaker’s freedom that was protected by the police. Not so with Pipes. When Pipes arrived at his lecture venue in 2003 (under a different university administration), he was required to listen to a briefing by a Toronto police detective on Canada’s hate speech laws. No such requirement was imposed on George Galloway.
What accounts for the disparity of treatment? In a widely circulated email, a Toronto rabbi accused York University president Mamdouh Shoukri of “an amazing tolerance for anti-Semitism.” This email prompted another legal threat from York, this time a threat to sue the rabbi for defamation of the university president.
But the reputation most at risk this week is not Mr. Shoukri’s, but York University’s.
Christopher Hitchens memorably described George Galloway as “a pimp for fascism.” York has now welcomed Galloway as an honored guest at one of Canada’s largest universities, even as those who uphold democratic values are shut out.
Originally published in the National Post.
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured article: Beyond Hiroshima - The Non-Reporting of Falluja's Cancer Catastrophe.
No comments:
Post a Comment